Nyhed
Læsetid: 3 min.

Løkkes klimafond gav direktør toplønnet job efter fadæse

Efter anklager om vildledning trak GGGI’s generaldirektør sig sidste år fra sin post. Alligevel fik han efterfølgende et højtlønnet job i organisationen
Udland
11. marts 2014

Selv om den kontroversielle generaldirektør Richard Samans sidste år trak sig fra sin post helt frivilligt, fortsatte klimaorganisationen Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) med at betale ham løn flere måneder efter hans fratrædelse.

Udbetalingerne skyldtes, at Samans efter sin exit blev tilknyttet som rådgiver i en periode på tre måneder. Den post fik han på trods af, at han ifølge Udenrigsministeriet var blevet beskyldt for at »misinformere« GGGI’s bestyrelse.

GGGI har ikke ønsket at oplyse, hvad Samans fik i løn i sine tre måneder som rådgiver, men ifølge Informations oplysninger fik han det samme som i sin tid som generaldirektør.

Af en rapport fra den koreanske rigsrevision fremgår det, at Samans løn som generaldirektør var på 2,1 millioner kroner årligt. Tre måneders løn svarer altså til omkring 500.000 kroner.

Det fremgår ikke, hvad GGGI-formand Lars Løkke Rasmussens (V) rolle var i beslutningen om at tilknytte den tidligere generaldirektør som rådgiver. Men Richard Samans oplyser selv, at han blev enig med GGGI’s transitionsudvalg om ordningen. Det udvalg er Lars Løkke Rasmussen formand for.

Rod i butikken

Som generaldirektør var Richard Samans ansvarlig for organisationen i en periode, hvor den fik kritik af den koreanske rigsrevision for forvaltningen af bistandsmidler.

Blandt andet fik Samans personligt udbetalt det højest mulige tillæg for 44 dages hotelophold uden at fremvise dokumentation for udgifterne, og derudover fik han 130.000 kr. for meget i uddannelsestilskud til sine to børn.

Men amerikaneren, der har en fortid som rådgiver for præsident Clinton, kom først for alvor i problemer på et bestyrelsesmøde i januar 2013.

Ifølge det danske Udenrigsministeriums mødereferat, som Information har fået aktindsigt i, var der »udbredt kritik« fra »alle« bestyrelsesmedlemmerne, fordi Samans forslag til et budget ikke var tilstrækkelig gennemsigtigt.

Et unavngivent bestyrelsesmedlem gav ifølge referatet »i et ganske følelsesladet indlæg« udtryk for, at »sekretariatet ikke i tilstrækkelig grad lyttede til bestyrelsens synspunkter, og at sekretariatet i visse tilfælde havde misinformeret bestyrelsen«.

Frivillig afgang

Efterfølgende besluttede GGGI-formand Lars Løkke Rasmussen, at der var brug for en ny generaldirektør.

Af en korrespondance mellem norske embedsmænd dateret 3. april 2013, som Information har fået aktindsigt i, fremgår det, at Lars Løkke Rasmussen »ønsker en ny leder snarest og indhenter bestyrelsesmedlemmers støtte og/eller synspunkt« til »løsningen«. Hvad denne ’løsning’ bestod i, står der ikke noget om. Men det fremgår, at hvis Richard Samans »mod forventning« ikke »accepterer løsningen«, ville Norge skulle høres igen.

Den 15. april trådte Richard Samans så tilbage. Ifølge GGGI, det danske Udenrigsministerium og Samans selv skete det helt frivilligt.

Dermed var han ifølge sin kontrakt, som Information har set, ikke berettiget til en fratrædelsesgodtgørelse. Samans kontrakt var i øvrigt udløbet allerede den 12. marts, og han oplyser selv, at han ikke havde skrevet under på en ny, selvom han var blevet tilbudt det.

Men amerikaneren gik altså langt fra tomhændet fra organisationen.

Ifølge Sydkorea-eksperten Anders Riel Müller fra Dansk Institut for Internationale Studier og Roskilde Universitet havde GGGI behov for at undgå flere dårlige sager.

»Da Sydkorea lige havde godkendt GGGI’s etablering som international organisation på trods af skandalerne, var der afgjort en politisk interesse i at undgå flere møgsager. Man kan spekulere i, om den her rådgiverpost var en måde at få løst en potentiel skandalesag, uden at den kom til offentlighedens kendskab,« siger Anders Riel Müller, der er en kendt kritiker af GGGI.

Ikke et gyldent håndtryk

GGGI’s kommunikationsdirektør Graham Dwyer oplyser, at ordningen blev lavet for at lette overgangen til en ny generaldirektør, og at Samans’ »tilbagetræden blev håndteret i overensstemmelse med hans kontraktlige forhold med GGGI«.

I en mail til Information kalder tidligere generaldirektør Richard Samans løsningen »ansvarlig overgangsplanlægning, ikke et gyldent håndtryk«.

Allerede i februar var han begyndt at overveje sin fremtid i organisationen, oplyser han.

»Jeg besluttede i marts i stedet at acceptere et tilbud om at vende tilbage til World Economic Forum og diskuterede dette med bestyrelsen tidligt i april,« skriver Richard Samans.

I forhold til beskyldningerne om misinformation, som fremgår af Udenrigsministeriets mødereferat, mener han, at Information giver en »upræcis« beskrivelse af bestyrelsesmødet.

»Som det fremgår af referaterne, var bekymringen, som bestyrelsen gav udtryk for, at den ønskede fuldstændig og detaljeret information om budgettet, ikke at jeg eller nogen af mine kolleger misinformerede,« skriver han med henvisning til GGGI’s egne referater, som ikke nævner beskyldningerne.

Om den koreanske rigsrevisionsrapport skriver han, at »den kritiserede på ingen måde min ageren, men sagde i stedet, at organisationens politikker skulle struktureres anderledes i sådanne situationer fremover.«

Lars Løkke Rasmussen har ikke ønsket at kommentere sagen.

Følg disse emner på mail

Vores abonnenter kalder os kritisk,
seriøs og troværdig.

Få ubegrænset adgang med et digitalt abonnement.
Prøv en måned gratis.

Prøv nu

Er du abonnent? Log ind her

Lars Bo Jensen

Hvis du forsætter med at holde øje med hvad der sker i GGGI, så er det interessant hvornår formanden får udbetalt løn. Da den endnu ikke er udbetalt, kunne man få den tanke at det var for at undgå at den blev modregnet i det eftervederlag, Lars Løkke fik som statsminister.

Men det kunne han vel ikke finde på at spekulere i ?

Henrik Christensen, Helle Walther, Inger Sundsvald, lars abildgaard, Heinrich R. Jørgensen, Torben Nielsen, Rune Petersen, Jens Falkesgaard, Anne Eriksen, Laurids Hedaa og Mette Hansen anbefalede denne kommentar

Ja, der er lunt på toppen.

Søren Kristensen

Uddannelsestilskud. Lyder som noget beregnet til en enlig mor på kontanthjælp?

peter fonnesbech

Denne korruptionskultur må uundværdigt ende som en boomerang hos partiet Venstre.

Bjarne Hansen

Danmark er et meget rigt land ,der råd til den slags...hvad Danmark ikke har råd til er at behandle sine ældre og de arbejdsløse der vil arbejde med den fornødne værdighed.

morten Hansen, lars abildgaard, Bo Carlsen, Rune Petersen, Jens Falkesgaard, Janus Agerbo og Benny Jensen anbefalede denne kommentar
Laurids Hedaa

Hvorfor bliver jeg overhovedet ikke overrasket over denne artikel??

Torben Lindegaard

@Lasse Schou Andersen

Du bør øve dig i at skrive overskrifter.

Et konsulentjob på 3 måneder er ikke et toplønnet job - heller ikke i GGGI og heller ikke selv om Richard Samans fik generaldirektørhyre i 3 måneder som konsulent .

Korruption er kommet for at blive...
Og det ses ofte hos den "herskende klasse"!

"Et konsulentjob på 3 måneder er ikke et toplønnet job"

Skulle overskriften da have heddet "toplønnet ansvarlig overgangsplanlægning"?

Overskriften er forkert:

GGGI er da ikke Løkkes klimafond, den er også den nuværende regerings klimafond!

Klimakorruptionen er overalt.
Plattenslagerne og poppolitikerne har for længst fundet ud af, at når det hedder noget med 'klima',
så er alle pengekasserne åbne på vid gab.

Torben Nielsen

"de arbejdsløse der vil arbejde "

Hmm-Bjarne Hansen ?

This is what my colleague Rick Samans told you about his tenure at GGGI so that your readers can make their own minds up about your reporting.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Post-resignation 3 month advisor contract:

It is common in a leadership transition within an organization to organize a transition period in which the outgoing person hands over matters in an orderly fashion to the incoming person. The Transitional Subcommittee of GGGI's Council and I agreed that it made sense for me to stay on as an advisor to the incoming Director-General for three months inclusive of unused vacation time in order to help ensure continuity during a crucial phase of the organization's conversion into an international organization, providing support at his request. That is responsible transition planning, not a golden handshake.

In regard to your question about whether GGGI ever requested my support during my tenure as an advisor, the answer is "Yes, on a number of occasions relating to different programmatic and administrative aspects of the handover and the organization of its flagship convening, the Global Green Growth Summit."

January 2013 Council meeting:

As documented by the meeting minutes, you have provided an inaccurate account of GGGI's January 2013 Council meeting. The meeting had a heavy agenda, including proposals the Secretariat developed for adapting the organization's personnel structure and policies to those of an international organization, creating diplomatic, tax and other privileges and immunities in a headquarters agreement with the host government, establishing a new budget, procurement rules, financial authorities, disclosure policy, governance structures, advisory committee, etc. The Council approved plans to move forward with nearly all of these. However, some Council members, including the Chairman, stated that they were not satisfied with the format and level of detail of the proposed budget and headcount projections. They insisted that we work further on these matters over the next several weeks. I acknowledged that we had had capacity problems in assembling the budget within a tight timeline and agreed to work on a revised version with the Audit and Finance Subcommittee of the Council. As shown in the minutes, the concern expressed by the Council was that it wanted more complete and detailed budget information, not that I or any of my colleagues were providing misinformation. GGGI has confirmed that nowhere in 37 pages of official meeting minutes is there a mention of misinformation.

Reasons for not signing contract and ultimately resigning:

As for the reasons why I deferred a response on a new contract and ultimately resigned, "First and foremost, I received a compelling offer to return to the Forum to help lead an important new phase of the institution's development, and it was clear that this opportunity would most likely not be available in a year or two. Second, against considerable odds and obstacles, GGGI had by that time succeeded in being converted from a start-up Korean NGO into a new kind of treaty-based international organization in which developing and developed countries share equal governance responsibility and the academic and business communities can participate fully; quadrupling and greatly diversifying its funding base; establishing its leading position as a preferred partner of developing countries and major research institutions on green growth technical assistance and analysis; and settling on the appointment of two world-class deputies to further professionalize its programming and particularly administrative functions. Third, there were also some family and school considerations and differences in perspective over strategic matters, but the main reason I began to consider departing was that I felt I had fulfilled my original two-year commitment and could make a bigger difference in the next phase of my life by accepting the new professional challenge that had been presented to me and taking my family back to Geneva."

As for my resignation, I informed some Council members in February 2013 that I needed to reflect on whether I wished to extend my tenure beyond my original two-year contract. I had been presented with a new two-year contract both before and after the January Council meeting but deferred a response. I decided in March to accept instead an offer to return to the World Economic Forum and discussed this with the Council in early April.

Korean Audit Report:

Regarding the section in the BAI report concerning my contract, "The BAI report criticized the way GGGI structured the housing and children's tuition allowances in my contract during the first few months before we moved to Seoul and my children had completed their school year in Geneva. It in no way criticized my conduct but instead said that the organization's policies should be structured differently in such situations going forward. Specifically, tuition for my children's schooling in Seoul was higher than in Geneva, and GGGI committed to adjust that amount and make the corresponding amendments to the contract after we moved. And my hotel expenses in Seoul during the transition were paid within an overall housing allowance rather than against individual receipts."

Final comment on unbalanced and leading nature of questions posed:

"I am disappointed by the lack of balance in your questions and am left with the impression that the article is likely to be similarly unbalanced with no recognition of the importance of what has been accomplished in creating within a remarkably short time an international platform of first-mover developed and developing countries committed to experimenting with and demonstrating to the world the feasibility of integrating strong economic growth and progress in living standards with major action on global warming and other environmental problems. The irony here is that one of the major lessons of the United Nations negotiations that were held in your city five years ago (COP 15) is that climate change is now fundamentally an economic policy challenge. Unless doubts about the economic implications of decisive action on climate change can be put to rest, it will be very difficult to muster a strong international response. GGGI is a vehicle for your country, Korea and other middle-powers to advance the practice and theory of green growth in a practical, cooperative atmosphere, apart from the big-power and other high politics found sometimes in the United Nations and the partisan back-and-forth of national political debates. What is critically needed to advance the world's response to climate change is much more field experience and evidence on successful pathways to green and inclusive growth. GGGI is providing a unique service to the international community in this regard, as demonstrated by the bipartisan support it has received and is continuing to receive in countries around the world from all different political persuasions and levels of economic development, including Denmark."

Helle Walther

Løkke har ikke talentet, sådan er det bare, ikke til GGGI ikke som partiformand og slet slet ikke som kommende statsministerkandidat, han burde skiftes ud før næste valg.

Lasse Skou Andersen

@Adrian Monck

I am all for the idea of letting the readers make up their own mind. So let me post the three follow-up questions which mr. Samans characterized as 'lacking balance'. The three questions that gave him the impression that the article would be 'similarly unbalanced'

---------------------------------------------
You stated that, in your new role as advisor, you were »providing support« at the new DG's request. Did GGGI ever request your support?

You state that »
>As shown in the minutes, the concern expressed by the Council was that
>it wanted more complete and detailed budget information, not that I or
>any of my colleagues were providing misinformation.
« However, the minutes done by the Danish MOFA state that a board member said that (my translation from Danish): »the secretariat did not listen to the opinions of the council to a satisfying degree, and that the secretariat had on certain occasions misinformed the council.«

What is your comment on this?

You state that »
>As for my resignation, I informed some Council members in February 2013
>that I needed to reflect on whether I wished to extend my tenure beyond
>my original two-year contract. I had been presented with a new
>two-year contract both before and after the January Council meeting but
>deferred a response. I decided in March to accept instead an offer to
>return to the World Economic Forum and discussed this with the Council in early April.
«

Why did you not wish to sign a contract so shortly after accepting the nomination as DG for two more years?

Torben Lindegaard

@Lasse Schou Andersen

Uha Lasse Schou - hvis din artikel er baseret på ovenstående indlæg præsenteret af Adrian Monck, så må det blot konstateres, at du manipulerer med læserne i bedste EkstraBlads-kampagne stil.

Du burde holde dig for god til den slags hundekunster.

Jeg fik mindelser frem om Rasmus Lindbos berygtede artikel om Henrik Gade Jensen: "Højre-ekstremist er spindoktor" - ja undskyld.
Information måtte betale kr. 60.000 i ulemper, mens Rasmus Lindbo end ikke ville undskylde overfor Henrik Gade Jensen.

Torben Lindegaard:

Jeg ved ikke, hvordan det kan have undgået nogens opmæeksomhed, at Lasse Schou Andersens indlæg var baseret på mindst tre kilder. Ovenstående indlæg præsenteret af Adrian Monck, GGGI og dets mødedetaljer og Udenrigsministeriet og dets mødedetaljer.

Hvor meget kød, der ellers er på sagen , er et åbent spørgsmål. Personligt ledte jeg forgæves efter den diskvalificerende "fadæse", overskriften omtaler.

Det sagt, så er der stadig ualmindeligt lunt i toppen, og det er indlysende klart, at disse poster ikke er besat af folk, der betragter klima- og udviklingsspørgsmålet som a labour of love. De er udelukkende drevet af de gode gamle, "What's in it for me?" betragtninger. Jeg finder det yderst problematisk, at det slet ikke er et krav til disse lukrative poster, at man har hjertet med i det (i Løkke og Bachs tilfælde var hjernen tydeligvis heller ikke med), og at de udelukkende bliver set som et hurtigt karriespringbrædt. Richard Samans:

"the main reason I began to consider departing was that I felt I had fulfilled my original two-year commitment and could make a bigger difference in the next phase of my life by accepting the new professional challenge that had been presented to me. . ."

I Sanmans' lange udlægning af sine overvejelser er miljøets bedste således ganske naturligt ikke en faktor, det er ubrugt, betalt ferietid derimod:

"I agreed that it made sense for me to stay on as an advisor to the incoming Director-General for three months inclusive of unused vacation time in order to help ensure continuity during a crucial phase of the organization's conversion into an international organization."

En ualmindelig lun ordning, men næppe får tilbudt i den anden ende af fødekæden, uanset hvor uundværlig en ekspertise, man måtte have udviklet i at samle kommunale hundelorte op.