(cont. from § 10) Response to interpellation 2024/25:15 on notice of layoffs in the sawmill industry
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns timber shortages, forestry policy, and species protection. KD argues that forestry must be able to act on the market to contribute to jobs, growth, and climate work 1. KD considers a restriction of forestry due to the LULUCF regulation to be questionable 1 and emphasizes that Sweden is building alliances in the EU to maintain national decision-making power over the forest 2. S argues that the timber shortage affects the export of climate benefits and that domestic demand has fallen due to a non-existent housing policy 3. S criticizes that the forest was not prioritized in the Tidö Agreement 3 and demands clearer answers regarding the role of birds in the species protection investigation 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Isak From begins by asking why it has taken two months to get the answer. I regret that, as I always try to answer within the 14 days that are stipulated. During the break for the question period, I checked why, and it was due to foreign trips, Agrifish meetings, an information council at the castle, and a forest conference in Bonn, where Sweden took over the chairmanship of Forest Europe and I needed to be present. But it was also due to the fact that the interpellator himself could not be available at two of the proposed times shortly after the two-week period. So, this has been clarified.
Back to the issue at hand. It is important that companies, regardless of industry, can act in the market. Forest owners and industry need to be able to increase production in a boom and reduce it in a recession.
The government prioritizes, as stated, that Swedish forestry should not be restricted but should fully contribute to both jobs and growth throughout the country and with its full potential in climate work. It is a reason why I believe that a restriction of forestry due to the LULUCF regulation would be a questionable path to take. It was the Social Democrats who negotiated LULUCF, and they are well-versed in that regulatory framework. Today, we stand with a short-term focus on the size of the net uptake in individual years instead of steering towards long-term, active, and sustainable forestry within the entire EU.
A diminished access to forest raw materials would reduce the possibility of substitution of fossil materials and fossil energy within many different sectors, not least within the construction sector and the energy sector.
My responsibility includes the forest industry policy but also the forest policy. Initially, I mentioned a little about the housing policy, but otherwise, regarding housing construction, I must refer the interpellor to Housing Minister Andreas Carlson.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker! We have a timber shortage, and it affects the export net and the export of climate benefits. Right now, exports to the Middle East are falling, which is understandable given the conflicts taking place there. As I began with, domestic demand has fallen back because we have a non-existent housing policy. I do not hear in the Minister's answer that the measures are in place.
In P1 Morgon, it was reported that timber prices are rising, which benefits private forest ownership. The Social Democrats did not succeed with that, and I believe it is good that forest owners get more in their pockets for their production. It is important and good. Fundamentally, however, it unfortunately depends on the fact that there is a timber shortage.
The industry had great hopes for this government, not least because the Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson, now Prime Minister, wrote a clear letter to all of Sweden's forest owners before the election in which he promised that they would get to decide over their forest, that more forest would be cultivated, that only those affected by forestry measures could be influenced, and that Sweden in the EU would stand up for Swedish agriculture.
It is still a long way from delivery on these promises, but the Minister is not obliged to stand here and answer for what the Moderates' party leader promised. It is still quite clear that the forest was not prioritized in the Tidö Agreement. It is not included, and we can therefore conclude that it is of little importance.
So, regarding the forest investigation that the Minister has appointed and which is led by Göran Enander. Despite the fact that the investigation has received quite a lot of criticism for vague directives, the investigator in this case seems to be quite proactive, and what has leaked out looks relatively positive in large parts. A partial report is to be submitted, which we will be made aware of. Perhaps there are proposals in there that can speed up the delivery of timber to the sawmills.
Something that is, however, extremely worrying is the very vague answers one receives regarding the species protection investigation the government appointed. Here is the big question: Where are the birds? It is the nesting sites of the woodpeckers and the black grouse that stop the most logging notifications and create the most restrictions. In Västerbotten, thanks to private forest owners who have planned their forestry in the long term, we have relatively many three-toed woodpeckers.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I am genuinely pleased to hear representatives for the Social Democrats speak with such passion about the Swedish forest and forestry and the importance of maintaining an active, sustainable forestry. It is positive to hear a different sound in the chamber than what was heard just a couple of years ago.
I still have to make a point. During the two years that have passed, the focus on forestry issues has been incredibly strong. In budget documents and government declarations, it has been a long time since there was such a clear focus on that the Swedish forest should be allowed to continue to be cultivated.
As the interpellator mentioned, we have appointed a forest investigation with a very broad mandate. A partial report is to be submitted in the relatively near future.
At the Ministry of Climate and Enterprise, the Minister for Climate and Environment has commissioned an inquiry into species protection, where we ourselves manage which plant species are affected. But the compensation issues apply more broadly. What happens when one is not allowed to cultivate their forest? What right to compensation does one have?
Isak From knows just as well as I do that we in Sweden do not have control over the Birds Directive ourselves, but it is clear that it is extremely important to find ways to move forward. Regarding the species protection parts, we were already very clear when announcing that this investigation would be appointed that certain things should no longer be allowed to affect ongoing land use. The Great Snipe, for example, has caused problems for forestry in very many places around Sweden.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker! The shortage of timber, particularly in southern Sweden, contributes significantly to the fact that prices for combined heat and power and district heating are now increasing by two to three times, which affects Swedish consumers. This is largely due to the fact that the previous import of Russian forest products has been stopped, but also to some extent due to timber shortages and restrictions. It is naturally also a matter for the forest owners to take into account and also plan for. Many of the spruce plantations that were established after Storm Gudrun have been attacked by spruce bark beetles and other things, and it is clearly not successful. More measures are needed there.
In northern Sweden, not least after Sveaskog's large reduction, we see that this affects the entire forestry sector. We cannot count on exporting climate benefits to the extent we have previously done. If this continues, we cannot include the forestry industry's large contribution in the export net. The government needs to address this.
Where are the birds in the species protection investigation? They are enormously important, and it is clear that we also worked on that issue. We saw that the alliance government's implementation of the species protection ordinance did not turn out well. We did not get all the way; that can be acknowledged. But this investigation does not look like it is tackling this either. There are therefore more issues to deliver on. There are more who expect delivery. Where are the birds, Peter Kullgren?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! They are in the woods, it seems, in many places.
There has not been much focus on the interpellant's second question. I intended to touch upon it a bit more now in my concluding remarks and try to answer it.
We have, as we have said, primarily focused on the matters we directly control in the investigations that have been appointed. Then, it is of course clear that continued work is needed, primarily within the EU, to address these parts. But I also view the forestry discussions within the EU with some caution.
It is a matter of gaining increased understanding of the utility of the Nordic boreal forests for the climate and the substitution of fossil products. I believe I see some success there. Sweden has, under former Minister for Rural Affairs Anna-Caren Sätherberg, entered into a forestry cooperation within the EU called For Forest. It is a very good cooperation consisting of Sweden, Finland, Slovenia and Austria. I am very pleased that we now, after some pressure from among others Sweden, have also managed to include France as a party in For Forest, which is now called For Forest plus.
We are building alliances in the EU, including more parties and creating increased understanding for our view on forestry, so that we can retain the national right of decision over the forest. I believe that most in this chamber agree that it should be so, but we can simultaneously observe that more and more of the EU's environmental and climate policy is entering the Swedish national forest policy.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.