The debate on the billion-dollar bill for energy renovations is dominating the last TV debate before the EU election. In the final TV debate before the EU election on June 9, the question of who should foot the bill for energy renovations of Danish homes became a focal point. Tensions arose when the debate hosts, Cecilie Beck and Kaare Quist, highlighted the statements made by Christel Schaldemose, the lead candidate for the Social Democrats (Socialdemokratiet), and her party colleague Niels Fuglsang. Fuglsang had suggested that the cost of renovating homes with low energy classes could ultimately fall on the citizens themselves. This led to strong criticism, and both Schaldemose and the party leadership have distanced themselves from this statement, calling it a mistake.
Schaldemose stated in the debate that the Social Democrats do not wish to pass the bill directly on to the citizens, and that it is not included in the proposal the party voted for. The energy renovations are part of an EU agreement aimed at ensuring that homes retain heat better and move away from fossil heating sources. Researchers at Aalborg University have estimated that it will cost Denmark 120 billion Danish krone to upgrade the worst insulated homes.
This amount was used by Anders Vistisen, the lead candidate of the Danish People’s Party (Dansk Folkeparti), to criticize the Social Democrats and the other parties that have supported the initiative. Vistisen warned that the requirement would be a “bomb under the property market” and could lead to depopulation in villages where residents cannot afford the renovations. He claimed that it would affect both welfare in municipalities, the state, and the private sector.
However, Christel Schaldemose assured that the bill will not end up with the citizens. She emphasized that the implementation of the law will be decided by the Danish Parliament, which has shown a willingness to carry out the green transition in a socially balanced manner. Venstre’s (The Liberal Party) Morten Løkkegaard supported Schaldemose’s statements and pointed out that the law is about climate ambitions. He described it as sensible, as it will result in significant CO2 savings and reduce Denmark’s dependency on Russian gas. Løkkegaard argued that the amount of 120 billion Danish krone will not be imposed on taxpayers, as the Parliament will find ways to work around it.
It is clear that the question of energy renovations and their financing is a central issue in the debate leading up to the EU election, and there are different views on how the financial responsibility should be distributed.