Unexpected climate surge before upcoming Norwegian election?

This month, Adopt-A-Negotiator invited guest blooggers to report on the place of climate change in upcoming national elections in their country. Do political parties talk about climate during the campaign? Are there major differences on renewable energy and carbon pollution between the various political programs? Should we expect these differences to have an impact on the result of the elections?

The Norwegian parliamentary elections will be held on the 9th of September. The big fight is between the two government blocks: on the one side is the Red-Green government that has already been in power for 8 years (consisting of the small Socialist party, the likewise small Centre party and the big Labour party). On the other side are the liberal parties: Left (environmental liberal party), the Christian party, Right (traditional liberals), and the right-wing Progress party.

Because of this polarization between the two different government alternatives, the pre-election debates has mostly been reduced to debates about some very few national sectors which are important in people’s everyday lives. Early on it was established that this was not going to be an election about climate (much to the annoyance of myself and other people who thinks climate and environment are among the most important things).

One of the reasons for why people assumed this was not going to be an election about climate was that last year almost all the parties represented in Parliament agreed on a “political climate settlement” (klimaforliket) that with all probability would quench most of the climate debate (many thought). The second reason was that none of the three biggest parties (the Labour party, the Liberal party Right and the right-wing Progress party) made climate or environment as one of their main topics for their election campaigns. It was assumed that people would be more interested in school, family and health issues and therefore nor root for climate to become a big thing. The third reason is, of course, that most Norwegian politicians are well aware of the fact that Norway as of today is very dependent on the fossil industry. Very few politicians want to seriously engage in debates about how Norway should be more climate friendly, cut emissions and thereby having less money to spend on the welfare state, because they might be risking political suicide.

However, there has recently been a development that may prove these assumptions to be false. Several things point to the fact that climate is becoming a more important topic than previously thought, however little the major parties want to discuss it. Most monumental is the fact that the Green party has had a major improvement on polls the last months. In June, they rated 1,9 %. Now, they actually show numbers around 5 % on some polls, lifting them well above the electoral threshold at 4 %. If these numbers turn out to be true, the Greens would be in Parliament for the first time ever, which is a very positive development.

Also, there has for a long time been a lot of work going on within the Norwegian civil society to give more voice to the climate concerns. A large coalition called “climate-election 2013” has worked a lot during the year to get more people and politicians interested in debating climate and environment. Now, even the medias have to give more attention to climate issues, and this gives a spin-off effect where people hear more about these things and then again expect the media and politicians to talk more about it. Only the last weeks there has been several political debates where climate has been the main topic, and finally the big parties are actually being challenged on this. That’s something that we concerned environmentalists have been waiting for a long time.

There’s still 15 days to the election, and a lot of things can happen. I think the latest development has been very positive and not a minute too soon. It’s also a long time since an election has been this important. A lot of people probably feels forced to choose between the Red-(somewhat)Green(ish) government that already has been governing for two periods (and maybe is a little worn out) or a Blue-Blue government that represents new ideas but will do a lot of changes if they come to power (like boosting privatization), while at the same time not doing anything markedly positive for the climate. Given the fact that Norway, as all other nations, will have to do some serious action the next couple of years to deal with climate change issues both nationally and internationally, it won’t help us to have a blue government that wants to pretend Norwegian fossil industry isn’t a problem or that the marked will help us out of any fix automatically. Maybe this is what makes more and more people open to vote for the Greens, who very clearly say that they will prioritize climate and environment in every matter, even though they’re open to collaborate with parties on both sides. In this way, the Greens represent an alternative to all the voters who are sick and tired of politicians compromising climate on behalf of more “election-friendly” topics, or the voters who feel forced to choose between only two, very static, government blocks.

Then again, we’ll have to see if enough people actually prioritize climate and choose the Greens or one of the other environmental parties when push comes to shove and the day is upon us. I, for one, will definitely be biting my fingernails on the night of September 9th.

Read about the role of climate change in the narratives of other upcoming elections:

• Out of the spotlight: The role of climate policy in the Austrian campaign - by Joachim Thaler
• High stakes for the climate in Australian national elections - by Josh Wyndham-Kidd
• The hidden topic of Climate Change and energy democracy in the German Elections - by Anton Jaekel

Photo Credit: KCIvey, Dmitry Valberg and Fremskrittpartiet.