He smiled gently. Walked concentratedly to his place with calm steps. He did not wave to the audience. It was center party leader Trygve Slagsvold Vedum’s first party leader debate as finance minister. It was to be a demanding balancing act between the two roles. Vedum struggled in a dilemma. He received a pat on the shoulder from his sidekick, Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre (Ap), before presenter Fredrik Solvang asked the first question. Støre seemed confident in the role. Clear in the argument. Occasionally pedagogically convincing. Vedum struggled more. It is well known that the two parties disagree on parts of energy policy. We did not get much news about the government’s tentative pragmatic solutions together. But we got an interesting insight into how the two leaders experience their own room for action and self-confidence in the debate. Even Støre, who knows that large parts of his own party and the trade union movement do not get the same palpitations from the message as he himself does. Vaccines and medicine In general, the current debate creates differences on both sides of Norwegian politics. The government partners Støre and Vedum disagree about whether the power cables serve us well. FRP disagrees with the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party. Regardless of the relevant government alternative, the view on this would split the parliamentary majority. Vedum was able to highlight the disagreement, but not in a way that creates more discord in government cooperation; Valgkamp-Vedum would not have had the same need to emphasize on TV that “we need an exchange of power” with foreign countries. He would emphasize the points of heritage silver and district jobs. The government’s position also means that the Sp leader comes more on the defensive and has to explain himself, Vedum’s many attacks on the favorite opponents Høyre and Frp did not involve a change of words, as it did for many years when Sp was on the offensive. Now Listhaug straight up asked Vedum to do his job! Finance Minister Vedum had to defend the maximum price resistance to harsh criticism from Sylvi Listhaug. It looked as if the latter, who even received applause, was most comfortable with the situation. Vedum responded by calling Listhaug an economic vaccine opponent. At least the responsibility medicine seemed to have worked on Vedum. He leaned on the bureaucracy in the Ministry of Finance. All the party leaders gathered in Arendal for the party leader debate on Thursday evening. Photo: n22145 Støre took an SV settlement Støre appeared extra engaged and on the offensive when he could settle a settlement with negotiating partner SV about the international background to the power crisis in Europe. – There is war in Europe, Kirsti! You cannot say that market forces are ravaging Europe, it is Putin who is ravaging Europe, Støre pointed out in a clear voice. Before the war, before the power crisis, Støre wanted to govern with SV. Now he needs them to get a majority in the Storting. For Støre, European solidarity is a pillar of the policy and basic vision. That separates him from both of his closest political allies. This was clearly visible in the debate. Complex debate – muted wording The power debate is complex. The sometimes technical change of words gave way to nuances, even if it is demanding to clear the clutter and solutions. Power production, electricity prices, support schemes, international unrest and cooperation, war are closely linked. The government’s spending must also be adapted to a different situation than what has been the case in the last ten years. It places limitations on the politicians’ room for action. All solutions will have advantages and disadvantages. Some choices cannot be undone, even if the result was different than expected. Politicians can therefore be open about the upsides and downsides. For example, in the issue of foreign cables, regardless of position. It is to the advantage of the change of words and the voters that it can happen in subdued forms, as the debate in Arendal largely showed.
ttn-69