Question Time

ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN

I would like to welcome the ministers. Questions today will be answered by Minister Paulina Brandberg, Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren, Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin, and Minister Romina Pourmokhtari.

A question must be of an overarching and general political nature or concern a subject that falls within the Minister's area of responsibility and concerns his/her performance of duties. The question shall therefore not concern, for example, conditions within political parties. Minister Paulina Brandberg answers both general political questions and questions within her own area of responsibility.

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! Last week, the budget bill was submitted to the Riksdag. The reactions were strong and unanimous. Rich men are the big winners in the government's budget. In the media, news broadcasts, economists, political commentators, and editorials described the distribution profile in the same way: Rich men are the big winners.

Six out of ten women feel that they cannot get divorced for economic reasons - and that was before this budget.

Is Sweden's Minister for Equality proud of the distribution profile in the government's budget?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! I think it is important that we stick to the facts. The government prioritizes equality highly, and we have presented a responsible budget. One can say what one wants about the media's headlines, but the fact is that the government's proposal for increased resources for welfare services will benefit women to a greater extent than men. All in all, this is a budget that to a very large extent benefits women. At the same time, the budget takes long-term responsibility for welfare and growth. This is a budget for a safer and wealthier Sweden that in the long run will benefit both men and women.

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! Women and, above all, working women pay the highest price in crises, whether it is a pandemic or an economic crisis. Economic independence is a fundamental prerequisite for achieving equality.

From the Minister's answer, I note that Sweden has a Minister for Equality who is proud of the government's distribution profile, that is to say, that rich men shall be the big winners.

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! I completely share the view that economic equality is an important issue of freedom. Therefore, I am proud that the government, in its budget, enables all people to have a so-called "fuck off" capital through the ISK reform.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! During the night of September 16, another horse was killed in Sweden following a wolf attack. This time, the wolf attack occurred in Lerdala outside Skövde, a little over a kilometer from my house. The wolf observations in the area have been numerous, and a pack of as many as 14 individuals has been captured on camera. Under these circumstances, it was only a matter of time before domestic animals would be attacked, as there are plenty of cows, sheep, goats, and dogs in the area.

The County Administrative Board issued a protection hunt for a wolf, even though physically there must have been several wolves involved in the attack. The limitations for the protection hunt also made the conditions for a successful protection hunt practically impossible, and after an appeal, it was immediately overturned.

How do we, according to Peter Kullgren, ensure a purposeful protection hunting procedure on wolves?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! I cannot, of course, comment on the individual case or the exercise of authority that has occurred in connection with it. I can, however, state that the government has ensured that the protection hunting guidelines for primary wolves have been updated. It was a bit hesitant at the beginning, but now in several cases it has gone significantly faster to reach decisions on protection hunting when wolves exhibit a behavior we do not want them to have, that is, taking domestic animals of various kinds.

The government gave a somewhat broader mandate than that which has been reported back, and we are not averse to proceeding with new mandates if the situation does not improve.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! The insecurity and frustration affecting hunters, animal owners, and ordinary rural residents in the wake of the wolf explosion cannot be overemphasized. Furthermore, the legal uncertainty prevailing around license hunting, protection hunting, and defense hunting, in combination with agency activism, paves the way for a popular uprising.

What is the government doing to stop the wolf's progress and the suffering that accompanies it?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today, the Council of Ministers decided to change the wolf's protection status from strictly protected to protected. The Government has worked hard to make this a reality, and now it has become so. It is an important step so that we can manage the wolf better.

The government has also clearly stated that the Riksdag's recurring decision that Sweden shall have 170-270 wolves shall be complied with, and we are working intensively on this.

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

Andrea Andersson Tay (V)

Madam Speaker! At this time last year, I asked the Minister for Rural Affairs whether the government will work to stop industrial fishing in the Baltic Sea. He answered then that the government shall work for sustainable quotas in accordance with the objectives of the common fisheries policy so that we will also in the future be able to have surströmming preparation and a coastal fishery in Sweden.

Now a year has passed, and we can observe that the alarms regarding the condition of the sprat in the Baltic Sea continue to come. Fresh sprat is difficult to find for those who want to eat it, and it was warned again about a shortage of surströmming before the premiere.

There is broad agreement that large-scale industrial fishing for fishmeal is a major part of the problem, while small-scale coastal fishing is being driven to its knees. The shortage of herring also threatens the entire Baltic Sea ecosystem.

My question to the Minister for Rural Affairs is: Will the government in this year's EU negotiations work to stop the industrial fishing of herring in the Baltic Sea?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! The most central thing is to keep the quotas down. I have been involved in a fisheries negotiation, and there we received historically low quotas. For the first time ever, time-limited trawl bans were also introduced during the primary spawning periods for herring and sprat, which has had a fairly good effect in large parts of the Baltic Sea - at least according to my colleagues around the Baltic Sea. We will likely pursue the most restrictive line of all even in the upcoming negotiation.

The questioner knows just as well as I do that it is about diplomacy, that it is about negotiations and that it is about achieving a result. This will continue to be what is most important for me, not a poster politics that makes us impossible around the negotiating table. We shall strive to achieve such low quotas as possible.

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

Andrea Andersson Tay (V)

Madam Speaker! The Baltic Sea and the herring are threatened by a number of different environmental problems, but the only thing that can be addressed quickly is the fishing. The simplest solution to benefit both the environment and all Swedes who want to eat herring is to stop industrial fishing. If not the Swedish government stands up for this in the EU negotiations, who then will do it?

I want to ask the Minister for Rural Affairs: How serious must the situation for the Baltic herring actually become before the government begins to work to move the industrial trawlers from the Baltic Sea?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! Again: The most important thing for the recovery is that we get the lowest possible quotas. I understand that it is easy for the opposition to shout about one measure after another.

When I meet my colleagues around the Baltic Sea - those who collectively decide this together with other countries in the EU - I notice that we are quite alone. In that case, it is a matter of being smart to ensure that we get as low quotas as possible, and that is what we intend to do.

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

Stina Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! I also have a question for Minister Kullgren. The forest is an important carbon sink, and the forest contributes to biodiversity and high nature values. The forest provides us with biofuels and energy, and timber from Swedish forests replaces concrete when we build houses in wood. The forest is simply good for Sweden.

Despite all the forest, it looks dark regarding meeting our commitments within the EU for an increased carbon sink. This is because the government has already spent the emission space that existed and instead subsidizes fossil transport. The forest risks taking the hit when the government pushes important measures into the future.

What message does the Minister for Rural Affairs have for all Swedish forest owners and for the forest industry now that it looks like the use of forest must be restricted?

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Larsson, for a well-posed question!

We have a lot of forest in Sweden, and we also have very high goals regarding what the forest should deliver for the EU to reach its climate goals. The government is working towards this in many ways, not least through the Environmental Goals Commission - a parliamentary commission where, if I remember correctly, the member himself is also included.

The Environmental Council Secretariat works on policy for how we should ensure that the forest delivers so that we meet our climate goals but can also produce all the raw materials, not least the timber that the member himself mentions, which the Swedish forest production needs to supply not only Sweden but all of Europe with.

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

Stina Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! As I suspected, the Minister for Rural Affairs does not want to answer the question. The climate issue affects many political areas, primarily the forest and the countryside, but Minister Kullgren pretends that this does not concern his area.

I will clarify the question. Increasing the carbon sink in forest and land will cost money. Is the government prepared to allocate the funds required to increase carbon storage in soil and forest by 2030, or will you turn a blind eye to this just as you do with the climate goals for 2030?

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin by pointing out to the Member that it is not the case that one ignores climate goals, abolishes climate goals, or does not work to achieve climate goals. It would be very nice for the opposition if it were the case that the Center Party and the Green Party are the only parties in Sweden that want to achieve climate goals, but that is not the truth.

The government is actively working on a realignment of climate policy which, among other things, means that forest owners do not need to worry that it is they who must refrain from their logging for Sweden to reach the goals. On the contrary, the government is working with a reality-based climate policy that will also benefit Swedish forest owners.

(Applause)

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Madam Speaker! In recent weeks, the Minister for Climate has proclaimed that Sweden, thanks to the government's budget for 2025, is expected to meet one of the EU's two climate targets for Sweden, the so-called ESR target.

In the budget's climate reporting, it states that the goal can be reached if one starts from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency's most optimistic scenario and that the government reduces emissions by a total of approximately 15 million tons during 2025-2030. But the government's policy does not reduce emissions by any 15 million tons at all. Instead, the government has used two loopholes in the legislation. On one hand, the government uses the industry's overperformance within the EU's emissions trading system, and on the other hand, the government burns the entire buffer of emission allowances that has arisen earlier thanks to MP's policy. This has been reported by several media outlets.

I want to ask the Minister: Does the Minister know what proportion of these 15 million tonnes in reduced emissions comes from actual expected emission reductions in the transport sector 2025-2030 and what proportion comes from surpluses within industry and reduced emissions that occurred in previous years? This may be stated in percent.

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! I know that the Green Party has a penchant for discussing figures back and forth. If one wants to know what the ETS-flexes consist of in terms of the industry's overperformance, I can say that it amounts to approximately 5.2 million tons.

What is relevant here, however, is that it is not the Green Party's policy that has generated a gigantic surplus that we are now utilizing, but rather it is Sweden that has delivered against its climate goals. It is Swedish companies that have used electricity - clean electricity which we have, among other things, thanks to our nuclear power and much more - to reduce their emissions and continue the journey forward.

It is this that forms the basis for why Sweden is now expected to reach its ESR commitment. We use flexibility mechanisms as the legislation is designed, and we ensure that together with Swedish industry and the whole of society, we continue to reduce our emissions and move forward to reach our climate goals. That is how one works with a coherent climate policy that holds over time and also generates confidence among a larger part of the Swedish people than just the party's own voters.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister very much for the answer.

I want to continue discussing the figures. I would like to know what proportion is number-tricking and what proportion is real emission reductions.

I can tell the Minister that it concerns 2 million tons in reduced emissions and 13 million tons that are subtracted through number-tinkering. It is 5 million tons of carbon dioxide from the industry's surplus and 8.6 million tons in buffer, thanks to the previous government and MP's policy.

So it is 15 percent real emission reductions and 85 percent number juggling. I wonder: Will the government spend more time on real emission reductions going forward?

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! It is a fantastic self-confidence we see here from the opposition party, which takes the credit for Sweden's climate work.

If one looks at what actually makes Sweden lie far ahead in having low emissions and what is the reason that we have the lowest emissions per capita in the EU, one sees that it is that we have a clean electricity system that delivers clean electricity at cheap prices and that we have a great commitment from our business sector, which wants to remove the fossil and bring in the electric-driven. The single most important thing for them is the electricity issue, and that makes the government's climate policy far better than the previous government's.

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

Gustaf Göthberg (M)

Madam Speaker! In a threatening world, we must stand guard over that which is most worthy of protection in our society. We have known for a long time that our preparedness, which is good, is being tested by antagonistic forces, other states and individuals, who utilize IT attacks, hybrid warfare, propaganda efforts, disinformation, mapping of critical societal infrastructure, violations of our airspace and, not least, cyberattacks because they want to harm Sweden.

The responsibility for and the work with Swedish cybersecurity has not functioned sufficiently well. On Monday, State Secretary Bohlin presented the initiative to now centralize the Swedish cybersecurity work at the Defence Radio Establishment. This reorganization will entail increased governance, better control, broader cooperation, and more bang for the buck in the cybersecurity work.

How, according to Minister Bohlin, can this new edition of the cybersecurity center at FRA contribute to increasing our collective ability to withstand dangerous cyberattacks?

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

Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Göthberg, for a very relevant and topical question!

Just as the member notes, we are presented with everyday examples of the barrage of threats we face in the cyber domain. Unfortunately, they sometimes also succeed. We have had examples of this.

This shows us that the need to shape a better edge in the national cybersecurity work is extremely urgent. Between 2017 and 2022, the then government received a lot of criticism for the work on information and cybersecurity both in the Government Offices and at the agency level. Therefore, we are now creating a cybersecurity center with power that will be led from FRA. We are also adding substantial amounts of money, with an additional 50 million to the center already next year, 2025.

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

Gustaf Göthberg (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister very much for the answer to the question. He himself mentioned the extensive criticism that has been received, not least from the Swedish National Audit Office, regarding the previous government's inability to prioritize the right measures in this work. Now it is being gathered at FRA, as the Minister points out, which is important. But more than just a center is required. The work for the Swedish society's robustness, resilience, resistance, and operational capacity to avert cyberattacks needs to be strengthened broadly across the entire society. What steps does the Minister intend to take going forward, beyond Monday's welcome announcement?

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

Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)

Madam Speaker! I completely share the member's conclusions in this part. It is among other reasons why we in the budget allocate funds for the national CERT activity but also for a completely new mapping of the technical cybersecurity capability of municipalities and regions. This has not been done on a broad front previously. Unfortunately, we know that the capability of many municipalities and regions is all too low, which is also evidenced in successful attacks. We need to raise the general minimum level to prepare ourselves for a more antagonistic environment.

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

Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Yesterday we received the extremely pleasing news that a majority of the EU's member states have reached a conclusion that the wolf's protection status should be lowered according to the Bern Convention. It is an extremely important step in the fight for a functioning predator policy. But we are not at the finish line yet. This is only a sub-goal, albeit an important one.

I wonder if Minister Kullgren can tell us what will happen moving forward to make this a reality. This decision does not go all the way. But it is very welcome, not least for those of us who live in Värmland, who have taken the absolute biggest hit since the wolf returned to Swedish nature. How will the government work so that we can move forward, so that this becomes a reality and we can have fewer wolves in Sweden?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! Yes, it was a very important step that was decided upon today: a change of the Bern Convention. It is a prerequisite for us to be able to change the Habitats Directive, which in turn affects us and the management of wolves. This decision could be made because it has been established that the wolf population is viable in Europe; that is the basis.

The government has given clear mandates at the national level. We have received reports from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency that, under certain conditions, we may have a wolf population that is in the lower range of what the Riksdag has decided. We are actively working to implement this. The next time we are to report a reference value to the EU is 2025. At that time, I assume that we will report a lower reference value.

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

Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.

The Minister said in an interview yesterday that this is the most significant decision from the EU regarding the wolf issue in the foreseeable future. A former questioner mentioned the problems with wolf attacks that we see in the Swedish countryside. Now that the hunting season has begun, new wolf attacks on dogs are occurring. It is therefore not only domestic animals and cows that are being torn apart.

How will this decision be able to manifest for our Swedish farmers, for our Swedish hunters, and for those of us who live in the countryside? How can we see that this will become a reality?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! This decision will make it easier for us to manage the wolf somewhat more independently. At the same time, it must be noted that the wolf is a species that we will continue to need to keep a close eye on, so that overshooting does not occur. It moves from "strictly protected" to "protected." This does not mean that all protection is gone by definition. But as said, the government's goal is that we shall significantly reduce the wolf population. It will be the greatest relief for the people in the countryside.

(Applause)

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

Elin Nilsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Recently, the question of cows' right to pasture has once again become topical. In my opinion, a scrapped grazing requirement would be to go backwards into the future. We would then once again have dairy cows in Sweden that are not allowed to go out. Mules created to graze would no longer be allowed to do so. That is something we in the Liberals oppose. An argument put forward for a scrapped grazing requirement is that many cows would actually still get to go out. But that does not apply to all, and one confined dairy cow is one too many.

My question to the Minister for Rural Affairs is therefore whether he is prepared to stand up for maintained animal welfare or if he wants to see a deterioration, which a scrapped grazing requirement would actually entail according to my way of seeing it.

(Applause)

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! Elin Nilsson knows very well that we have just received an investigation which we are now preparing to send out for consultation. Once the consultation responses have been received, the usual preparatory work begins. Subsequently, negotiations will take place within the Government Offices between my party, Elin Nilsson's party, and the Moderates – the parties that are part of the government. I believe we will take those negotiations then.

The purpose of the investigation is to strengthen the competitiveness of Swedish food production. Sweden is the only country in the EU that has a declining milk production. Since 1988, nine out of ten dairy farms in Sweden have disappeared. These are serious figures.

It is far too early to say whether the government will agree on a proposal to be tabled in the Riksdag. We simply have to come back to that. But that we need to strengthen the competitiveness of Swedish food production stands beyond all reasonable doubt.

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

Elin Nilsson (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Rural Affairs for the answer. We obviously have different views on this issue, but we shall continue the discussions in another forum.

Madam Speaker! While I have the floor, I would finally like to take the opportunity to thank Minister Kullgren and Minister Pourmokhtari, who are also here in the chamber, for a very well-executed job on the wolf issue. The change that we will hopefully see now is very welcome, not least here in my wolf-dense county, Örebro.

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Elin Nilsson for the thanks.

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

Tomas Kronståhl (S)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to Minister for Rural Affairs Kullgren.

We clearly see that the government uses large parts of its reform space to lower taxes for the very richest in the country. At the same time, we see large and in many cases painful savings in a number of different agencies. This applies in particular to the county administrative boards, where they are now saving over 1 billion kronor.

Madam Speaker! I see further that the county administrative boards' trapping fees for moose are increasing significantly. In my opinion, these are unjustified increases in trapping fees for adult moose. The primary purpose of the trapping fee is to form county-specific wildlife damage funds to be used to pay out compensation for wildlife damage etcetera. But what we are seeing now is that several county administrative boards are doubling their trapping fees and that in several counties the fees are very high, up to several thousand kronor for an adult moose.

Does Rural Affairs Minister Kullgren and the government think it is reasonable to shock-increase the culling fee for moose in order to finance an increase in the number of civil servants at the county administrative boards?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! I believe that this, in practice, is connected to the fact that the number of moose culled has decreased quite significantly and that one wants to maintain the level of oversight, supervision, and everything else it may be. I would believe that one has revised the fee in order to be able to resolve it within the existing system.

This is not one hundred percent my area, but we do have a civil minister who is responsible for the county administrative boards. But I believe that my description is close to the truth.

Speaking of the budget in general terms - if I may circle back a bit to the previous question about competitiveness - I am very pleased that we can strengthen the common agricultural policy with quite substantial sums during the coming mandate period, something that has not happened for a very long time.

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

Sara-Lena Bjälkö (SD)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to the Minister for Civil and Defence. Limitations in the legislation regarding information sharing between authorities is a pervasive problem, whether we are talking about cybersecurity or welfare crime. The global situation and the previous government's nonchalant handling of the national cybersecurity center make this urgent.

What measures is Carl-Oskar Bohlin prepared to take before a new law is in place to facilitate information sharing between authorities?

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

Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)

Madam Speaker! In part, I have already answered Member Bjälkös question in connection with a previous question. It concerns what the government is currently doing to reshape the national cybersecurity center into a unit that will function better.

The previous arrangement with a cooperation platform between different agencies has become - if one expresses it a bit awkwardly - everyone's responsibility, nobody's responsibility. It simply has not functioned in a sufficiently satisfactory way.

When FRA is now given a clear leadership responsibility and a clear principalship, it creates significantly better conditions for operational work but also for better situational awareness and information sharing in the center.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Madam Speaker! In connection with previous questions, we have heard that there are no answers on how the government will handle the fact that the EU targets for carbon sequestration are not being met with the government's policy. According to researchers, this risks leading to reduced logging levels of up to 10 percent.

I want to hear from Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren what scenarios the government has for future logging levels and if he can guarantee that the Swedish forestry industry and the agricultural sector will not be affected by the government's substandard policy in other areas.

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! I am grateful that the Speaker has a handle on the order in the government. It is therefore I who shall answer the question.

The government is working to achieve many different climate goals, one of which concerns the carbon sink that forest and land can provide. What is of importance for the government is to continue working with the concept of stewardship, where we want to ensure that both environmental goals and production goals are equal. We shall also ensure that we defend the property rights which also lie as a fundamental principle for the forest policy that Sweden pursues.

We are working hard to ensure that all forest owners in Sweden can in a proper manner both contribute to protecting the nature worthy of protection and produce so that we can, for example, have Swedish instead of Russian timber all around Europe.

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

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! During her time in government, the Minister for Climate has primarily devoted herself to dismantling effective climate policy instruments such as the reduction obligation, taxes on fossil fuels, and support for public transport, electric buses, and electric cars.

Of the very few new steering measures that the Minister for Climate and Environment has introduced, great weight has been placed on the new scrapping premium. The Government has allocated funds for this year for a corresponding 25,000 applications. Now, statistics are arriving showing that only 56 applications have been received so far this year, and only half of these have been granted. In industry media, this is described as a flop.

At this rate, approximately 150 cars will have been scrapped and replaced with electric cars during this year, which means 24,850 fewer cars than the government had calculated. The new electric car bonus that the Minister for Climate has started talking about will be introduced in 2026 at the earliest, and furthermore with funds from the EU.

I wonder therefore: Does the government see a need to urgently revise and do something about the scrapping premium?

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Member for a question about the government's climate policy and which reforms we raised in contrast to the work that the previous government did with climate policy!

What this government is doing regarding climate policy is, first and foremost, to re-establish a functioning clean electricity system that can enable all the fossil activities that exist in Sweden to dare to phase out oil and other things to replace them with clean electricity. In that case, one needs both nuclear power and wind power - something that the opposition still does not seem to have gotten used to.

In addition to this, we are making historical investments in charging infrastructure, and we will design a new electric vehicle premium targeted at the groups that are in greatest need of it.

Our scrapping premium exists as a complement to the policy we are implementing so that the electrification of our transport fleet moves forward. If the scrapping premium, after the period of approximately one month that it has been in operation – but which the member refers to as a year – does not turn out to work as intended, it simply must be analyzed. The government has presented new policy, not only in the form of a scrapping premium. It is about much more that contributes to electrification in Sweden.

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to Minister for Equality Paulina Brandberg. Women's healthcare has historically always been underprioritized. Even today, women have poorer access to care than men do.

Despite this, the red-green government in Stockholm has now initiated a significant dismantling of the choice of care with extensive cuts specifically within women's healthcare. This applies to both gynecological activities and eating disorder care.

The justification is that accessibility in healthcare is high and that it has led to cost increases and overconsumption. But there is no evidence whatsoever that women and young girls would seek help from a gynecologist or eating disorder care without very good reasons. Who can even believe something so stupid?

It is an unpleasant and misogynistic policy that is now being put forward, and it risks leading not only to major deteriorations in accessibility and care for women but also to diminished equality in healthcare.

My question is: How will the government work to ensure accessible and equal healthcare for women?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for a very important question. I completely share the view that women's health is an issue that has been deprioritized for far too long.

This was something that the government identified already when we took office. In the Tidö Agreement, we have a long section concerning just equal healthcare, where we invest in issues regarding research on women's diseases, home births and the like.

The investments are also visible in our budget. The Government estimates allocating 1.6 billion kronor per year both in 2024 and 2025 for gender-equal healthcare, women's health, and maternity care.

We identify the exact same problem as the member. At the same time as the government takes the issue most seriously, experts, investigations, and patient and professional organizations have seen the need for a clearer state responsibility for health and medical care. Therefore, there is also a parliamentary committee looking at precisely this issue.

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

Camilla Rinaldo Miller (KD)

Madam Speaker! My question also goes to Minister Paulina Brandberg.

On July 1 this year, the parental leave was changed and became somewhat more flexible, among other things when the possibility to transfer days to a relative came into effect. But it was also about the number of double days being doubled.

As the spokesperson for the Christian Democrats for family policy and equality, I view the changes that have occurred positively. I believe that a change will occur in the withdrawal, especially regarding fathers' withdrawal. I have high expectations for what has happened.

My question to the Minister is how the Minister himself views the change that the number of double days has doubled. Does the Minister believe that it will lead to an increase in fathers' take-up of parental days?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! A more equal distribution of parental leave is an incredibly important issue. It is important for women's economic equality, it is important for fathers so that they can bond with their children in a better way, and it is not least important for the children, who get a better bond with both of their parents.

That is why I am very pleased that the government has moved forward with this measure. I believe that we need to lower the thresholds that exist and which cause fathers today to take as few parental days as they do. We need to make it easier for fathers to bond with their children and create a secure transition between maternity leave and paternity leave, which is often what it is about. I believe that by increasing the number of double days, we can make that process safer both for the mothers and, not least, for the children.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! I have a question for Minister for Equality Paulina Brandberg.

It was recently reported that several elderly people in Uppsala have been subjected to sexual abuse by home care staff in their homes. At the same time, a report from the Gender Equality Authority shows that 10-15 percent of people over 60 years of age have been subjected to violence or abuse during the last year. It is difficult for all of us, I believe, to grasp the immense vulnerability that these people live in.

Unfortunately, the elderly are a group that has long been forgotten in the work of preventing and combating violence in close relationships. We see in black and white that vulnerability to violence and abuse does not go into retirement. The number of unreported cases is large, and we know that many who suffer do so in silence without receiving the help they need.

My question is: What is the government doing to illuminate, combat and prevent violence in the close relationships of the elderly?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question.

Men's violence against women and violence in close relationships are among our very greatest societal problems. When we work with these issues, it is important that we see that the support needs for different groups can look very different. Just as the member describes, older people are a particularly vulnerable group - and also an often forgotten group. The Government has therefore given the Gender Equality Authority a mandate to map out and see which support measures need to be targeted specifically at the group of older people. We see, for example, how impaired cognitive functions can make one more vulnerable, but also that dementia diseases can make one more of a risky perpetrator.

I have recently received this report from the Gender Equality Authority and will continue to work with the proposed measures that the authority presents there.

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to the Minister for Civil Defence.

In the spring, we could see how the TV4 program Kalla fakta presented the documentary Undercover in the troll factory during several episodes. The Director General of the Swedish Psychological Defence Agency reported two of the episodes. Now, the review board has acquitted Kalla fakta.

I thus have three questions for the Minister for Civil Defence:

How does the Minister view the fact that the authority reported Kalla's fact-checking at all?

How has the minister acted after the review board cleared the sections?

Has the Minister continued to have confidence in the Director General of the Agency for Psychological Defence?

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

Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)

Madam Speaker! There were many questions in a short time.

I have, in fact, already accounted for the answer to the first question. My assessment is the same as the authority has stated: That did not turn out completely well on the authority's part. That is also what MPF has said in its subsequent communication.

The second question was what measures I have taken since then. The answer there is: none at all. As a minister, I cannot have opinions on the audit committee's statements.

The last question was whether I have confidence. Yes, absolutely. I do not think we should make directors-general into political punching bags. They are non-political civil servants. In my opinion, we must have the order, Madam Speaker, that individual mistakes can be made without the government firing directors-general. This is a very competent employee in the state, and we should not politicize our directors-general.

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

Mats Hellhoff (SD)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to the Minister for Environment and Climate.

In April 2021, the Riksdag, in connection with the report 2020/21:CU14, issued a notice to the government that a property owner with a private sewage system shall not be forced to connect to the municipal water and sewage network. A long time has passed since then.

The requirement for unnecessary compulsory connection has a great impact on many people, especially in rural areas, and it is important to get legislation in place. My question therefore becomes: When will the law be enacted stating that property owners who have a private sewage system shall not be forced to connect to the municipal water and sewage network?

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! Thanks to the member for a well-posed question!

We in the government know that this is a problem. We will need to find a way out of the situation that currently exists. We know that many property owners are very concerned about what such a thing can mean for the type of investment that then needs to be made.

This is an issue that the government will continue to follow closely. I cannot today provide any information regarding dates for when decisions will be made in different directions, but only inform that the government is closely following the issue and is aware of the problems that the member is raising. The government shares the view that this is a problem that cannot continue in the way that is currently being discussed.

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Madam Speaker! In the spring, I asked what the government is doing about the fact that the economy for Region Gotland is about to collapse. The answer I received was that healthcare needs to be nationalized. However, such a reform would in that case lie several years into the future, and the situation for Gotland is acute. The fact is that more than 200 million kronor are now taken every year, primarily from school and preschool, to finance, for example, healthcare.

The reasonable thing would have been to, as has been done in many other countries, recognize that Gotland as an island has special conditions, introduce an island factor and consequently allocate funds in the budget. There is, however, not a trace of this in the government's budget for 2025.

Therefore, my question to the Minister for Rural Affairs is: How does the government intend to help solve Gotland's acute problems in the short term? We want the whole country to live. This is not just about healthcare, but also about school, transport, and for example, electricity capacity.

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! Gotland is, just like all parts of Sweden, fantastic and has much to contribute. The problems that arise because Gotland is an island are, of course, something that is discussed in many parts of the Government Offices and in society at large. Not least at my department – which also has the infrastructure issues, an area that affects the people of Gotland very much – my colleague Andreas Carlson is putting effort into this to make it as good as possible.

When it comes more to my core area, Gotland also has fantastic agricultural opportunities that are well utilized but that can certainly be utilized even better. Therefore, I am glad that we can strengthen the support to our Swedish farmers so that they can produce even more food in all of Sweden and also on Gotland.

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

Peter Ollén (M)

Madam Speaker! I have a question for the Minister for Environment and Climate.

I am very interested in climate issues. When I have spoken with researchers in the forestry field during the past months, I have received a very hopeful picture. They say that in 30 years, one will be able to take care of perhaps up to one and a half times Sweden's CO2 emissions.

My question is whether the Minister shares this positive picture regarding the opportunities for research on the forest in Sweden, and whether similar positive tones exist elsewhere in Europe.

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question regarding the potential that exists in the forest. It is a beneficial contrast, not least to the previous questions concerning the forest, which have mostly proceeded from a rather pessimistic view – that we will not be able to reach any goals if we are to have forest production and other things.

We know that when the forest grows, it sequesters the most carbon. We know that a growing forest will be able to contribute to forming a carbon sink for our entire country.

We also know that there is a lot of potential, technically speaking, in terms of what equipment can reduce waste but also something such as bio-CCS. The biomass that Sweden has can also constitute a large carbon sink if we dare to tackle these new areas, for example, carbon capture. This is something that this government, not least, is investing heavily in.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I have on several occasions asked about small-scale hydropower. Now we have finally received a document that is out for consultation. But when I have had the privilege of being out and meeting people from LRF and Villaägarna and small-scale hydropower owners, I have been met with a great concern.

I have read the document and performed searches on individual words and can state that it contains nothing about self-sufficiency, nothing about water bodies, nothing about ownership rights, nothing about compensation, nothing about property value and nothing about lake regulations. On the other hand, it contains 51 points on national planning and national utility.

We are several who have pushed the line that small-scale hydropower should be protected, and I cannot have any other opinion. But when I read this document and listen to those who are affected, I see and hear that there is a great concern that if this becomes law, we have precisely laid down small-scale hydropower.

What does the government intend to do to protect small-scale hydropower?

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Jacobsson, not least for the commitment to this important issue!

We have discussed this many times, but let me start at this end. This government is concerned about small-scale hydropower. This review work will continue for a long time and will have long-lasting significance for both the environment and hydropower. That is what we know.

For us, it is important that it becomes an applicable and fair regulatory framework and that we change the approach that has been taken previously in the review work. We want to provide better conditions for cooperation between authorities and hydropower owners so that the hydropower owners do not get caught in the crossfire.

We also want to ensure that we look closely at the referral proposals that come in and take into account the concern that the member points out. It is a task that will be carried out thoroughly. And we will ensure that this work, which will have long-lasting impact and significance, is handled in a much more careful manner than how other governments have handled the issue previously.

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! I direct my question to the Minister for Civil Defence.

Recently, the government presented a historic investment in civil defense. It is good and necessary. Popular education and study associations can and want to contribute to civil defense. Study associations already cooperate with 15,000 associations today and exist and operate in all the country's municipalities. Six of the voluntary defense organizations cooperate with study associations. And the study associations bear witness to a growing interest in precisely the issues of preparedness.

It is good news. There is, therefore, an opportunity here to reach the general population when it comes to knowledge about, for example, home preparedness and source criticism, and also to strengthen the role of civil society in the total defense.

My question to the Minister is therefore: How does the Minister view the role of the study associations in the work to strengthen civil preparedness throughout the country?

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

Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Starbrink, for the question and the analysis which I believe to be correct!

Studieförbunden have a very important and central role in strengthening knowledge about the Swedish total defense, which concerns all 10 million people in this country. But they can also help contribute to transforming the will to defend into actual defense capability by providing education and relevant courses. I therefore cannot do anything other than applaud the studieförbundens important and central role in this.

Right now, the preparedness week is underway. I see many initiatives also from study associations to specifically strengthen knowledge, not only when it comes to home preparedness but also regarding other issues. I am going to Medborgarskolan myself this evening to lecture on just this subject.

My hope is that more study associations choose to engage in the total defense.

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

Anna-Caren Sätherberg (S)

Madam Speaker! In recent years, five samebys have filed lawsuits against the state. The samebys want the exclusive right to lease small game hunting and fishing above the cultivation limit.

Right now, the parliamentary Renmark Committee is working on these issues, which are also larger and more complex. In the long run, it concerns the issue of land use in, for the most part, half of Sweden. But in the directives to the Renmark Committee, one has not taken into account that these parallel legal processes are ongoing. I have also not noticed the government acting in any way on the issue.

My question to Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren, if it is he who intends to answer this time, is whether the government intends to give the Renmark Committee new directives or if you intend to act in some other way.

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! Of course, Anna-Caren Sätherberg, I answer questions concerning the Renmark Committee because they primarily fall under my responsibility. LULUCF primarily falls under the Minister for Climate and Environment. Therefore, she answers questions regarding that. That was the case when you were in the government as well.

The Renmark Committee is active and is still working. I will not go into detail in this forum regarding what we intend to do. We have received the partial report. It has been sent out for consultation. We are currently compiling the consultation responses. When that is done, we will be able to draw some more conclusions about the possibility of enacting legislation based on what has been submitted and so on. But since it is an ongoing work in the committee, it is, as the member knows, difficult for me to speak about it in this context.

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

Michael Rubbestad (SD)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to Minister for Equality Paulina Brandberg.

Economic violence is a form of exercise of power where a person systematically controls their partner's finances. It can involve preventing someone from working, having control over their income, limiting access to money, or putting the person into debt. These actions can have consequences as serious as physical or psychological violence.

Despite this, there is currently no specific legal framework that protects those who are subjected to economic violence. Sverigedemokraterna argues that a separate legal framework needs to be created to strengthen legal protection and clearly signal that society does not accept this type of violence.

My question to the Minister for Equality is therefore: How does the Minister view the need for a specific legal framework to combat economic violence, and is the government prepared to take the initiative on this?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for an important question!

I completely agree that the issue of economic violence is incredibly important. It creates an incredibly great lack of freedom for many, especially women. It also means that many of those who are subjected to physical violence do not have the opportunity to free themselves from the physical violence because one does not have economic freedom.

This is an issue that the government is working on on several fronts. We have, among other things, in the directives to the new national strategy regarding men's violence against women, violence in close relationships, honor-related violence and oppression, given the investigator the mandate to specifically look at what measures we can implement against economic violence.

In this context, I have also previously mentioned that the government intends to appoint an inquiry where we review the division processes. We see, namely, that today's regulatory framework enables the use of economic violence. We will start with those measures. Then we will see what additional measures will be needed.

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

Sten Bergheden (M)

Madam Speaker! My question is directed to Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren.

Sweden has far too many wolves today. The Riksdag has decided to reduce the wolf population, preferably down to 170 wolves. In the government statement, it was clear that the wolf population is to be reduced, which I welcome.

The government and the minister have done a very good job in the EU to lower the protection status for the wolf. This will now make it easier for Sweden to be able to reduce our wolf population. But the situation in Skaraborg and Västra Götaland is now very strained with both too many territories and too many wolves. There are constant attacks on livestock, pets, and a reduced moose population.

The situation for the country's livestock owners and hunters is now soon unsustainable. Daily I receive calls from desperate livestock owners whose livestock has been attacked or was close to being attacked by wolf.

Can the Minister specify even further how quickly he and we can change laws, rules and directives so that the wolf population can be seriously reduced in Sweden and in Skaraborg?

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! I agree with much of what the member before me has said. I am also very pleased that we have made the step at the EU level. Many did not think it was possible, but it turned out to be so. The basis, as said, is that we have a viable wolf population in Europe. In that case, one does not need the absolute strictest protection. This will facilitate our administration.

The government has been very clear. We have received notification from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, which has hired researchers. We have now received confirmation that Sweden may have a wolf population at the lower level of the range that the Riksdag has decided.

As a member, we report a reference value with some periodicity. Now we are working so that Sweden will land on a reference value that is significantly lower the next time this is to be done. We have much greater prerequisites now to get it approved, above all because there is a government that stands up for the Riksdag's decisions.

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

Jytte Guteland (S)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to Climate Minister Pourmokhtari.

Sweden appears to be missing three out of four climate goals by 2030. That was the Climate Policy Council's assessment after the budget was presented a week ago. This is not quite the picture we received at the press conferences, but it may be an important piece of consumer information that Sweden is still doing so poorly.

When the Climate Policy Council looks at the goals, they see that Sweden does not look like it will meet the transport goal with current politics. When they look at Sweden's climate goals, they see that we will not manage to reach them. Possibly we will meet ESR, according to optimistic calculations and according to some scenario. And then we have LULUCF. That goal we do not meet.

My question to the Minister for Climate is, of course, whether there is a sense of crisis and whether one is willing to get started and write the directives that the Steering Group needs and appoint an investigator. We have constantly been given the answer that it is there that we are to get the policy.

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! I am proud of the powerful climate initiatives that the government chooses to focus on and that we have once again allocated a historically large budget, larger than all previous S-MP budgets, to the climate and environment area.

Our measures are about creating the conditions for the transition that needs to take place in our entire long country. It is about ensuring that there is clean, reliable electricity for all those operations that want to phase out the fossil and bring in the electric. It is about expanding the charging infrastructure in our entire country. It is also about making an ambitious and long-term investment in the restoration of wetlands. We are strengthening Klimatklivet. We are making many different investments to electrify, for example, the transport sector. There will be new investments for trucks through market introduction support but also a new electric car premium.

The government is therefore working full out to achieve the climate goals. With the budget for 2025, Sweden's emissions will once again decrease.

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

Mikael Eskilandersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! After eight years of politics that negatively affected the countryside, with high fuel prices, high inflation, and one-sided investments in building apartments in larger towns, the current government has had two stressful years to restore it all. This means that we are now seeing significantly lowered fuel and energy prices while much else is being done to strengthen and improve the possibility of living in the countryside.

What is also new in the budget is the proposal for Sverigehuset, which is a type-approved house that can be built throughout Sweden. This means a new owner-builder movement so that people get the opportunity to fulfill the dream of their own house more cheaply and faster. It is as revolutionary as when cars began to be built on assembly lines instead of having unique solutions.

I would like to ask Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren how he views improving the possibilities of living in the countryside and when he expects Sverigehuset to be introduced so that it is in place for all those who want to live in the countryside.

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

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is probably my department that handles the issue, but it is more directed towards the Minister for Housing. I am, however, happy to speak about how we shall further improve for residents in rural areas. The Member mentions several important steps that we have taken. We can state that there are additional steps in the budget.

When the previous government revised the currency ordinance, they did not let the farmers receive the money that they should have received already then. Unlike that, we now give the money that comes through the change of the currency ordinance directly to the farmers; we strengthen the agricultural policy with 746 million kronor.

We are also working on a rural policy proposition that we look forward to presenting. It contains rural policy that spans many policy areas. It is not just about agriculture, even though it is important, but also about ensuring that school, healthcare, safety, and everything else also exists in the countryside.

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

Johnny Svedin (SD)

Madam Speaker! My question is addressed to Minister Romina Pourmokhtari.

Sweden has long been a pioneer in environmental and climate policy and has had ambitious goals and strict regulations to protect the environment and promote sustainable development. At the same time, Swedish industry faces significant challenges. The strict environmental requirements can lead to increased production costs, which reduces companies' international competitiveness. This risks leading to the relocation of companies to countries with lower environmental standards, which not only threatens Swedish jobs but can also result in increased global emissions.

Given these challenges and the need for balanced environmental considerations with economic sustainability, I would like to ask what measures the government is taking to ensure that environmental regulations do not hinder the international competitiveness of Swedish industry and prevent the relocation of companies and jobs.

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

Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

The very most important thing that happens so that the entire EU does not lose out on the powerful transition we are undertaking, so that we become the first climate-neutral continent in the world, happens in no small part by ensuring that the fees and burdens that fall on industry end up in a money bag that the industry can then utilize for the changes it is undertaking. The money that goes in for the climate through, for example, emission allowances shall then be used for such things as financing an electric car premium in Sweden aimed at specific groups to utilize.

There are, therefore, many such functions that make it possible to invest together in a way. But then it is a matter of ensuring that the transition being carried out does not complicate everything, that bureaucracy and permit processes do not delay the whole thing. It is not least such things that create large costs for companies throughout Europe, and it is something that the government is working very hard to reduce.

Question time was hereby concluded.

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