Introduction
I think we can all agree that a transparent public sector is a prerequisite for true democracy. Decisions that affect the common good cannot be made in secrecy. There is a fundamental difference between decisions that might be legal, but that are not legitimate. Political decisions are only legitimate when they are taken in a process that allows the public to hold their politicians accountable. People must be given the opportunity to understand, and challenge, political decisions. In the absence of such opportunities, the trust, and hence the social contract between those who govern and those who are governed erodes.

In plain words: The people must be able to establish whether or not politicians keep their promises and act in their best interest. This can only be done when the political process is transparent.

The Norwegian tradition for openness
This fundamental fact is an important part of the Norwegian political tradition, a tradition that we have recently taken steps to reinforce. The Norwegian government presented its proposal for a new freedom of information act to the parliament last year. This new act will replace the current freedom of information act of 1970. The purpose of the reform is threefold: to strengthen transparency in the public administration and the access to official documents; to make the act more accessible both to the public and to the administration; and finally, to adapt the legislation to the new possibilities provided by new technologies. The fundamental principle of the current act is retained – the principle that essentially all documents that are prepared in any public office is open to the public, unless they may be exempted from disclosure on few and specific legal grounds.

The proposal is based on the principle that the exemptions should be limited to situations when they are necessary to protect specific interests. One consequence is that the exemptions will be restricted to only specifically targeted, sensitive information, whilst the rest of the document will have to be disclosed.

Transparency in our foreign policy
I have started out by describing the right to information in Norway in some detail. We should start at home when we want to achieve results elsewhere. Our own tradition and experience add credibility to our message about transparency in our foreign policy.

Our call for open and transparent government is made in many ways – in our foreign policy and in our policies to promote development and good governance. Let me provide a few examples:

Firstly, corruption cannot be fought effectively without transparency. We know that many countries that receive Norwegian development assistance face severe and systemic corruption challenges. And development assistance is no less prone to corruption than other financial streams. That is why the fight against corruption is a critical element in our development policy. We should have no illusions about the magnitude of this endeavour. Significant developments have taken place in the last decade or so, much thanks to active and high quality NGO campaigning. In most countries were corruption are systemic, however, much remains to be done. In many countries we are up against deeply rooted power structures.

We need to work long term and on many different levels. Globally, we have been active in the negotiation and implementation of the UN anti-corruption convention. Locally, we try to assist critical public functions, like auditor generals, anti-corruption bureaus, ombudsmen or finance ministries. A particular emphasis is placed, through our new “Oil for development”-programme, on assistance to sound management of revenues from petroleum and other national resources, an area where we have experience and specialised competence to offer.

Secondly, we are active participants in the process aimed at creating transparency in revenue streams from the extractive industries, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. Our firm belief is that such transparency may prove catalytic to social and economic development and political stability. We have to prove wrong the “paradox of plenty”, whereby most resource rich countries end up in poverty and unrest as a result of theft, corruption and mismanagement. To promote and consolidate the EITI process, Norway is hosting the third EITI plenary meeting in Oslo in October this fall. We are quite ambitious: Our aim is to see the EITI call for transparency become the global norm for countries and companies alike.

Thirdly, we make transparency a prerequisite for bilateral aid. In all of our bilateral agreements with recipient countries we include provisions to ensure that we have the right to subject budgets and financial procedures to scrutiny. Such transparency is critical, in particular, of course, when we provide assistance by way of direct contributions to the national budget.

Fourthly, we try to support the free and independent media through a specific program, in appreciation of the critical role free media plays in societies in transition.

The right to information and new technology
We should not discuss the right to information without addressing the opportunities created by modern technology. Information and communication technologies create challenges and new divides, but at the same time vast possibilities. Information technology may be used to facilitate informed, open debates, increased transparency and thus strengthened accountability of government decisions. I realise that these opportunities lend themselves more easily to some countries than others, and that the access to the required technology is very unevenly distributed. On the other hand - if we consider the fundamental changes brought about in the developed world as a result of information and communication technology, one should assume that the potential is there for solutions adapted to the needs of the developing world. Such solutions must be low cost and low entry, and change will not occur over night. I think however that we must consider the opportunities in the somewhat longer term. and trust that these issues are among those you will consider in the days ahead.

In conclusion, let me commend the work UNDP and all of you do in development more generally, and on the right to information more specifically. There can be no doubt that the right to information, and the transparent societies required for it to be become a reality, is a fundamental building block in the wider concept of good governance.

Norway’s policy is in short one of trying to lead by example. We would like to continue to focus on openness, transparency and participation at home, while we encourage similar policies in other countries.

I wish you good and fruitful discussions here in Oslo.

****