Increasing climate costs must be distributed fairly, otherwise public support for climate policy is in danger of melting away. Recent governments have not always paid sufficient attention to this.
This is stated by the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR) in the report ‘Justice in Climate Policy’ that will be presented on Thursday. Ministers Harbers (Infrastructure) and Jetten (Climate) will receive it.
As an example, the WRR cites the popularly known ‘Tesla subsidy’: the plug subsidy on electric cars, which in practice mainly used by wealthier Dutch people. The Council also points to the French Yellow Vests, who demonstrated against higher excise duties on fuel, as an example of how citizens can turn against climate policy if they perceive it as unjust.
Heaviest loads
“Climate policy is more than just a technical question about which measure limits the most CO2 emissions,” explains WRR researcher Gijsbert Werner. In the political choice for the right measures, it should be clear in advance who bears the heaviest burden and who receives benefits.
There is also dissatisfaction about the ODE tax. This tax on energy consumption – from which the subsidy for wind and solar parks is financed – threatens to put the most burden on the weakest shoulders. Prosperous households are able to insulate their homes and thus pay less energy and ODE tax. Poorer families, on the other hand, are forced to use more gas in a drafty rented house and therefore pay more tax.
The level of future climate costs is uncertain. But climate policy alone has a price tag of hundreds of billions of euros over the coming years. In addition, the costs of climate damage – due to floods, drought and heavy precipitation – can also amount to several thousand euros per year per capita, according to reinsurer Swiss Re.
Watch all our videos about politics here:
Free unlimited access to Showbytes? Which can!
Log in or create an account and don’t miss a thing of the stars.