Stockpiling in the food supply chain

Sofia Skönnbrink (S)

Madam Speaker! Sometimes it feels as if my generation has experienced more crises than should be possible during an entire lifetime. We millennials grew up with "nine eleven", terror threats, and climate anxiety. Then came the pandemic, skyrocketing food prices, and a security situation in Europe that many of us thought belonged in history books. We grew up believing that the world would become more open, safer, and more stable. Instead, we have had to learn how quickly societies can change when supply chains break, when borders close, and when war once again hits our continent. Here I stand now as a member of the Swedish Parliament in the year 2026, debating the rebuilding of preparedness stocks for food. That says quite a lot about the time we live in.

Madam Speaker! For a long time, Sweden dismantled its preparedness. For several decades, policy was characterized by the belief that the world had become safer, that the market would always function, and that deliveries would always arrive on time. But the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and the deteriorating global situation have shown how vulnerable that view is.

Food is not just any commodity. Food supply is a fundamental part of our total defense. Without food, society does not function. Without food, healthcare, elderly care, or the Armed Forces do not function. Without food, people's everyday lives and security do not function. Therefore, it is positive that we are now establishing a law on emergency stocks in the food chain.

The Social Democrats welcome the bill, not least because it builds upon the investigation that we in the government commissioned during the previous parliamentary term. We view it positively that the government has chosen a broader approach than the original investigation proposed and that the storage shall now cover the entire food chain, not just cereals and input goods. It is important, not least for the will to defend, for

Let us be honest, Madam Speaker: Swedish soldiers need their coffee!

Jokes aside. This actually says something important about our food security. In a crisis, it is not just about there being grain in a warehouse somewhere. It is also about food being able to be processed, transported, and actually reach people all over the country. It is about robust supply chains and about people being able to continue to live their lives as normally as possible even when times are difficult.

For this to work, the state needs to take a clear responsibility for the preparedness. Therefore, we Social Democrats believe, in accordance with the proposal, that it is wise that the state should own the goods that are stored and that the government is given the opportunity to decide which goods should be stored, in what quantities and where in the country they should be located. It is reasonable that the state takes a clear responsibility for this type of critical societal activity.

Madam Speaker! It is at the same time important to say that a preparedness stockpile does not arise simply because a law is passed in the Swedish Riksdag. What is crucial is how the stockpiling is actually built up in practice. Therefore, we Social Democrats in our special statement highlight that it would have been valuable if the government had already been clearer regarding the order of priority and how the build-up should take place step by step. In practice, however, much of the preparedness will rest on our Swedish

farmers and other entrepreneurs in the food chain. Therefore, the rules of the game need to be clear from the beginning. Which goods are most critical to society, how do we achieve a geographical distribution, and how do we ensure that the storage does not just look good on paper but actually works when it is needed? These are questions that must receive clear answers moving forward.

Madam Speaker! For a long time, stocks were seen as something old-fashioned, and preparedness was many times regarded as unnecessarily expensive. But in recent years, we have learned that it is sometimes significantly more expensive to stand without preparedness when the crisis finally arrives. This applies in particular to our food supply. We have seen how quickly prices can skyrocket when the world around us shakes, and we have seen how dependent Sweden is on imports of input materials, fuels, and food.

We have also started talking about how important it is that we have Swedish farmers and Swedish food companies that can actually produce food at home. Ultimately, food preparedness does not begin in a warehouse, it begins in the field, in the barn, in the greenhouse, and with all the people who every day work to produce food in our country. Therefore, we must continue the work of strengthening the profitability and competitiveness in Swedish food production. Preparedness warehouses can never replace a functioning domestic production. These two things must go hand in hand.

Madam Speaker! There is something almost historic in that Sweden is once again building up emergency stockpiles for food. My generation grew up in a Sweden where many believed that those types of issues belonged to the past. But now we know better. We know that peace, security, and functioning societies can never be taken for granted. Therefore, it is good that we today take steps to strengthen Sweden's food preparedness and our civil defense. But the work must not stop here. This must be the beginning of a long-term rebuilding of Swedish preparedness and Swedish resilience.

Madam Speaker! I conclude by saying that we Social Democrats stand behind the committee report. Now the important work of getting the implementation in place begins, and I hope that it can take place in good dialogue across the block boundaries with Sweden's best interests in focus.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Staffan Eklöf (SD)

Madam Speaker! The Tidö government is building up Sweden's new total defense bit by bit, and today we are debating preparedness stocks in the food supply chain. I stand behind the report in its entirety and move for approval of the committee's proposal.

Food preparedness is a broader concept than just food stocks and includes, among other things, an increased and robust food production. It is completely central to Sweden's food preparedness. In this area, Tidö has made extensive efforts during the past parliamentary term.

We have reduced the overhead costs of agriculture, provided compensation for certain Swedish specific requirements, and introduced certain strategic supports, for example support for robust food production, which is very relevant in this case. We have also increased demand, strengthened variety development, technological development and technology dissemination, found measures that simultaneously benefit production and the environment, strengthened disease control, and implemented several measures to reduce bureaucracy and increase legal certainty for farmers.

But we are not finished, and we have many other measures in the pipeline that we will launch if we receive renewed confidence.

Other parts of the food preparedness include measures so that municipalities and regions shall have greater opportunities to contribute and measures to facilitate keeping trade routes open during crisis and war.

The government bill with the following committee report, which we are now debating and will then vote on, concerns new legislation for preparedness stocks in the food chain. The storage shall aim to ensure the availability of necessary food or food that is of crucial importance for the will to defend in the event that Sweden is at war or in danger of war, or if, as a result of an extraordinary event, there is a shortage of food in the country or if there is a significant risk that such a shortage will occur.

Until very recently, food stockpiles were considered outdated, especially in a state capacity. But here is the situation: The different parts of the preparedness complement each other. The stocks provide a respite while Sweden works on re-establishing trade connections and increasing domestic food production.

The new law contains mandates and obligations for the government and indirectly agencies to decide on the content of and use of emergency stockpiles. It also contains provisions regulating the conditions when an individual holds stocks under agreement with an agency. Finally, there are rules on confidentiality so that foreign powers cannot be able to destroy the stockpiles. We consider the provisions to be expedient and will ensure that the operations function well.

Madam Speaker! When one sees how long it takes to build up all parts of the total defense, I can at least not avoid thinking that it was crazy to dismantle it as thoroughly as was done. In Finland, they maintained both military and civil defense and, of course, also emergency stockpiles.

We Swedes sometimes imagine that we are so moderate, as if we were a middle ground between different orientations found out in the world, but in reality, we are extreme. We swing easily between extremes, and it happens quickly. In Sweden, change is a good value in itself. Is it that way anywhere else in the world?

We therefore have a national character, whether you want it or not, and it sometimes deceives us, such as when we dismantled the military and civil defense in the 2000s and similarly in the 1930s. There is probably no people in the world that has a greater need for conservatism than the Swedish people. Conservatism does not want revolutionary changes. It wants to preserve the foundations of society, and it wants to analyze the consequences before decisions are made and carefully weigh different values against one another.

Take that insight with you into the voting booth in September, and make sure that Sweden avoids more dramatic shifts!

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Joanna Lewerentz (M)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Environment and Agriculture's report 25 on emergency stocks in the food chain. At the center stands an issue that has become increasingly acute in an uneasy world: Sweden's food preparedness.

The report addresses the need to strengthen preparedness through, among other things, the stockpiling of goods in the food chain. It is an important step, because for a long time we in Sweden have seen how food production has decreased, how farms have been shut down, and how we have become increasingly dependent on imports.

Recent years have clearly shown how vulnerable that starting point is. When the world around us shakes, we cannot assume that someone else will produce the food for us. Therefore, we must now reverse the development and strengthen Swedish food production, not only for the sake of competitiveness and because Swedish food is very good, but also for our own security and preparedness. Building up emergency stocks is ultimately about just security and about Sweden being able to stand strong even when the world around us shakes.

Madam Speaker! We do not find the best preparedness in decisions on stockpiles, because preparedness cannot be stored in empty shelves. It exists in profitable companies throughout the entire food chain.

Agriculture and food companies need to be able to break even. They need to be able to invest, grow, and feel confidence in the future. That is why the government's work to strengthen competitiveness and improve conditions throughout the entire food chain is so important, and this, together with emergency stocks, creates long-term security for the availability of food in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! There is a small dividing line in politics here. While some parties want to meet the problems with more rules, more requirements and more micro-management, we in the Moderaterna see it as our task to make it easier to be an entrepreneur in Sweden.

We know that the regulatory burden is heavy today. We know that administration and supervision can be perceived as both unpredictable and costly, and we know that in practice it affects the possibility of conducting operations, every day. Therefore, the work with regulatory simplification is not just a minor detail but a completely decisive part in strengthening food production.

Madam Speaker! The report points in the right direction when it comes to strengthening preparedness, but we must not stop there. We must see the whole: Preparedness stocks require production. Production requires companies. Companies require conditions that work. It is precisely this work that the government is now carrying out in various areas.

Madam Speaker! The Moderates' line is clear: We want to see a food production that is sustainable, competitive and profitable, and where more hard-working farmers feel optimism for the future and dare to invest and grow. We want more people to be able to produce more food in Sweden. We want Swedish companies to have conditions that make it possible to compete, both within the EU and globally. That is where the preparedness begins.

Sweden is heading in the right direction. We have begun work that strengthens both preparedness and the conditions for companies. But we are not finished. Therefore, it is crucial that we continue on the path we have taken, with a focus on profitability, regulatory simplification, and competitiveness. That is how we build a Sweden that stands strong, both in peacetime and in crisis.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the report Preparedness Stocks in the Food Chain, and I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal.

Unfortunately, we live in a restless time. Just 100 miles from Stockholm, a war has been ongoing for four years. Russia's full-scale war and invasion of the neighboring country Ukraine has shown that we as a country must have full readiness when it comes to both food and input goods such as artificial fertilizer and diesel.

Madam Speaker! We decided in this chamber in the 90s that the danger of war was over. We heard about perestroika, glasnost and the eternal peace, and we decided to reduce Sweden's defense at a rapid pace so that only a thumb-sized amount remained. Nor was the food preparedness any less important.

Madam Speaker! I remember the first debate I had here in the chamber when I was a newly elected Member of Parliament in 2014. I spoke about how we in Sweden needed to increase our food preparedness. After the debate, a member came up to me and said: ”You don't need to talk about food preparedness, Magnus. We have the EU, so it will work itself out.” Today, hardly any of us politicians say that, instead we have understood that Sweden needs a food preparedness worthy of the name.

Madam Speaker! Unfortunately, farmers did not rank high on the list at the end of the 1990s and in the beginning of the 2000s. It was decided, for example, that it should state in the Environmental Code that agriculture is an environmentally hazardous activity, and we had a Prime Minister who considered agriculture to be a special interest.

Madam Speaker! Sweden has gone from having a high food preparedness in the late 80s to having a preparedness of under 50 percent. From there, we must now move up and achieve a food preparedness worthy of the name.

Our neighboring country Finland has, as we heard from Staffan Eklöf here earlier, constantly asserted that they cannot do as Sweden and other countries do because history has shown that Russia cannot be trusted. Finland had a food preparedness of six months but considered that it was too little and that it must be raised to nine months. They can now manage that without having to import a single grain of wheat. In Sweden, we have a food preparedness of approximately ten days – then the shelves are empty in our grocery stores.

That is why it is so important that we have a government that acts, because it is of the utmost importance that Sweden's inhabitants can feel secure that there is food available in the event of a crisis or in a war situation.

The food strategy that we adopted here in the Riksdag in 2017 and the government's updated food strategy 2.0 form the basis for the report. The basis, Madam Speaker, is that we have profitability in Swedish food production and agricultural enterprises throughout Sweden. We need more cows, my friends, for both meat and dairy products.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet welcomes the bill on emergency stocks in the food chain. It is both important and necessary that Sweden strengthens its food preparedness. We live in a time characterized by war, climate change, extreme weather, and uncertain global trade flows. In that case, Sweden must have the ability to supply the population with food even during crises and, ultimately, war. Therefore, we stand behind the bill. But precisely because the issue is so important, we must also dare to speak about the whole, and from Miljöpartiet's side, we consider that it is missing in the submitted bill.

Madam Speaker! Emergency stockpiles are important but do not constitute the entire food preparedness. It is not enough for the state to build stockpiles if we simultaneously have a food system that is fundamentally vulnerable. A robust society also requires profitable agriculture, functioning transport, energy supply, water supply, regional production, and a food chain that can withstand the consequences of climate change. This is the core of the Miljöpartiets follow-up motion and reservation. We want to see that both the government's broader work on emergency planning and the specific proposal on emergency stockpiles are promptly complemented on the basis that food preparedness and the sustainability transition shall be treated as linked policy areas. We say yes to emergency stockpiles, but we mean that food preparedness and the sustainability transition must go hand in hand.

Madam Speaker! Climate change is not a side issue for agriculture. It is a direct threat to our future food supply. Droughts, floods, new pests and extreme weather are already affecting production. Therefore, climate adaptation is also preparedness policy.

We see a risk that the government's policy becomes too narrow, that the focus is on the stocks themselves but misses the long-term resilience in the surrounding system, because preparedness is not only built in warehouse premises. It is also built on farms, in soil health, in regional processing capacity and in robust infrastructure.

Madam Speaker! Several referral bodies also point this out. The Swedish Energy Agency highlights the need for reserve power and robust energy supply. FOI emphasizes the importance of transport and logistics. The County Administrative Boards point to the importance of regional knowledge and regional planning. This shows that food security must be seen as an entire system.

Miljöpartiet therefore argues that the government needs to complement the work with preparedness stocks with a clearer focus on sustainable transition, climate adaptation, and long-term resilience in the entire food chain. It is about building preparedness that works both in the next crisis and in the long term. If we simultaneously strengthen Swedish production, reduce the vulnerability of imported inputs, and build a more sustainable agriculture, we also get stronger preparedness for every invested tax krona. It is responsible politics. Therefore, I move for approval of the reservation.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 26 May.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)