In the middle of the street Vedum fought – Yitring

He smiled softly. He walked cautiously towards his abode with silent steps. He didn’t sway the audience. It was the first party leader debate in which Central Party leader Trygve Slacksvold was the finance minister.

It was a balancing act between the two roles. Vedum struggled in a dilemma.

Before host Fredrik Solvang asked the first question, he received a tap on the shoulder from his side, Prime Minister Jonas Gerstor (AP).

Storr was confident in the role. Clarity in argument. Hope to teach occasionally. Vedum struggled even more.

It is well known that the two parties disagree on some areas of energy policy. We don’t get much news about the government’s temporary practical solutions.

But the debate gave us an interesting insight into how both leaders experience their own action and confidence. Even Storr knew that his own party and large parts of the union movement were not as thrilled by the news as he was.

Vaccination and medication

In general, the electricity debate creates differences on both sides of Norwegian politics. Government partners Støre and Vedum disagree on whether power cables serve us well. The FRP disagreed with the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party. Regardless of a suitable government replacement, the view on this would split the parliamentary majority.

Scripture was able to highlight disagreement, but not in such a way as to create further contradictions in governmental cooperation; They would not have had the same need as Valkamp-Wade to insist on television that “we need a transfer of power” with foreign countries.

He will emphasize the points of traditional silver and district work.

The government’s position meant that the Sp leader had to come to the defense and explain himself, and many of his attacks on favored enemies Høyre and the Frp did not involve a change of words, as the Sp had done for years while on the offensive. .

Now Lystak straight up asked Wade to do his job!

Finance Minister Ved also had to defend the maximum price opposition to strong criticism from Sylvie Listock. The latter, who received a standing ovation, seemed more comfortable with the situation.

Veda responded by calling Listhaug an economic vaccine opponent.

At least the responsible medicine seemed to work. He leaned on bureaucracy in the finance ministry.

Storr took an SV settlement

When he was able to negotiate a solution with partner SV on the international background to the energy crisis in Europe, Storr appeared with extra commitment and attack.

– There’s war in Europe, Kirsty! You can’t say that market forces are ruining Europe, Storr pointed out in a clear voice that it is Putin who is ruining Europe.

Before the war, before the power crisis, Storr wanted to rule with SV. Now he needs to get a majority in the Storting.

For Storr, European unity is a pillar of principle and fundamental vision. This separates him from both of his closest political allies. This was evident in the discussion.

Complicated discussion – muted words

The power debate is complex. Sometimes a technical change of terminology has led to nuances, even if it calls for clearing up clutter and solutions.

Power generation, electricity prices, support programs, international unrest and cooperation, war are closely linked.

Government expenditure also needs to be adapted to a different situation than it was in the last ten years.

It imposes limits on the action of politicians. All solutions have advantages and disadvantages. Some choices cannot be undone even if the result is different than expected.

Politicians can articulate the pros and cons. For example, on the issue of foreign cables, regardless of position.

As the debate in Arendal amply showed, it can happen in modest forms, changing words and favoring voters.