While the excitement in the run-up to the Durban summit is minimal, interest in climate policy is on the increase in Norway. This is not because commitment to stop climate change is noticeably on the rise. No, it is because the frictions about climate policies in the government are so strong that they could cause a government crisis in a few months.

Here's the background: the Socialist Left Party (SV), which is one of the two junior parties in the government, had a terrible local election in the autumn. The subsequent opinion polls forecast that the party might fall below the threshold of four per cent at the general election in two years' time. That would be bad enough for SV but it would probably also lead to the red-green bloc losing its majority in parliament. Party leader Kristin Halvorsen took the consequences of her fourth consecutive election defeat and gave notice on election night that she would step down at an extraordinary party conference early next year.

A minister and an MP are now battling to take over as party leader. A major theme in the many duels between them is that SV must again be recognised as relevant and important for voters, and this applies most of all to efforts to reduce climate change. So it is a question of whether this job is best done in government or out.

Climate as a battleground

Officially the leadership of SV all think that the party should remain in government, but in back rooms and in corners there is discussion of whether SV would actually be better off getting out of government. But in that case it would have to happen in the right way: SV would have to walk out in protest against the "impossible" and "irresponsible" Labour Party. There could be no stories about the old radicals in SV having chickened out - that they couldn't cope with all the unpleasant and difficult decisions that go along with being in power.

Climate policy is not just important for SV. There are many indications that it is also a perfect set-up for a final showdown in the government. Four years ago a broad majority in parliament adopted such ambitious targets for cuts in climate gases that a large number of people in government and in the Labour Party believe that it will be impossible to achieve them. If SV refuses to agree to an adjustment of these targets, it could lead to a government crisis, and then Kristin Halvorsen, or the newly elected SV leader, could say that it was the Labour Party which did not have the will to stay the course in efforts to save the climate.

It is impossible today to have a sensible conversation about whether this will happen or not. It is not even possible to say with any certainty whether this battle will even take place. The Report to the Storting (white paper) on the issue of the government’s advancing all its efforts to reduce climate emissions has been postponed many times. First it was said that the report would come in 2011, then that was firmed up as the autumn, and now the latest is that it will be in the first half of 2012.

Delays

The pattern is recognisable. Ever since the Kyoto Agreement was signed 14 years ago, Norwegian politicians have warned voters that our international emission commitments had become so ambitious that each and every one of us will feel a change. So they have produced various statements and documents to specify these noticeable measures, and they have concluded without exception that more clarification is still needed.

After a parliamentary majority in January 2008 agreed to cut between 15 and 17 million tons of CO2 emissions by 2020, the government decided to ask all state directorates and specialist agencies to instigate a professional review of various measures with estimated costs and effects. When the specialist agencies published their advice, it turned out that some of them were so drastic that they would clearly get no support from the electorate. Minister for the Environment Erik Solheim concluded that it is extremely important to "pick the low hanging fruit first". This means that he would begin by implementing the effective measures for which there would the greatest acceptance by the public. He would not do it all at once, he would look at the measures in context. So nothing has been done.

Norway is the world champion

The Minister for the Environment will most certainly respond to this fairy story. His and Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg's story is that Norway is at the forefront in the fight against climate change. In the global context it is obviously correct. No country in the world spends more money on conserving rainforests - especially in Brazil and Indonesia. Few countries have committed to buying more climate quota than Norway. We will exceed the promises made in Kyoto by buying quota which contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the parts of the world where it is most cost-effective to reduce them.

As if that were not enough, Jens Stoltenberg and Norway played an important role in the work of setting up a green climate fund - a global fund that will finance climate measures in poor countries. In the autumn, Norway's prime minister launched the large-scale programme Energy+ with the UN Secretary General. This is a plan to provide electricity to the 1.3 billion people who today do not have electricity where they live. The idea is that private interests and the public will co-operate on energy efficiency and the development of new renewable energy.

In an international context Energy+ is a major initiative, but it has been completely lost in the Norwegian debate, in the same way as the forest investments and the climate fund are very often forgotten.

The reason is simple: the majority in the parliament believes that there must be a connection between what Norway does abroad and what it does at home. We do not get credibility in the international fight for climate measures as long as we continue to allow Norwegian climate emissions to increase.

It was this thinking that made three of the four opposition parties apply pressure on the government for national emission cuts. It was only when Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg understood that the conservative opposition party Høyre would support SV's demands for strong reductions in national emissions that he agreed to make it government policy.

Does Høyre regret?

Some people claim that Høyre are now regretting their climate policy activism. One effect of the resolution for massive CO2 cuts by 2020 has in fact been that Norway is rejecting industrial policy measures that could have provided jobs and created growth without ruining the climate. This is a point that the Progress Party is exploiting for all it is worth. The Progress Party was not involved in the climate compromise in 2008, and the party's representatives continually refer to a tentative proposal from the multinational company Alcoa to build an aluminium plant in Northern Norway - very close to the Snøhvit field which produces gas. No one believes that a refusal from Norway will prevent Alcoa from building a new aluminium plant. CO2 emissions will come no matter what - it is foolish to reject economic growth in Norway because of the climate.

Norway has already seen in practice how economic growth leaves the country because of this policy. Our major aluminium producer, Norsk Hydro, has built its own works in Qatar where there are no expensive CO2 taxes.

In addition, most of Norwegian industry will be covered by the EU's quota system from 2013. It would be even more stupid if Norway were to make its own policies to prevent industrial development or to reduce existing industrial emissions. The result might be that Norwegian jobs will be moved to other European countries, even though it would be more cost-effective in relation to the climate to keep them here.

Conjuring tricks

The consequence of the difficulty in limiting emissions from industry which can be moved between countries is that there should be even more curbs in activities which cannot be moved. It makes sense to make cuts in the transport policy area, and in the construction sector, in particular. The problem is that it will require extremely tough measures to reduce emissions by over 15 million tons just in these sectors.

Most political observers predict that the Labour Party and Høyre will force the others along with them by some tricks which, in practice, will lead to the ambitious national target cuts being scaled down. One method which has been used before is to calculate the forestry CO2 sequestration as a cut in our emissions.

Hints that Norway will once again wriggle its way out of domestic climate targets rest, meanwhile, on the assumption that SV still whole-heartedly wants to remain in government. This is a premise that no one can take for granted in Norway in the run-up to Christmas 2011.

The views expressed are those of the author.