Lærdal inst in Sogn has access to copious amounts of licensed power, and before Christmas the municipality decided that the power should benefit its own residents. Quite concretely, in that they receive an offer to sign fixed price contracts for electricity at 62 øre per kWh. Mayor Audun Mo (Ap) tells news that the agreement springs from “a social democratic idea of sharing good things and smoothing out differences”. But not everyone in the municipality gets access to the new agreement. The explanation is that the power supplier first carries out a credit check on the customers. Those who do not pass the test are shown to the “regular market”, where the average price in recent days has been twice the fixed price. In Sogn Avis, the mayor acknowledges that it is a paradox that those who need it the most fall outside the sponsorship, and that the municipality did not take account of this outcome when they decided that the concession power should benefit the residents. – Unfortunately, this is yet another example that it is expensive to be poor. But I don’t quite see what we could do otherwise, he says to news. He adds: – It is not like we can instruct the power company to enter into agreements they do not want. Or could the municipality do just that? news has been in contact with several people who believe that the municipality should and could make it a condition that all residents, regardless of their ability to pay, must have access to the scheme. Mayor Audun Mo (Ap) tells news that “by all accounts there are relatively few” who are excluded from the scheme, and that they will try to find a solution to the problem. Photo: Jan Christian Jerving / news Associate Professor of Jurisprudence, Morten Walløe Tvedt, tells news that the “right of instruction” means that the municipality could order the power company to offer the agreement to everyone. And further that the obligation to supply electricity according to the Energilova “is an argument for the power company having to offer the same agreement to everyone within the same geographical area”. – There is a big difference between a credit check for new loans and signing an agreement for a vital good such as electricity, he says. The Consumer Council states that the municipality “should look at solutions” to extend the fixed price agreement to include all residents. – We cannot turn a blind eye to those who may need it the most – The municipality should ensure that all residents were able to take part in this offer, says senior adviser at the Consumer Council, Thomas Iversen. – It could, for example, be solved by the municipality providing a guarantee for those who fell outside due to payment notices, he adds. Sæmund Stokstad is the municipal council representative for Lærdal SV. – We have to try to get this door open again, he says. He points out that the purpose of the scheme was to give the residents “a helping hand in what for many is an economically challenging time”. – Then it goes without saying that we cannot turn a blind eye to those who may need it the most. Group leader for SV in Vestland County Council, Marthe Hammer, characterizes the agreement as “completely unreasonable”. – What is important here is that universal arrangements actually apply to everyone. This will be a bit like child benefit, which is also a universal scheme. Many municipalities have shortened this for those who live on social security, while others receive child benefit in addition. Then those who have the least will be framed. – The intention with the scheme was that it should apply to all residents of Lærdal, and when you learn that this is not the case, then you have to go through and see what needs to be done to ensure that it applies to everyone, says the group leader for SV in Vestland County Council, Marthe Hammer. Photo: Nikita Solenov/SV – It is completely unreasonable The reasoning that it is “expensive to be poor” is based on the fact that people with payment notices quickly end up in spirals where they have to choose solutions that may be more reasonable in the short term – but more expensive in the long term . Examples of this “psychology of scarcity” are cars with high workshop costs and homes with greater heating needs. – It is completely unreasonable that people with financial problems do not get the same offer as others, says Sofie Marhaug in Raudt. She says the noise surrounding the electricity agreements in Lærdal is symbolic of what happens “when we make electricity a commodity, and not a common good that we own together”. – Here the municipality has introduced a good scheme for the residents, but it turns out to be wrong. Of course, the politicians can decide that the municipality should not use a power company that sets such strict requirements. – It is unacceptable Terje Halleland, Frp – This seems like simple political craft, where no account is taken of how the scheme turns out. It is a shame if people with a low ability to pay are put in the way, when reasonable and sensible electricity solutions are to be distributed. It is very worrying that many people struggle with the high electricity prices today, and then arrangements should be made so that those with poor advice do not fall outside the reasonable solutions. Jeanette Syversen, group leader in Raudt Vestland – It is unacceptable to let those with the worst advice bleed double the electricity price by sending them out on the stock exchange! I advise the municipal council in Lærdal to ensure as soon as possible that absolutely all residents, as well as institutions and businesses, have access to electricity at a maximum price of 35 øre. As a candidate for county mayor for Raudt, I invite mayors in Lærdal and local politicians from other power municipalities to join a joint initiative to demand that the county municipality return its concession power income to the municipalities that have made their natural areas available. We are forced to ensure stable and reasonable power prices for residents, the entire business community and voluntary groups and organizations that struggle with the record high electricity bills. The fixed-price agreement in Lærdal also received attention this winter when the municipal council was informed that fixed-price customers used twice as much electricity as those outside the scheme. – More cases than before go to debt collection In the past year, the loudest calls for a maximum price for electricity have come from Frp, Raudt – and KrF. – This is very unfortunate. Lærdal has large power revenues, and when they create such a solution they must make sure that those with poor finances are also included, says Kjell Ingolf Ropstad (KrF). He adds that this would not be an issue anyway if more people agreed to their model of 100 percent compensation every time the electricity price goes over 50 øre. – Credit check does not only affect the “poor” Eivind Smith, professor of jurisprudence – Credit check does not only affect the “poor”, but also people who for various reasons have “messed it up”. As legal discrimination it is difficult to see that it can be discussed – after all, this does not apply to any “significant relationship with a person”, which is the wording in the Discrimination Act section 1. Anita Lesteberg is the leader of FØL Noreg (Association for increasing the standard of living). She is disappointed that the Labor Party municipality of Lærdal has vouched for an arrangement that “squeezes the most vulnerable groups”. – Prices have increased for all goods and services, and many people are in a pinch. There are more people who receive payment notices, and many more cases than before go to debt collection. Then an arrangement like this seems wrong, and not least discriminatory. She adds: – It is precisely those who struggle financially who need this scheme the most. Lærdal Power Municipality sponsors residents with cheap electricity. Unless they have a payment notice. Photo: Østfold Energy
ttn-69
Here you get cheap electricity, if you have your finances in order – news Vestland
