Budgetary conflict  The climate dispute stalled government negotiations, this is what it is about

Budgetary conflict The climate dispute stalled government negotiations, this is what it is about

Spread the love

Budgetary conflict  The climate dispute stalled government negotiations, this is what it is about

Prime Minister Sanna Marin (sd) said there is still disagreement over 0.2 megaton tonnes of emissions reductions. Interior Minister Maria Ohisalo (Green) found the message misleading.

On Wednesday in the afternoon it became clear the government’s budget crisis will not be completed in the original schedule. Negotiations will continue, at least on Thursday, as there is still disagreement over climate action.

Prime minister Sanna Marin (sd) told the Stairs of the Estates House that he had given the negotiators of the center and the Greens until tomorrow morning to find a common record on climate solutions. Minister of Agriculture and Forestry involved in the evening’s talks Jari Leppä (middle) said the party had submitted a compromise proposal to the Greens.

What is torsion about?

Government the goal is for Finland to be carbon neutral by 2035. To ensure this, a decision should be made 11 megaton tonnes of emission reductions. The decisions were to be made in the government budget debate that began on Tuesday.

There are different views in the negotiations now on how much certainty this number of emission reductions have already been found.

The dispute concerns, above all, emissions from the so-called burden-sharing sector. The burden-sharing sector refers to emissions from agriculture, transport and, for example, heating.

Prime minister Marin said on Wednesday afternoon that the controversy is over 0.2 megaton tonnes of emissions reductions, meaning a large part of the pot has already been agreed.

A similar message was sent by the chairman of the center, the Minister of Finance Annika Saariko when he leaves the negotiations.

Saarikko said that the share of climate action that was inappropriate had been reached. However, it was necessary to search for a smaller group of “some kind of footnote or fig leaf on top of the whole match”.

The message from the Greens and the Left was different.

Minister of the Interior Maria Ohisalo (green) and the Minister of Education Li Andersson (left) emphasized that it was first and foremost about the certainty with which the list of measures now agreed would produce the desired emission reductions. So not just a 0.2 megaton difference.

“It’s a little misleading that the message would only be 0.2 megatons,” Ohisalo said.

“It’s about the credibility of that whole package.”

Ohisalo stressed that more than five of the 11 megatonnes come from the burden-sharing sector and now means are needed to provide sufficient credit to reduce those emissions enough.

“There is a lot of uncertainty in the package, which has been politically discussed there for many days, that we cannot have the confidence that it will certainly reduce emissions enough,” Ohisalo said.

“Since it’s about the future of all people, there’s no room for risk-taking,” Li Andersson, for his part, wrote on Twitter.

“We now need to find ways to ensure that sufficient emission reductions are achieved. This is an absolute demand of the Left Alliance. We are confident that we will find a common solution. ”

Sdp has presented a compromise based on the possible introduction of a national emissions trading scheme if the decisions now taken are not sufficient in future reviews.

There are different compromise proposals, but they would also apply to a burden-sharing sector other than transport.

The Greens would like the entry to ensure that sufficient additional action is indeed taken without further negotiations if the emission reductions now decided appear to be too small.

The Greens have been dissatisfied with the compromise proposals because they do not include automatic tightening.

The point of view would apparently be in the spring.

Center for its part, it does not want to lock in any system that would lead to higher fuel prices than already agreed.

The center has promised its supporters that, for example, the price of fuel will not be raised during this parliamentary term. If there were increases, for example, next year, it would be awkward under the 2023 parliamentary elections.

In practice, there has been disagreement, for example, about raising the tax on heating fuels. The tax increase for heating fuels is not valid for the city center. Therefore, the SDP has proposed a solution for future emissions trading negotiations if the decisions taken now prove insufficient.

With regard to emissions trading, the fact that the treatment of transport emissions trading at EU level is just beginning is a cross-cutting issue. Some see it as problematic if Finland now made its own decisions on the matter.

Now thus, the center and the Greens are, among other things, trying to find together a mutually acceptable record of a so-called stern board that would be suitable for both. Other solutions are also possible.

The party chairmen, the so-called five, suspended the talks on Wednesday afternoon. Negotiations are now being led by the former Prime Minister and Chairman of the Environment Committee for the center Juha Sipilä and for the Greens, the Minister for the Environment Krista Mikkonen.