New complaint to the government: Deeply frustrated over 'political theater'

If some believed that the chairman of Agriculture and Food would say yes to a CO2 tax in agriculture, they were wrong. Or if others expected Søren Søndergaard, as he is called, to make a green three-party agreement that takes more than 400,000 hectares of agricultural land for nature, wetlands, and forests, they were also mistaken.

Instead, the 398 delegates at the Agriculture and Food conference in Herning Congress Center defended themselves against the politicians at Christiansborg, who are currently negotiating and unable to agree on turning the green three-party agreement into reality.

It was the first time that the farmers' front figure, Søren Søndergaard, faced his opposition, after he signed the green three-party agreement back in June.

But it seemed as if farmers had forgotten how they had treated a CO2 tax and almost considered it a death sentence for Danish agriculture in recent years.

The critical voices dealt with issues such as wolves, protected dikes, sludge, regulations on odor, school visits to farms, and much, much more than CO2 tax and green three-party.

Instead, the government and politicians at Christiansborg were under fire. Agriculture wants to be part of converting land to nature for economic compensation. But it requires the government to have made the deal that can set the whole thing in motion.

---------------------------------

Key points in the green three-party agreement

---------------------------------

The green three-party agreement was signed in June of this year. The main parties were the government, the Danish Nature Protection Association, and Agriculture and Food.

The agreement includes a CO2 tax on agricultural bioprocesses. It will be 120 Danish kroner per ton of CO2 from 2030 and will rise to 300 Danish kroner in 2035.

Support for planting forests on 250,000 hectares of agricultural land by 2045.

Support for extracting 140,000 hectares of low-lying land by 2030.

Land purchases with the aim of reducing nitrogen emissions.

There is a fund of 40 billion Danish kroner for the initiatives.

Political negotiations are currently taking place to turn the agreement into reality.

---------------

Political theater

---------------

Søren Søndergaard spoke out in his speech. He called it 'deeply frustrating' to witness the 'political theater' that was currently playing out at Christiansborg.

- While this is going on, there is, of course, first and foremost everything that the agreement is about: nature, biodiversity, climate, and the environment. It is waiting for this deal.

- Second, there are many farmer families who are living in an uncertain situation on their farms at home right now.

- And third, there are many hard deadlines in the agreement, and we are making it harder and harder to meet them, the longer this goes on, says Søren Søndergaard.

A number of ministers, including Economy Minister Stephanie Lose, spoke in Herning. (Photo: © Bo Amstrup, Ritzau Scanpix)

-------------------------------------------

Focus on nitrogen emissions from neighboring countries

-------------------------------------------

The biggest obstacle to an agreement currently concerns nitrogen. Nitrogen emissions from farmers' fields are the main cause of the eutrophication in fjords and inner waterways, which have reached record levels this year.

The Finance Ministry has prepared three scenarios for how much should be reduced. The government has taken a firm stance on the scenario that provides the least reductions. This has been a stumbling block in the negotiations. Both The Radicals, SF, The Conservatives, and the Red-Green Alliance want a more ambitious scenario.

But the government has agriculture behind it. The scenario ends with fewer reductions because more consideration is given to nitrogen emissions from neighboring countries. And that is, according to Søren Søndergaard, quite right.

- We believe that one should take into account what kind of society we live in, what kind of neighboring countries we are surrounded by. So when water runs from Sweden and Germany through the dikes, it is clear that we need to do something together with Sweden and Germany, says Søren Søndergaard.

Have you agreed on scenario 3 with the government?

- We have not made a scenario choice in the tripartite agreement. But we have discussed these things, and there is also a formulation about it. If we are to achieve good ecological conditions in Danish waters, we must also look at the other countries around us, says Søren Søndergaard.

----------------------

Three budgets for nitrogen reductions

----------------------

The Finance Ministry has prepared a report that outlines three scenarios for reducing nitrogen.

* The first scenario states that agriculture will reduce 14,100 tons of nitrogen per year.

* The second scenario states a reduction of 13,600 tons of nitrogen per year.

* The third budget states a reduction of 12,900 tons less nitrogen per year.

The latest decision on nitrogen reductions comes from the agricultural agreement from 2021. It states:

'The agreement parties agree to ensure the implementation of the water framework directive, which involves a reduction in nitrogen emissions to the water environment by 13,100 tons with the current estimates.'

It was decided in the agricultural agreement from 2021 that a 'second opinion' should be made on the nitrogen input. This is the report that is now being disputed.

----------------------------

Minister understands frustration

----------------------------

It is not the first time this week that Jeppe Bruus (S), who is the Minister for the Green Three-Party, has had to answer criticism about the ongoing negotiations.

Earlier in the week, social democratic mayors from Southern Funen issued a sharp criticism that the government has so far held fast to the scenario that provides the least reductions in nitrogen emissions to the marine environment.

Now, criticism is coming from the top of agriculture, which he heard firsthand in Herning Congress Center.

- It is clear that they are impatient with the fact that we are not yet able to land a political agreement, so that we can really get out of the starting blocks. I understand that frustration, and we are negotiating. But it is a big agreement worth 40 billion Danish kroner, and the parties that were not part of it in the spring need to be taken care of as well, says Jeppe Bruus.

Søren Søndergaard says he is deeply frustrated that nothing is happening and that there is no agreement yet. He calls it political theater that is currently taking place at Christiansborg. What do you say to that?

- I understand the frustration and impatience. I also hope that we can gather a broad political majority in the Folketing, who will take responsibility for this piece of Danish history that we were a part of creating in the summer.

But still, political theater. You are the one responsible for it, he calls it political theater. What do you say to that criticism?

- I understand the frustration and impatience. When we negotiated in the spring, we had a room where things were kept confidential, and there were no leaks. That's not the case now, and it may be part of what creates uncertainty.

Can you guarantee that there will be an agreement about this green three-party?

- No, I can't, unless I have a broad political backing for it. And that's why the appeal is also to the parties at Christiansborg to take responsibility for the big agreement we made in the summer. And to ensure that it can really get started and that we can also reach our goals.

Warning: This article was translated by a Large Language Model, in case of doubt, you can always visit the original source.