EU's strategy for sustainable and circular textiles

Jytte Guteland (S)

EU's strategy for sustainable and circular textiles

Madam Speaker! The trend of fast fashion is unfortunately large in our world. It is also one of the more extreme expressions of an unsustainable throwaway society. Clothes produced with very short durability, often stuffed with chemicals and often manufactured under atrocious working conditions, are fed into the stores and entice us with bargain prices. As soon as the season is over, the clothes become unfashionable and are hung in the wardrobe, where they become monuments to this environmental crime. Instead of recycling or giving away the clothes, we see large companies burning the clothes directly, because it would tarnish the brand to have an old production out for sale. And in our wardrobes, we have tons of environment-polluting clothes that never see the light of day again.

Textiles are commonly used in clothing, in vehicles and in furniture. Often they are packed with chemicals, which not infrequently end up in our fields and watercourses. We consume more than 10 kilos per person per year. Global textile production has for many years doubled year after year.

Madam Speaker! Christmas is coming soon. Many of us are wondering what we should buy for our loved ones. Soft packages are popular Christmas gifts with something warming that we can wear. I also heard that this year's Christmas gift is precisely a knitted sweater – rewarding when it is knitted at home, of course, but it can also be nice to buy one. But few think that the clothes contain just a lot of chemicals.

Chemicals are used not only in the manufacturing and dyeing of clothes but also as flame retardants or impregnation. We are talking about substances that are to be worn close to the body, not infrequently on our children's small bodies. Several of the chemicals in the clothes are harmful both to the environment and to our health and can lead to problems in the future. For example, they can entail risks for certain tumors or impaired reproductive capacity, meaning that those who grow up now may have difficulties having children in the future. Another may then perhaps not have the opportunity to become a grandmother, which would be very sad. That type of thought, I believe, many of us have.

According to the Swedish Chemicals Agency's calculations, a few years ago more than 10 percent of the chemicals used in textiles were harmful to health in some way. Small children are extra sensitive to this. For a small child, clothes are also something that one might suck on, which then becomes extra dangerous for the little ones.

This is truly no small problem. As I mentioned, we consume approximately 10 kilos of clothes and home textiles per person per year. Many more chemicals are also involved in the manufacturing. To manufacture, for example, a pair of jeans, approximately 2 kilos of chemicals are required. Think about what that means! If one compares it with, for example, a large bag of flour or something else where the kilos become very visual, one understands how enormously much chemicals this actually is.

The EU has a specific legislative program for this, REACH, but it leaves much to be desired as it stands today. Of the dangerous chemicals used in clothes and textiles, only one-third is regulated. We would therefore need to do much more. The fact that it looks this way implies a poor protection for people's health and the environment. Our consumers should not have to worry when they go out and do Christmas shopping and want to give a nice sweater to one of their loved ones.

Madam Speaker! Chemicals are also something that affects the workers in production in the textile industry. Many countries where the clothes are manufactured have appalling working conditions. If we consumers surround ourselves with chemicals, we can say that many of those who produce our clothes and other textiles are literally bathing in chemicals. Often, the combination of chemicals is particularly hazardous to health. It becomes a chemical cocktail that also makes the recycling of clothes very difficult. It is not possible to sort in a good way, especially since many of the clothes have special colors, and we demand increasingly exciting color combinations on our clothes. That also makes the recycling very difficult.

Many of us have heard about the conditions in China, Bangladesh, or Cambodia and about how workers are doing there. The rights for them are very weak. Many times it is women who work in the factories. They may work twelve hours a day, six days a week, and yet they have difficulty making the wages stretch. Isn't it something truly sick that there is such pressure on wage earners in the world? This is a race to the bottom, globally speaking. It is a constant hunt for the very cheapest places—the places where the labor is the cheapest. Production is moved there in a very cynical way, as we have seen during recent years.

It is about wages, working hours and safety. All of us who lived through that time probably remember with a shudder the major textile accident in Bangladesh, when thousands of workers died when a factory collapsed. The safety in these large factories is often substandard.

Madam Speaker! Much is being done to improve the situation within the textile industry. Not least, the industry itself is doing a lot. There are many good Swedish companies that are doing their very best to have an ethical production. Much is underway in the industry. There are exciting initiatives concerning the manufacturing of textiles from algae or forest-based cellulose. It is very good.

I have personally had the opportunity to visit the company Renewcell, a Swedish innovation company that has developed a patented process for recycling cellulose-based textiles such as cotton and viscose. It was very interesting to see their work. I believe that we need to encourage this much more.

I also want to say that Stefan Löfven's government ensured that Högskolan i Borås was tasked with creating a national platform for sustainable fashion and sustainable textiles, which was very good.

Now we must join forces to improve the situation. Therefore, we Social Democrats want to support what is proposed in the report on sustainable textiles.

The strategy that is now being developed to create a sustainable textile production is extremely important. There are a number of points in the strategy that we Social Democrats think are good and can contribute to putting a stop to the madness that exists in the textile industry globally. This includes, among other things, improving sustainability through new design requirements, clearer labeling with a digital product passport, stricter control against greenwashing, and measures against microplastics released during production. The EU also needs harmonized rules for an extended producer responsibility.

(Applause)

In this speech, Anna-Caren Sätherberg (S) agreed.

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

Andrea Andersson Tay (V)

Madam Speaker! In line with the majority in the Committee on Environment and Agriculture, the Left Party welcomes the EU's strategy for sustainable and circular textiles. However, we believe that the strategy falls short, particularly regarding social requirements, which we have clarified in a reasoned reservation together with the Green Party.

The production and consumption of textiles cause a large climate impact and also other environmental problems by the fact that manufacturing consumes large amounts of resources, energy, water and chemicals. The EU Commission's new textile strategy represents a step forward in the work to tackle these problems.

From a global perspective, EU citizens have a high consumption of textiles and therefore a great responsibility for the problems that the textile industry causes. Sweden also has good opportunities to be at the forefront and contribute to the measures that the Commission indicates in the textile strategy.

Unfortunately, the strategy has little focus on the social problems that the textile industry causes. I regret that the commission is not taking the opportunity to address them. We do not have time to solve one problem at a time. When production shifts towards increased environmental consideration, consideration for human rights must also become an integrated part of the circular business models. The EU must set sharp requirements for European clothing companies so that they take responsibility for their impact on the environment and human rights.

The strategy unfortunately misses issues such as unfair trading practices and living wages - aspects that are important for making the textile industry fair and sustainable. Brands use the uneven balance of power between themselves and their suppliers to create advantages for themselves, for example by setting purchase prices that are lower than production costs, shortening lead times, or making design changes at the last minute. This behavior pressures the manufacturers' margins and gives little or no room to invest in sustainable production and better working conditions.

Of the employees in the clothing industry, 75 percent are women. The gender equality perspective must therefore be central in all measures. It is not sufficient for the commission to refer to the proposal on due diligence for companies, especially considering that that proposal is only expected to cover 1 percent of the companies. Even small and medium-sized enterprises must be included for us to see real change in the textile industry.

The strategy would need more concrete requirements regarding companies' responsibility for the climate transition, including through binding requirements for companies to develop and implement transition plans in line with the Paris Agreement and requirements that companies manage climate risks in their value chains. If companies do not comply with the requirements set for them, they should not have access to the EU market.

Products must be designed in such a way that parts and materials can be reused and recycled without toxins circulating further. Therefore, it is good that the Commission prioritizes textiles in the proposal for a regulation on ecodesign for sustainable products.

In addition to this, Vänsterpartiet wants a ban to be introduced against destroying unsold or returned goods.

I vote in favor of the joint reservation by the Left Party and the Green Party.

(Applause)

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

Helena Storckenfeldt (M)

Madam Speaker! Many wise examples have been raised by my colleagues in the committee, so I will be very brief and therefore will not need my allotted eight minutes - so the speakers after me may proceed.

I would like to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposal in the report. The Moderates support the Commission's communication on the EU's strategy for sustainable and circular textiles.

In Sweden, we throw away 8-10 kilos of clothes per person per year. For us, it is obvious that the textile industry is an industry with a high degree of innovative power, which, however, needs a coherent direction for the transition and for maintained competitiveness within the EU.

The EU is Sweden's most important climate policy platform, which is why we welcome that joint proposals are submitted in the areas of environment and climate. Today we see that both production and consumption of textile products are increasing, which affects climate, water and energy consumption as well as the environment. In the EU, the consumption of textiles is today on average the fourth largest cause of negative environmental and climate impact. Of this, the consumption of clothing accounts for 81 percent. Therefore, it is mentioned in the Commission's message that fast fashion is a major culprit and something that will hopefully become unfashionable and obsolete.

But, Madam Speaker, opportunities also follow challenges. The textile industry can play a prominent role in the circular economy. The EU has an opportunity here to take the lead globally when it comes to creating sustainable and circular value chains, new technical solutions, and innovative business models for the textile industry.

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

Rebecka Le Moine (MP)

Madam Speaker! We in Miljöpartiet welcome the textile strategy, but we believe that it is not sufficient as it is designed just now. We have therefore written a motion of reservation together with Vänsterpartiet.

Every year, around 100 billion new garments are produced. These garments are used an average of seven times, and after one year, half of them are dumped. A truckload of textiles is deposited or incinerated every second. It is difficult to even comprehend and imagine. Anyone, regardless of ideological background, says that this is unsustainable and something that we cannot let the market solve itself; here, clear and strong legislation is needed.

We have so far placed a lot of responsibility on the consumer to choose correctly. But it is very difficult. There is a lack of transparency in this industry. It is difficult to know which labels and certifications are sufficient. There is a great deal of greenwashing occurring. It is much more effective and also fair to primarily place requirements on the producer, from the beginning.

As the previous speaker has mentioned, this is an incredibly environmentally impactful industry. It is difficult to know exactly how large the emissions the industry accounts for are. There are figures that say up to 10 percent, but this also points to a major problem: We have no data and no good statistics on how large the emissions the textile industry accounts for are. We welcome that the textile strategy also contains sharp requirements that make it more transparent.

We have seen revelations in Aftonbladet showing that H & M's factories in Bangladesh contribute to an enormous destruction of waterways. It is just one of thousands of examples. This occurs all the time.

We consider that the Commission's proposal is deficient regarding the equality aspect and social aspects. Around 75 percent of those employed in this industry globally are women. We therefore believe that the equality perspective must be integrated much more carefully.

We also know that forced labor occurs in the textile industry. In that case, one cannot simply lean back and refer to the due diligence legislation, especially since it, as mentioned earlier by Vänsterpartiet, is only expected to cover 1 percent of all companies.

We mean, therefore, that this strategy fails regarding the issue of justice. Unfair trading methods and purchase prices occur, and living wages and living incomes are not fair. If the textile industry does not rectify this, it misses the chance to contribute to an industry that is both fair and sustainable.

It is also very important, Madam Speaker, that there is a sharp ban on throwing away clothes that are unused and products that function. In what is on the table now, it is stated that one must report. Just reporting and clarifying how much of the clothes are thrown away is not enough, but there must be a sharp ban on burning up fully functioning clothes.

We also think that both small and large companies must be covered. We would like to see concrete and binding targets to reduce environmental impact. These targets should be set in line with the Paris Agreement and include the entire value chain. If these requirements are not followed, they should not have access to the EU market.

It should be easy to do the right thing, but it must also become impossible to do wrong when the errors involve precisely forced labor and large-scale environmental destruction. Therefore, it is important that we set requirements on textiles as soon as possible and ensure that this strategy goes hand in hand with the ecodesign regulation.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, I do not intend to repeat more of what my colleagues in the Committee on Environment and Agriculture have said, but I stand behind our reservation of motive.

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

Stina Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! The world faces climate change, loss of biodiversity, and depletion of natural resources. Today's production and consumption of, among other things, textiles accelerates exactly this. That is why the UN's sustainability goals in Agenda 2030 regarding sustainable consumption and production are so important.

Global consumption of textiles has grown exponentially in recent decades and constitutes an ever-increasing part of our consumption-based emissions. Most of these emissions, both in Sweden and in the rest of the Western world, however, never become visible to the consumer because they occur in the production phase.

The textile and clothing industry has a high environmental footprint, and the current production and distribution systems are almost entirely linear. Fast fashion has become the norm, and furthermore, it is expected to triple by the year 2050. Production takes place mostly in low-wage countries where the local environmental impact is extensive and working conditions are often poor. The recently conducted review of H & M's factories in Bangladesh shows that the problems with the fast fashion industry are far from solved.

We need to do something about this. I and the Center Party now welcome that the EU Commission has developed a strategy for more sustainable and circular textile flows. The EU is acting as a pioneer here, and that is good. It is part of the EU's larger work with a stronger circular economy in all of Europe. We believe that Sweden should wholeheartedly embrace the strategy, and a majority of the proposals in the strategy are such as we have advocated for for a long time.

There are several measures that should by a large margin be designed at the European level, for example, the introduction of mandatory ecodesign requirements, a ban on destroying unsold or returned textiles, as well as the introduction of digital product passports. It sends an important signal to the market and the producers that the public and the policy actually stand behind them.

At the same time, there are things that Sweden can do independently and proactively to achieve environmentally better textile flows. I want Sweden to become a world leader for circular and sustainable textiles. And a great deal is being done. Over the past year, several companies, including the forestry company Södra, which already has knowledge and infrastructure in place to handle plant fibers from trees, have started with commercial recycling of textile fibers. The mass produced is then sold to companies that, among others, make fabric from the previous textile waste. Furthermore, some time ago, the world's first large-scale textile sorting facility was inaugurated in Malmö - a collaboration between the municipal waste company Sysav and the Swedish Environmental Institute.

But we in the Center Party want to accelerate this even further, and here are some proposals for measures that we can introduce already today.

The first thing is to make it easier to choose correctly already in the store through a climate labeling. By strengthening the information about a product's climate impact in a clear and understandable way, it becomes easier for the consumer to make sustainable choices already in the store or in online retail. We have therefore submitted proposals to introduce a climate labeling on the textiles placed on the Swedish market where it is stated directly on the price tag what carbon emissions the production of the garment has caused.

The second thing is to introduce a producer responsibility for textiles. One of the most effective ways to increase the amount of textiles that can be handled for reuse and recycling is through a producer responsibility system. Collection can take place at the large fashion chains, in secondhand stores, at recycling stations, or in special bins near the home. It simply aims to make it easy to get rid of old clothes and textiles without having to throw them in the regular household waste.

A producer's responsibility for textiles is something that we have pushed for for a longer period of time. It is regrettable that neither the previous nor the sitting government has succeeded in delivering a bill despite there being an investigation that is referred and complete. By introducing an ambitious system, Sweden has good opportunities to collect a very large proportion of textile waste as well as prepare it for reuse or material recycling.

The third is that Sweden needs investments in sorting and fiber recycling of textile waste. Through a producer responsibility, the amount of collected textiles would increase significantly, and it could even lead to a surplus of textile waste in Sweden. Today, much of the textile that does not go to incineration is sent abroad, which is an enormous loss of resources as it is often incinerated or ends up in landfills there instead. A vanishingly small proportion of the exported material is reused or materially recycled. Centerpartiet wants instead that the lifespan of textiles is extended on-site here in Sweden. We can do this by strengthening the possibilities for a large-scale infrastructure for sorting and fiber recycling. This is something that is almost entirely lacking today but which would benefit the growing Swedish textile manufacturing by giving it access to recycled and toxin-free input materials.

The fourth is to take advantage of the opportunities in the bioeconomy. Sweden has considerable assets in renewable natural resources but also the technical expertise and a solid infrastructure which together create good conditions for increasing the proportion of bio-based inputs and products. In this way, one can replace fossil-heavy and environmentally burdensome alternatives from abroad. Bio-based raw materials from the Swedish forest and by-products from forestry can be used in next-generation textile and clothing production, and we see how a number of Swedish entrepreneurs within this sector are emerging. It is also positive that a national bioeconomy strategy is now under investigation, which will have great significance for this growing sector.

The fifth proposal is to stimulate more reuse and opportunities for repair. Using clothes and shoes longer, as well as repairing and upgrading them, is among the best things we can do to reduce our climate impact from this product group. The Center Party wants to see a stronger sharing economy where services for reuse, repair, and sharing or renting of clothes increase and that we take advantage of modern digital solutions. In this context, it is also deeply regrettable that the government chooses to raise the VAT on repairs of just clothes. Even though it is one of the countless measures needed for the circular transition, it sends a very dull signal from the government that repairs and resource efficiency are not prioritized. This applies especially when we enter economic crisis times where many families are struggling.

Our sixth and final proposal is to appoint an inquiry into the climate impact of online trade. Today's opportunities for online trade have made it easy and convenient to shop for clothes and home textiles. It is one of the many advantages of digitalization. At the same time, e-commerce poses a major challenge in terms of more sustainable textile flows, not least in the transport chain where free returns lead to increased shipping volumes, and the fact that many return centers are not located in Sweden. In comparison with the climate emissions that arise in the production phase, this is a smaller problem but nevertheless one that we see must be addressed. Therefore, we want to appoint an inquiry that takes a broad approach to the entire e-commerce sector and provides concrete proposals on how it can become more climate-smart.

Overall, the measures I have raised here would provide great added value for the Swedish textile and fashion industry, which, after several decades, has begun to return in the form of young and driven entrepreneurs. It is unlikely that all textile and clothing production can be moved back home, but considering the environmentally negative impact this industry causes in the world's developing countries, all initiatives that break with this fast fashion trend and throwaway society are welcome.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 12.)

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