This was said by Climate and Environment Minister Espen Barth-Eide (Ap) when the newly created international nature agreement, seen in relation to the E6 development through the Lågendelta, was among the topics in the Storting’s question time on Wednesday morning.
– Not important enough?
It was Storting representative Birgit Oline Kjerstad (SV) who brought the question to the fore. She thought the Nature Agreement was good news, and that an initiative has been taken and work is being done on a report to the Storting as a follow-up to the Nature Agreement.
However, she expressed her skepticism that before the Storting notification is in place, major land issues will have to be decided. Among other things, the E6 development between Mjøsbrua and Øyer, which thus affects the Lågen delta.
The Norwegian Environment Agency put its foot down for a dispensation from the conservation regulations on the same day that the Nature Agreement became a fact.
– The ink on the Nature Agreement in Montreal was barely dry before the minister left the door open in connection with the protection of the Lågen Delta. It was established as a reserve in 1990. The road authorities have known about the protection all along. It is not just about replacing a conservation area. Is the Nature Agreement not important enough to stop such projects, and is the protection not a lasting protection, Kjerstad wanted to know.
– Not early
The Minister responded by emphasizing that the Nature Agreement is very successful.
– But it is not stated in the Nature Agreement from Montreal that you cannot build a bridge over the Lågen Delta. What it says is that you must take more account of the overall burden on nature in everything you do. We have to become smarter in connection with development projects of roads, cottage fields etc.
Barth Eide further said that it is completely out of the question to cancel the Environment Agency’s decision not to grant a dispensation from the conservation regulations for the Lågen Delta.
– The Norwegian Environment Agency gave a specific answer to a specific question. The directorate further said that if you want to make changes, you must look at the safety regulations. The problem is that any change to the road (E6) affects the safety regulations. The current road passes through the same protected area. We are looking at solutions where nature as a whole will come out better than today. We have not advanced Which one solution. Not doing something is also not good for nature and people. Now trucks are crashing into parts of Lillehammer to a greater extent than was intended. What we are going to achieve is that nature should come out better overall than it did in the original scheme. We are looking for a solution.
The climate and environment minister also stated that he is working on the matter in collaboration with the transport minister.
High threshold
– There are 3,200 conservation measures in Norway today. We will take with us the principle that nature should come out better. The threshold for changing the protection regulations is very high. Sometimes societal measures can come into conflict with the original protection. Then there is room in the law to make adjustments in the protection regulations, said Barth-Eide.
Kjerstad claimed that protected areas in Norway are under great pressure.
– Nature often loses the battle in large projects. It is not only Lågendeltaet that is in danger of losing the battle. The nature agreement must have consequences for the projects. These areas are not renewable resources. Will the government put nature-destroying motorway projects on hold, asked Kjerstad.
Bath-Eide replied that the government should prioritize the infrastructure to a greater extent as it is along the existing routes, and not like the previous government which built a number of new four-lane motorways to be able to introduce 110 km/h speed limits.
– This is a shift in transport policy in line with the Nature Agreement. It is stated in the Nature Agreement that more consideration must be taken, not that no building should be built anywhere. Which is more favorable for the finances, and more favorable for the nature accounts.
The minister also answered in the affirmative that they will take the initiative to implement measures in old plans that have not been realized in order to limit road and cabin development in the future.
The Hurdal platform
Sigrid Zurbuchen Heiberg (MDG) wanted an answer to whether the government’s handling of the Lågen Delta harmonizes with the program statement in the Hurdal platform on climate, environment and nature.
– In the Lågendelta we are talking about nature conservation, which we take very seriously, said Barth Eide, who reiterated that the law leaves room for adjustments.
