the Government has presented its third krisepakke, the one that belongs to the so-called "phase 3" - the reconstruction of Norway. 27 billion, goes 3, 6 billion to the green transition.
Too little! Such is often the immediate reaction.
In order to make the political discussion to a contest about who can promise the most money, it must now act to find enough good projects - that can justify more spending.
It will make the climate and omstillingsdebatten much more constructive and it will make it harder for the government to argue to stay again on the money.
the Parliament has now an unprecedented opportunity to identify projects. It will be able to secure a bigger commitment already when this header is to be approved.
When the government is holding again, has the opposition the opportunity to shine. It happened when Parliament treated the first two krisepakkene, and the same they can do again.
There are several good candidates, but first, a little about why the bourgeois government seizes an this in a relatively careful manner.Turn On the LydErrorAllerede plus customer? Log into herError SET: Climate and miljøminister Sveinung Rotevatn has today announced on Facebook that he poses as lederkandidat in the Left. Video: Sveinung Rotevatn Show more
bourgeois the government is allergic to "pick winners" in the ministry of trade and industrial development. It is the basically good reasons. It is the market that determines what is a commercially attractive solution, not the politicians. Politicians can add terms and point out a direction, but the long-term economic sustainability, technology, and the companies themselves that must make sure.
This neutral approach applies, however, only up to a certain point. The obvious projects that many are talking about as the foundation for restructuring in the Uk - offshore wind, green uk, hydrogen - are all favored in regjeringes new krisepakke.
It happens still first and foremost in the form of research and development means, support in moderate quantities in order to realize new initiatives.
This approach may be wise, but there are ways to make even the cautious approaches more potent. The government will not pick winners, it will stimulate the initiative. The way to scale this up is to facilitate even more such broad approaches which triggers the investment.
In this, there is also the potential for compromise in Parliament.
Here are two suggestions:
** Norway to cut the large amounts of emissions within the transport sector. The state can add up to wide tax exemptions for the purchase of emissions-free buses, trucks, speedboats, etc - and give municipalities and county municipalities muscles to make purchases.
** Energitiltak for buildings can be increased dramatically. Here there is a huge potential for energy efficiency, and Norwegian companies who are ready to deliver the solutions. These measures will give fast effect, both investeringsmessig and in the form of emission reductions.
In addition to such solutions, aimed at specific sectors, the state can also make more general arrangements. Here are suggestions for two of these:
** A green investment bank. This proposal has already A launched. After model from among others Germany, they will spend 53 billion for a new state investment bank for climate-friendly investments. Investment capital that goes into with more favorable terms, will increase the possibility to trigger major projects and investments.
** Leterefusjonsordning for green entrepreneurs. The oil industry has a leterefusjonsordning, who almost immediately grants them reimbursement for the expenses they have to exploration - before they get revenue. A similar project for green entrepreneurs will make it possible to invest and bet over the several years, even if the income is further ahead in time. Such a commitment is risky and must be framed with a form of qualification, but Norway have acute needs for new industries and lagging behind with the realignment.
If the opposition in Parliament manages to make a smørbrødliste that is detailed enough, there is no reason to that not the green krisepakka should be larger and at the same time effective.the Story of Norway can get a dark turn Comment
Want to discuss?Visit Dagbladet debate!