Published: Less than 20 min ago
Updated: Just now
Following Kallafakta’s review of the parties’ handling of anonymous donations, five parties have now submitted explanations to the Chamber of Deputies.
There, both SD and KD accuse Kalla of hard cutting facts and of painting false narratives.
– It is actually quite absurd to claim that, says Emil Hellerud, reporter at Kalla fakta.
In August, Cold Facts revealed how five Riksdag parties tried to offer opportunities for donors to circumvent the law for contributions.
The Left Party reported the Social Democrats, the Moderates, the Sweden Democrats, the Liberals and the Christian Democrats to the Kammarkollegiet, whose department for party transparency reviews parties’ funding.
At the authority’s request, the five parties have now submitted letters about Kalla fakta’s review and the parties’ routines regarding documentation of contributions.
Several of the parties lie flat and admit that their representatives acted wrongly. But not everyone.
The Christian Democrats instead defend themselves and say that the review does not give a fair picture.
“The feature in Kalla fakta has been severely cut to suit the intention of the review,” writes the party’s finance director Robert Lisborg in his letter.
“Be an information”
In Kalla fakta’s program it is seen how Lisborg, together with party secretary and newly appointed Minister of Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren, offers the reporter, who poses as a businessman, a scheme to secure secret contributions of half a million kroner.
Peter Kullgen promises that the contributor can be kept secret and Robert Lisborg makes a suggestion:
“In principle, you could give 238 kroner per day for four years without there being any accounting for it at all,” he says in Kalla fakta.
In the letter, KD believes that they were misinterpreted.
“It was not a proposal to the donor but an information about what we believe needs to be changed in the regulations.”
Even the Sweden Democrats are critical of Cold Facts.
In the program, however, finance manager Lena-Karin Lifvenhjelm is heard mentioning a previous scheme where contributors to maintain anonymity by donating money through a friend or relative.
– What you then had as an idea or a solution was a person who can think of himself as a shop window and says “if you give me the money, I will be the person who donates”, says Lifvenhjelm to Kalla fakta.
The party has received a text transcription of the telephone conversation between Lena-Karin Lifvenhjelm and Kalla fakta’s “businessman”.
“The transcript makes it clear beyond doubt that Kalla Fakta’s narrative does not correspond to the real course of events. The picture painted in the program is the result of an editorial decision to only publish parts of a longer quote,” the Sweden Democrats write in their statement.
“In conversations with Kalla fakta, the party has neither called for nor proposed any alternative solutions with the aim of circumventing the law on party financing,” SD continues.
– I think it is quite obvious to everyone who heard those parts of the phone call that she is discussing a possible way for the donor to circumvent the legislation, says Kalla fakta’s reporter Emil Hellerud.
He continues:
– It is clear that we did not publish the entire conversation. I think in total we made 44 different calls in the review, we have to pick out the parts that are most relevant.
According to the reporter, the five designated parties have presented or suggested ways for the “businessman” to circumvent the legislation.
He doesn’t care much that SD and KD choose to blame the haircut.
– If they want to find ways to try to shift the focus from what they are actually saying, they can do it. But it is really absurd to claim that they did not propose ways to circumvent the legislation.
Gunnar Strömmer: “Made a mistake”
The Social Democrats and the Liberals acted immediately after the review this summer, and S fired its finance director, while a responsible L politician had to leave his post.
The moderates’ party secretary at the time, newly appointed Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer, was also caught in the spotlight in Kalla fakta’s review.
– There is an opportunity to give, to participate and part-finance with 350,000, perhaps, to a business that is not connected to us in that way, but which is still of great benefit to us, he told Kalla faktas reporter.
A statement he later regretted:
– I think it was wrong to talk to the donor in this way.
Cold facts: Even by you?
– Also by me.
If the Kammarkollegiet’s investigation shows that the parties reported contributions incorrectly, they may have to pay a special fee.