(cont. from § 8) Response to interpellation 2025/26:191 on the processing value of the forest
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the importance of the forest industry for the Swedish economy and climate. KD argues that the forest industry is a strategic basic industry that is negatively affected by previous Social Democratic and Green Party policies 1. KD emphasizes that the government is investing in research, innovation, and export strategies to strengthen competitiveness and reach climate goals 2 3. S considers that the phasing out of emission allowances negatively affects the Swedish forestry industry compared to the foreign fossil industry 4. S also criticizes increased track fees and a lack of investments in biofuels 4. S argues that KD has chosen to accept a situation where the industry is opposed by other parties in the government coalition 5.
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! I share the view that the forest industry is in a vulnerable position. We view with concern the extensive savings programs and layoff notices that have been announced during the autumn. When production decreases by around 4 percent, which is more than for other industries, it has consequences for regional employment and for companies that are dependent on the forest sector.
The forestry industry is one of Sweden's most export-intensive primary industries with a processing value of 133 billion kronor, corresponding to barely 3 percent of GDP and nearly 9 percent of Sweden's exports. For the forestry industry, the multiplier effects are significant because every krona in direct value generates an additional 1.3 kronor in other industries.
To strengthen Swedish competitiveness and simultaneously meet our climate commitments, the government has invested significant resources in research and innovation within the bioeconomy to develop climate-smart materials and new products. Furthermore, the government has reinforced the export strategy through mandates to Kommerskollegium and Business Sweden, which aim to help Swedish sawmills and pulp industries reach more international markets.
We are aware that the industry highlights the need for better raw material availability and more efficient transport. These issues are addressed, among other things, within the framework of the preparation of the forest policy proposals and the broader industrial policy, where infrastructure is a prioritized part. Also, the species protection issues, which the interpellor mentioned, are included in this work to remove unnecessary obstacles for an active forestry.
Within climate and industrial policy, the government has strengthened efforts for green financing and investment support. This creates conditions for the industry to develop solutions that contribute to the fossil-free transition and simultaneously maintain its competitiveness. Active forestry with high growth is crucial in order to be able to replace fossil materials in the construction sector, the energy sector, and the chemical industry. In this way, the forest industry continues and can continue to be an important driver in the climate transition.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker, the Minister for Rural Affairs and all listeners! We are discussing the processing value of the forest and the importance of the forest industry for the financing of the welfare state. When we spoke about this before the question period, I perceived that we agree that the major decline that has hit the sector is harmful to the national economy. My question concerns what measures the government intends to take.
Another shackle that has been placed on the Swedish forest industry is that emission allowances are being phased out. This means that the part of the Swedish forest industry that has transitioned, which is green, will lose emission allowances. Instead, emission allowances will be left to forest industry companies in other countries, which run their processes with natural gas, coal, and oil. It will become a very unfortunate, bad competitive situation. The Swedish companies that have made investments and phased out coal and oil from their processes are punished for having done the right thing. It is neither fair, climate-smart, nor particularly economical. Above all, it is bad for the Swedish treasury.
Minister Peter Kullgren also spoke about how the industry has for a considerable period demanded functional railway transport. At the same time, they have during the last twelve years been affected by sharply increased track access charges. During the period, they have been increased by 600 percent. It is clear that this worsens the possibilities to shift the transports to railway.
In my home region of Västerbotten, particularly SCA, but also Holmen, have pushed to establish a functioning railway connection and an upgrade of the transverse line between Inlandsbanan from Storuman to the main line and out to Umeå harbor and the forestry industries located there. These are investments that the Swedish Armed Forces also welcome. They see the importance of upgrading these important transverse routes. But from the government, there is no signal that this is something they can imagine considering.
It is absolutely crucial that we can keep going with an industrial sector that has been and is very significant.
The government has also put a brake on planned investments in biofuel production. They have been put on ice. It is evident, not least from the forestry industries' own reporting, that the large investments that were intended to be carried out have been paused or postponed to the future.
What is the Minister for Rural Affairs' answer to the sector? Is it that there will be a continued decline that will harm not only the industry and those who work in the industry but the entire Swedish economy?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I believe we all in this chamber agree that the forest industry is one of Sweden's most strategic industries and an engine for jobs, export revenues, and real climate benefits. But I cannot help but note that for a long time – during the two preceding parliamentary terms – much of this was put at risk by the Social Democrats, despite their proud industrial traditions. I believe they genuinely cherish the basic industry that forestry de facto is, but that they prioritized sitting in government – together with the Green Party, which pursues a completely different forest policy than the Social Democrats and the Christian Democrats.
An ideologically driven policy has led to increased restrictions and legal uncertainty, and to the fact that logging itself is being called into question and property rights are being eroded. The result of the long-term changes that have occurred with the Social Democrats' good memory is uncertain raw material supply, reduced investments, and notices of termination among large forestry industry actors. That is what we are trying to rectify, but changes in the forest policy area take time.
We have relatively recently received the final report of the forest investigation. We have presented a proposal on how forest owners shall be entitled to compensation – which is perfectly reasonable – if species protection displaces the intended land use. There were no tendencies toward such initiatives previously. We do all this to safeguard an immensely important and central industry in our country.
Mr. Speaker! Active forestry with high growth is not a problem at all in Sweden. During the last 100 years, when we have had active cultivation, the amount of wood in the Swedish forests has doubled. We have achieved what very few in Europe have achieved. We have managed to cultivate our forest, and we have managed to take responsibility. But ideologically driven political reforms have led to brutally great uncertainty. That is what the government is dealing with.
If we are to manage the climate transition, strengthen competitiveness and secure jobs across the country in this industry, it requires a policy that stands up for forest owners and industry, not a policy that sacrifices them for power on a social democratic and Green Party ideological altar.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker! During our time in government, we naturally had challenges. At the same time, the willingness to invest in Swedish forestry was very high. Now we unfortunately see that it is decreasing.
Another part of it is something I cannot blame the Christian Democrats or Minister for Enterprise Ebba Busch for. The Minister for Enterprise and the Deputy Prime Minister have been persistent in trying to reach an energy agreement that would have been extremely important. Unfortunately, other parties in the government base, especially the support party Sverigedemokraterna, are actively opposing this. Every day, they oppose the possibilities for Swedish industry to obtain long-term energy conditions. It is bad. And the Christian Democrats have, despite everything, chosen to place themselves in this situation.
In the first budget that the government presented, they removed the money that we had earmarked as compensation to forest owners who had been unfairly affected and were denied logging permits. Now it is announced that they intend to return some money in 2027. That is good, but fundamentally we must be able to manage the forest in order to put welfare first.
Rural Affairs Minister Peter Kullgren knows that his home county, Värmland, is the county that has been hit hardest. The Rural Affairs Minister needs to go to Brussels to clarify that Swedish forestry, the green raw material, is needed. The green industry still needs to be able to deliver. It is unreasonable and absurdly stupid to phase out the possibility for the Swedish forest industry to participate in emission allowances while simultaneously granting emission allowances to the fossil industry in Europe.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! The forest industry is one of Sweden's most export-intensive basic industries. It is a strategic sector for the transition. It contributes with jobs and regional development and delivers bio-based raw materials that replace fossil materials. When the industry is subjected to pressures, the entire value chain is affected, from the forest owner to the supplier and to the rural economy.
The government's direction is very clear. We are to strengthen competitiveness and create long-term conditions for the forest industry. In the budget bill for 2026, investments that simplify economic growth in line with the climate goals are prioritized. We invest in research and innovation within the bioeconomy, we strengthen the export strategy, and we reinforce efforts for green financing and investment support. These measures make it possible for the industry to transition while simultaneously maintaining its competitiveness.
The forest industry is central to achieving the goals we have set and to building a circular bioeconomy. The Government prioritizes a competitive and innovative industry that can drive Swedish economic growth while accelerating the transition.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.