A senior Norwegian transport official faces an external investigation after failing to disclose a multi-million kroner private land sale connected to a major industrial road project he was leading. The case raises serious questions about public trust and the enforcement of conflict-of-interest laws in Norwegian regional governance.
Ola Olsbu, the Transport Director for Agder County Municipality, was a key driver for a new industrial road to serve the Morrow battery factory in Arendal. Local media revealed this week that Olsbu sold 150 acres of his private forest land near the planned road route to a private company for 11.8 million kroner in 2021. The sale occurred without his superior's knowledge.
County Director Tine Sundtoft stated Olsbu had not acted professionally. She said she only learned of the sale when media requested documents. Sundtoft has now commissioned law firm Tofte Hald to conduct an independent external review. She emphasized the fundamental importance of trust in public administration. There are clear rules about conflicts of interest, Sundtoft noted. When you have a conflict, you are conflicted in all related work.
The planned industrial road is a political initiative intended to support Morrow's battery plant south of the E18 highway. Olsbu privately owned forest land directly across the E18 from the factory site. The property became relevant when Arendal Municipality considered relocating a waste facility to his land to free up space for the battery plant expansion.
While actively working on the road project, Olsbu knew his property value could skyrocket. He declined the municipality's offer and instead sold part of the land to Otra Holding. At approximately 80 kroner per square meter for raw land, the total property value could approach 30 million kroner.
Olsbu requested a formal conflict-of-interest assessment in September 2021, deeming himself conflicted. However, he continued working on the road project during the two-month review period before being formally declared ineligible. Six weeks after declaring his conflict, he accompanied the county mayor to the Norwegian Parliament, the Storting, to discuss the very same road project.
Looking back, Sundtoft said, when I see the scope that media revealed, he should not have attended that parliamentary hearing either. Olsbu has admitted he acted wrongly and apologized. He also apologized for using his official county email address for communications about his private property.
Steinar Bergstøl Andersen of the Progress Party, who chairs the county's main committee for transport and mobility, said he reacted with shock and some disbelief. Andersen, who took his role after these events, said he has never experienced any improper influence from Olsbu. He welcomes the external review to get all cards on the table.
The investigation will assess the employer's response to how the county director handled her subordinate's conflict of interest. Sundtoft has asked Olsbu to take several days off pending the review's conclusion. The outcome could lead to new routines in a system that appears to have been insufficient.
This incident strikes at the core of Norway's reputation for transparent and trustworthy public administration. It highlights the tension between rapid green industrial development, like the battery sector in Southern Norway, and the rigid ethical frameworks designed to prevent personal enrichment from public projects. The case also tests the robustness of Norway's habilitetsloven (Conflict of Interest Act) at the regional level, where personal and professional networks can sometimes overlap. For international observers, it serves as a reminder that even in systems with strong institutional trust, vigilance and robust procedures are perpetually required.