A new political crisis is rocking the ruling party due to the transport minister.

The Unity List party has just announced a vote of no confidence in Transport Minister Benny Engelbrecht over the carbon dioxide emissions scandal, according to a statement by politician May Fildensen to local media cameras. She said: “Our clear assessment is that the minister has concealed crucial climate figures and thus misled Parliament… We have informed Benny Engelbrecht and the government that we no longer have confidence in him as a minister. It is not a matter of confidence in the government as a whole, but in the minister alone.”.
So far, the Unity List, the Independent Greens, the Danish People's Party, and the Liberal Party are all against the Minister of Transport. Together, these parties hold 71 parliamentary seats, and if the parliamentary majority decides to vote against the Minister of Transport, the result will be his removal.
What is the issue?
MobilityWatch and Ingeniøren magazine revealed that the Ministry of Transport failed to provide the required overview of CO2 emissions for several infrastructure projects, which Parliament had agreed upon in June of last year. Documents obtained by the media show that the Ministry of Transport specifically instructed the Danish Roads Directorate to remove CO2 emissions figures from preparatory work carried out before negotiations on the plan began last year. In April, the government presented its plan for developing transport projects in Denmark up to 2035. That same month, the Liberal Party (Venstre) requested access to CO2 emissions figures but was informed that they were unavailable. Consequently, the plan was adopted by a majority vote in Parliament. On January 27, the aforementioned sources revealed that the Minister of Transport had withheld CO2 emissions information related to the infrastructure development of the transport projects plan, sparking outrage among parliamentary parties. These parties then urgently summoned the Minister of Transport, who explained that he had withheld the figures because they were inaccurate. However, this explanation was criticized by numerous experts.








