The government is right that more of the value from water, wind and sea should go to the community. It is good Labor Party policy. Unfortunately, the government misses the assessment of how this is best done in its proposal for a tax increase for municipally owned hydropower companies. This part of the proposal does not strengthen the community as such, but only moves money from the community in the municipalities to the community in the state. In addition, the proposal weakens the development and improvement of hydropower. The Labor Party’s tax policy should reduce differences, finance welfare and ensure predictability for people and businesses. We were therefore disappointed when the proposal for our power companies was unbalanced and retroactive. We expect an energy-neutral taxation. These are power investments that belong to our citizens and will ensure our common welfare. This is precisely why our municipalities chose to retain public ownership rather than sell out. The challenge with the government’s proposal, however, is that it affects the residents of the municipalities that own the power companies. Municipalities that have already had sharp increases in their own expenditure on electricity. Municipalities which must at the same time carry out much of the necessary work to reduce differences, deliver important welfare services and create opportunities for growth and new jobs in their own and surrounding municipalities. In reality, money is moved away from the municipalities where residents and businesses have felt the price of electricity the hardest – into the state, in order to finance various initiatives across the country. It is not distribution. It is pre-distribution. We must contribute, but it will be lopsided if a few city municipalities and other owner municipalities are deprived of billions of dollars overnight, which is a return on investments made in a generational perspective. It is in the cities that the differences increase the most and the welfare challenges are greatest. The gap between rich and poor is increasing. We went to the polls to get a government that would introduce a policy that reduces differences. At the same time, we went to the polls to get a government that really accelerated the green shift after many sluggish years. Then you cannot propose a power tax that puts the brakes on important investments in our power plants. Large multibillion-dollar projects in the development of power plant capacity have already been put back in the drawer. More will follow. Without more power in the Norwegian market, we will not be able to achieve what must be the most important political goal: to reduce electricity prices for people. It is investments in increased effect on hydropower that we as a nation depend on to ensure that electricity prices can actually go down. When you weaken the finances of the companies that are going to invest, and weaken the basis of profitability in the investments themselves, it is like saying that you accept stably high prices because it yields higher tax revenues. It can’t be like that. The municipalities that own the power companies primarily want to reduce power prices and thus also our profits. The challenge with the government’s proposal is that it reduces the development of power, and weakens the possibility of reducing electricity prices – and then the surplus is removed from the area that has paid to create it. So a bit of self-criticism: We, as owners of the power companies, must at the same time take greater political responsibility to ensure that our power companies offer fixed price agreements to their customers to a greater extent. To a large extent, the companies have thought about profit rather than taking social responsibility. The framework is now in place to secure more fixed price agreements. We have to take that responsibility, but with the “High Price Contribution” it will also be very difficult. We will give to the community, but it must be predictable and fair. Our proposal is the following: Increase the ground rent tax from 37 per cent to 40 per cent from 01.01.2023, as it is also on aquaculture and land-based wind power. Take away the high-price contribution, but keep it as a “rice behind the mirror” if the power companies do not deliver much better at fixed prices to businesses and residents, as is now provided for in the government’s energy policy. In this way, the municipalities can still deliver good services to their residents and businesses, investments to get more power in the market can happen at a great pace, the state can get extra income for national improvements – and electricity prices for people can be reduced. It’s really good Labor policy. The chronicle is signed by: Victoria Evensen, city council for industry and ownership, Oslo; Roger Valhammer, Bergen city council leader; Kari Nessa Nordtun, mayor of Stavanger; Monica Myrvold Berg, mayor of Drammen; Jan Oddvar Skisland, mayor of Kristiansand; Stanley Wirak, mayor of Sandnes; Robin Martin Kåss, mayor of Porsgrunn; Hedda Foss Five, mayor of Skien; Hallgeir Kjeldal, mayor of Bamble; Odd Stangeland, mayor of Egersund; Sigmund Rolfsen, Mayor Klepp; Frode Fjeldsbø, mayor of Gjesdal.
ttn-69
Municipalities, power and community – Speech
