Inger Støjberg with new concept: One will be able to smell the dirty diaper "decidedly"

Inger Støjberg comes up with a new invention.

The name of the concept recalls memories of the other side of the Atlantic, but one should remember the Danish pronunciation when saying it aloud: CO2 rally.

The recipe is simple.

A farmers' meeting on a farm, where there will be a treat of sausages, sodas, and hotdogs, and where Inger Støjberg and her Denmark Democrats party colleagues will talk about the fight against a CO2 tax.

So far, two rallies have been scheduled in the calendar ( https://danmarksdemokraterne.dk/forside/tilmelding/ ). Inger Støjberg formulates it as "two 'festive' days, where participants can see for themselves how 'clever Danish farming really is'."

Should one add something to the name of the arrangement, which recalls something from an American election campaign? No, it seems.

"It's just, what it is," says Støjberg:

"There are speakers, and there will be an opportunity to simply decide to smell the coffee."

Danish farmers are currently among the hottest topics at Slotsholmen, where the parties in the Folketing must take a stance on how a CO2 tax on agriculture can be designed and how agriculture can be compensated.

Most parties in the name of nature and the climate demand that farmers pay into their own pockets and pay for their pollution. The Danish Democrats, however, have taken a position in the opposite corner.

The political agricultural debate is a value political battleground, and with harsh words, announcements – and soon CO2 rallies – the Danish Democrats & co. warn against the tax in harsh terms.

The core arguments from the party can be summarized as follows: Danish farming is greener than other farming. If Danish farmers close shop, production will move to Germany or Poland. A CO2 tax will cost jobs in rural areas and will therefore also reverse land and city even more. The earth will not sink if, for example, the reduction target of 70% is not reached until 2035.

"I am with the fact that there is consensus in the Folketing that we must curb Danish business in the name of the climate," says Støjberg:

"It's not a position I share."

Land farming or die?

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

Left and several other parties in the Folketing have targeted ( https://www.berlingske.dk/politik/inger-stoejberg-har-sagt-at-hun-gaar-ind-for-storstilede-groenne-maal-nu ) the Danish Democrats and demanded an answer on how the party will reach the reduction target of 70% in the climate law without a tax on one of the most polluting industries, namely agriculture.

On the other hand, Støjberg has shot the other way and specifically accused the old agricultural party of betraying farmers.

The question is, do the critics have a point in that the tax on agriculture is necessary to meet the climate targets?

The Danish Democrats support the climate law in the sense that the party shares the ambition of the 70% reduction target.

"But it doesn't mean we can't have another stance on how quickly we should reach it," says Støjberg.

When will we reach it, if it's up to you?

"I just have it that way, that if we reach it in 2032, 2034, or 2035, the earth won't sink under that reason."

"If we force this through and close down agriculture and follow-up industries, we must give up if that's what we want. It's not what we want."

Is 2035 your deadline?

"I don't know when the deadline is. I just say that it's not necessarily 2030, because I don't believe we can reach it without both agriculture and follow-up industries closing down."

Do you have a deadline?

"No, not necessarily. I hope we can reach the target as quickly as possible."

The Danish Democrats have previously pointed to research, technological solutions, and the extraction of low-lying soils as ways to meet the CO2 reduction targets. However, experts have cast doubt on ( https://www.berlingske.dk/politik/inger-stoejberg-har-sagt-at-hun-gaar-ind-for-storstilede-groenne-maal-nu ) these arguments and said that it is unlikely that the 2030 target can be reached in this way.

"It can be done, but the question is, will it be in 2030 or later," says Støjberg, when confronted with the experts' messages.

How do you know with certainty that the technological solutions, which you put your faith in, will be ready to take us to 2033 or 2035?

"Well, I just know that at some point, it will be possible to reach it." Man mentions farmers' fertilizers, low-lying soils, and pyrolysis.

"All the things that have only recently been put into motion are being developed now."

Alone against the CO2 resistance

Inger Støjberg stands – almost – alone in the CO2 resistance. The Liberals are also opponents of the CO2 tax on agriculture, but not as openly as Støjberg.

Støjberg, however, will not mix things up and align herself with other bourgeois parties that go for a tax. However, she cannot help but send a little jab at her old party colleagues.

"Left must just give up if they want to sacrifice Danish farming, and how many jobs it will cost to introduce a CO2 tax," says she:

"I said before the election: 'We won't go along.' And that's obvious, isn't it?"

Will the Danish Democrats be part of a bourgeois government if the latter continues to implement a CO2 tax?

"Let's see how it ends up."

You won't reject it if ...

"You can't draw any conclusions from that at all," says Inger Støjberg:

"It's a completely hypothetical question."

It's not going to be introduced.

"Let's see."

Will you make it a requirement that it be removed again?

"We're not going any further with that."

Why not?

"Because I don't know what I'm commenting on. I can't comment on how a CO2 tax looks when it's not implemented."

Regardless of how the tax looks, you won't ...

"Let's see if they can make it work, or if they can't."

Shouldn't you put pressure and say: "I will not support a government that continues to implement a CO2 tax on Danish agriculture"?

"We're not going that far today."

Landbrug & Fødevar's chairman, Søren Søndergaard, has urged you ( https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/seneste/landbrug-og-foedevarer-opfordrer-stoejberg-til-droppe-afvisning-co2-aftale ) to enter the negotiating room. Why not try to influence?

"Because I believe it's so wrong to introduce a CO2 tax."

"It's Søndergaard's role as an interest organization to get as many people as possible around the negotiating table. But in fact, I think Danish farming has the best of it that there are parties that hold firm to the fact that this is wrong."

If it's wrong, and you must hold firm, then you must also be ultimatum?

"I will simply not comment on anything hypothetical."

It's not hypothetical that the tax will be introduced.

"Let's see."

Will you refuse to vote for …

"I won't comment on that either."

The farmers' union chairman, Bjarne Kammersgaard, has also urged you to enter the negotiating room ( https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/seneste/landbrug-og-foedevarer-opfordrer-stoejberg-til-droppe-afvisning-co2-aftale ) and has criticized your stance. How do you respond?

"I believe it's wrong to introduce a CO2 tax on agriculture."

"It's Kammersgaard's role as the chairman of the farmers' union to represent the interests of farmers as best he can. But in my opinion, Danish farming has the best of it that there are parties that hold firm to the fact that this is wrong."

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