There are few things that the FpU leader and I agree on. But now he deserves praise.
Thursday 2 May at 10:16 a.m
Central board member of the Center Party
FpU leader Simen Velle came forward earlier this week in VG with a drug conviction from his late teens.
He told about a tough period growing up, where he, together with two friends, were among other things caught by the police with 100 grams of hash and received a 30-day suspended prison sentence.
There is not much in the world that I agree with Simen Velle on. But here I believe that he deserves praise.
Not because he has broken the law and used cannabis, but because he talks openly and honestly about a period in his life which has obviously been very difficult for him.
VIDEO: Simen Velle opens up.
Obviously, it was not a wise decision by Velle to break the law, which he has also been clear about himself.
But I believe at the same time that this experience makes him better qualified to be a politician.
Having been through some tough periods in life is an important additional skill, which gives you some experiences and perspectives that the Storting needs.
Following Velle’s interview, there have also been some critical voices.
Former AUF leader and parliamentary representative for the Labor Party, Mani Hussaini, stepped forward and said that it was important not to trivialize the matter.
I really don’t understand what Hussaini means.
Because no one is trying to trivialize the matter. Everyone, including Velle himself, understands the seriousness, it seems.
But the point several of us have tried to make is that no human being is flawless. Neither do we politicians.
It is very unfortunate if a drug conviction from your teens should be able to disqualify you from a future parliamentary seat.
We should rather see Velle as a brilliant example of how one can recover from a tough upbringing, to lead a youth party and be one of the clearest voices in the social debate.
Thank you very much, Simen Velle, for your openness. Many people have a lot to learn from you.
Hear more about the Velle case in the commentary department’s podcast:
