Mixed reactions following the appointment of the 3AG

interviews, and analytical work demanded a calm and private environment, personnel explained.³⁷

Finally, the NAC agreed to change the office solution, in order to allow more auditors personal offices. The final solution was approximately 60 per cent in individual offices, 40 per cent in landscapes.³⁸ Personnel were still upset with the way that the NAC had argued and acted, not admitting their previous promises, and they were upset that some of them still would have to work in an office landscape. The office issue would continue to be discussed during the years to come, and there were often complaints about the office building, for example concerning the lack of soundproofing, lack of privacy, and lack of conference rooms.

4.3 Year 0, part II: Merger preparations with the

behind closed doors. As the national audit institution is a key control instrument for citizens in a democracy, voices were raised against this secrecy, and many argued that the recruitment process ought to be more open. In an editorial in the national daily newspaper Svenska Dagbladet (11 December, 2002), the Auditor-Generals were called

“super auditors”:

Not least, the choice of super auditors, this time chosen in the greatest possible secrecy, ought to be open for scrutiny. Thus, the premier auditors of the nation should henceforth be appointed in an open recruitment process.

In, for example, Denmark, Finland, and Canada, the AG positions were always advertised publicly, so that anyone interested could apply, another journalist noted (Dagens Nyheter, 28 November, 2002), while criticizing the closed recruitment process for RiR in Sweden. Rachel, too, argued that this should be an open process, as did many auditors in interviews.

The appointment of the 3AG had been subjected to speculation both in the media⁴⁰ and at the two authorities, for some time. It had been emphasized that these individuals must not have a background in any political party, as there must be no doubt about the independence and neutrality of a supreme audit institution.

Auditors explained that they hoped that competent people, preferably such already known in the media, would be appointed to Auditor-Generals. They requested charismatic people, who could gain respect both internally at RiR, and externally. A PA auditor explained that the worst thing would be if these individuals had made their career by being obedient, explaining that “It must be people with integrity.”.

2002, that RiR would be led by three Auditors-General. The formal purpose was

“to achieve a lower degree of vulnerability and a broader competence, without the organization losing clarity or efficiency” (Sveriges riksdag, 2000/01:KU8, p.18). Informally, many spoke of the solution as “a political compromise”. This was what was conveyed in an article in the newspaper Svenska Dagbladet (11 December, 2002).

40See, for example, Svenska Dagbladet, 26 November, 2002.

Expectations were high among personnel, so the atmosphere was optimistic when the announcement was finally to be made at a seminar on 10 December, 2002. Regardless who were appointed, the merger process would now enter a new phase, one where decisions would finally be made. Alison (one of the 3 primary NAC members) explained that now things would become really interesting.

When the names of the 3AG were announced, reactions differed considerably. All personnel were gathered. Many employees did not know Sophie at all. Matthew was known primarily to RRV, where he had been worked for many years. The appointment of Luke came as a surprise to everyone. It had been emphasized by the Committee on the Constitution, when merger preparations began in May 2002, that the intention was not to make him an Auditor-General. This is otherwise a rather common procedure, in committees under Parliament, as concerns the chairman. Luke had not only been the chairman of the NAC in 2002, but he had also been part of the previous, later cancelled, merger preparations process.

The general reaction among personnel was disappointment. This was especially evident with those from PA. At RRV, many were contented or neutral.

In interviews, personnel explained that one reason for their disappointment was that these individuals were not known to the general public or the media (many had hoped for civil officers with a high profile in society). Many asked themselves how these people would be able to create the headlines in newspapers that the authority would need, in order to gain response to their reports.

Another reason for the disappointment was how personnel at PA had experienced Luke in his position with the NAC. Personnel from PA had heard from Linda, during phase I, how he treated her in the NAC – and thereby PA as a whole, as it was interpreted. Rachel was a personal friend of Luke’s, and many argued that this affected his attitude towards PA. At PA, personnel claimed that they were being given very little influence in merger preparations. Matthew, coming from RRV, was unknown to many, but with his background, PA auditors expected that he would rather safeguard the RRV interests than PA’s interests. For PA, therefore, all hope rested on Sophie.

There was a break for lunch. The PA personnel gathered at a table, and sighed openly that the only thing they could do now was to start looking for another job. All agreed, and the atmosphere was very depressed. A PA auditor said, in the survey April 2003, regarding to the assignment of the 3AG and the issue of relative influence, that:

On top of all this come three Auditors-General with close relationships to RRV. Matthew employed there, Sophie member of the Council, Luke with contacts via the Auditors’ Committee. We can only give up, unfortunately!

Among RRV personnel, reactions were more mixed. Rachel explained at the seminar that she was “extremely happy” with the choice of Auditor-Generals, and emphasized that they were “very competent people”.

As the names of the 3AG were announced, responsibility for merger preparations was formally transferred from the previous NAC constellation to them. According to the Committee on the Constitution, the NAC would remain; it would merely take on a new form. Formally, the three primary NAC members (apart from Luke) became experts instead, as they were replaced by the 3AG. In reality, the concept of the NAC was rarely used in this sense at RRV and PA during phase II, and former NAC members explained how it more or less ceased to exist.⁴¹

4.3.2 From a slow start to an extremely rushed process