Trade policy

Ann-Charlotte Hammar Johnsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Sweden has built its prosperity on trade, and that Swedish export companies continue to be successful is what creates tomorrow's welfare.

In a tough global situation with increased uncertainty, inflation, shaky financial markets, geopolitical tensions, increased protectionism and so on, it is important to continue the work so that one does not turn inward but outward. Protectionism is constantly lurking around the corner, and when it is allowed to emerge, it hits our supply chains hard. Not least during the pandemic, it was shown how fragile Europe's internal market is during crises - goods could not make it to their final destination but were stopped along the way.

That is why it is important to do as Sweden does and constantly press on regarding what disruptions entail and, in all contexts, highlight and remind of the focus on free trade. We know, however, that free trade can never be taken for granted but constantly needs to be maintained so that setbacks do not occur. Increasing protectionism hinders growing world trade. This is very worrying for Sweden, as a trade-dependent country, but also in large for global trade, the economy, and growth.

Trade policy

Free trade affects our everyday lives, as imported products and services – not least in the form of input goods – become more expensive as a result of high tariffs. Geopolitical changes are occurring both elsewhere in the world and in our immediate vicinity. Russia's illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has had major consequences in the form of disruptions in supply chains and rising raw material prices on the international market. When we look back, we see that it was precisely the free trade agreement between the EU and Ukraine that was the spark for the conflict that preceded Russia's annexation of Crimea.

Madam Speaker! Historical crises demonstrate the need to have secure trade and supply chains. No one knows what the next crisis will be - we only know that it will come.

Europe needs to continue to be globally competitive. Our strength lies in openness and in building relations with the rest of the world. When the world loses trust, Europe must stand strong to counter tariffs and other trade barriers.

The current security situation has, like the pandemic, demonstrated the strength of having resilient and sustainable value chains, strategic partnerships, and open and rules-based trade. The EU's regulatory framework for the internal market creates the conditions for well-functioning trade, and therefore a deepening of the internal market is needed so that it functions well even in times of crisis.

Sweden has a goal for the area of Foreign Trade, Export and Investment Promotion. The new goal is free, sustainable and rules-based international trade, a well-functioning internal market, growing exports and international investments in Sweden. Increased trade exchange with the rest of the world is enabled by increased exports and imports, which we know is valuable for the entire economy. Furthermore, free trade enables export, import and investment flows. Therefore, the Swedish position is that foreign direct investments in Sweden contribute to increased employment and sustainable growth throughout the country.

Sweden's trade and promotion policy aims to promote Swedish economic interests and the image of Sweden abroad in order to facilitate exports and foreign investments in Sweden and to enable a mutual trade exchange with other countries. Trade goes both ways. With increased exports and increased imports, the trade exchange with the rest of the world increases.

Madam Speaker! It is important that Sweden is a clear voice for free trade - I cannot emphasize it enough - both within the EU, in the internal market, and globally. The WTO, World Trade Organization, therefore has a fundamental role. Global trade is a major contributing factor to both increased prosperity and reduced poverty in the world.

The multilateral, rules-based trading system, primarily through the WTO, creates conditions and equal and fair terms for all countries and is a clear forum for global, rules-based trade. Unfortunately, we continue to be in a situation where the WTO is dysfunctional.

With change come multilateral trading systems of great importance, and it is therefore an important Swedish interest to get the WTO to function. It is a matter of ensuring the organization's future relevance. Achieving a change in the handling of substantive issues and regulatory frameworks is important. Access to markets, equal rules of the game, and the removal of trade barriers are important for global trade and the Swedish economy.

The export of goods and services is closely interconnected. To give an example, it can be mentioned that industrial products are often interconnected with service content in the form of software. We can observe that the service sector has grown significantly over time and has done so at a faster rate than trade in goods over the last few decades. Technological development and digitalization provide opportunities for a country like Sweden.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is pushing to remove trade barriers generally. Free trade remains the backbone of our trade policy. The EU needs more free trade agreements, and Sweden is pushing for this during its presidency. A modern, sustainable free trade agreement has been negotiated with New Zealand. It is planned to be signed in June during the Swedish presidency.

Sweden is working for the EU to continue building open, strong and sustainable trade relations with the rest of the world and to conclude new, modern bilateral and regional free trade agreements with, for example, Mexico, China, Australia, India, Indonesia and Mercosur, that is to say Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Free trade and market economy are central to lifting people out of poverty, achieving the green transition, and financing our common welfare.

The green transition is necessary and contains new opportunities for employment and growth. There are synergies between climate financing, trade, and innovation that we must take full advantage of. The Swedish government will therefore cooperate closely with the business community to promote exports and foreign trade, investments, and Swedish competitiveness.

Competitiveness issues are therefore also in focus for the Swedish presidency in the EU. Both in relation to the Inflation Reduction Act, IRA, and in the design of the EU's policy for green transition, Sweden advocates for openness and transparency. But Swedish companies shall also benefit from the support opportunities available through the EU.

Regarding IRA, there is an ongoing conversation to remove trade barriers and avoid a subsidy race. More is needed than the concessions from discriminatory elements that have been made so far. Of course, we welcome that the USA takes responsibility for the green transition, but protectionist tools do not benefit trade.

Madam Speaker! Based on the fact that foreign direct investments are important for the economy and Swedish companies are simultaneously one of the ways that foreign powers use to achieve strategic advantages. Review and vigilance over foreign direct investments is an important part.

Globalization and international trade contribute to development and increased prosperity. It is not through less trade and lack of economic growth that people's standard of living improves, on the contrary.

Madam Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report and against all motions.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to the member for the speech!

I believe we can agree on much when it comes to trade policy. We have, for example, for a long time been broadly in agreement that the benefits of global trade must come to everyone, that is to say that we shall stand up for fair trade. Now it seems, however, as if the Moderaterna and this government have changed their minds.

In the budget bill for 2023, the government changes the goal formulation and abandons precisely the part concerning fair trade. In the most recent economic policy budget debate, the member's colleague also noted that the Moderaterna no longer stand up for fair trade. The Moderate Member of Parliament then emphasized that a fair trade policy entails more levies for companies and makes it harder to do business.

Is this the Moderaternas view on a trade policy that distributes the gains of globalization more fairly? Do the Moderaterna no longer stand up for fair trade?

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

Ann-Charlotte Hammar Johnsson (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

The Social Democrats are working hard to try to stick such fake news onto the Moderates and the government. Incorporating humanitarian aspects and social and environmental sustainability is done through regulations. That is why we have chosen the term rules-based trade. It is also the term used by the OECD, Global Deal, and the WTO.

These regulatory frameworks are based on the fact that everyone has awareness and knowledge of what it is about when working together. If one has such a common view, it is easier to speak with one another and conduct political discussions.

I will not act as an interpreter for my party colleagues, but I believe they think that one should not impose surcharges on companies. There are also different ways of looking at this in terms of fairness. Which concept is used by whom, and how do we understand each other? This is about understanding. One wants to bake this into the existing regulatory framework so that it aligns with the WTO's and OECD's way of assessing what this is about.

One simply chooses for oneself from one's party how one wants to anchor and make one's trade policy known. Rule-based trade already exists, and based on that, we work with different concepts that are known internally and that everyone shares when it comes to how it should function.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Madam Speaker! I do not know if I should label this fake news since this budget debate was broadcast live. It was clearly and explicitly shown there that the Moderaterna do not stand up for fair trade.

I must also say that it is remarkable that one speaks warmly of the importance of rule-based trade but at the same time does not want to touch upon the concept of fair trade. A fair trade is a prerequisite for a rule-based trade. It is a prerequisite for the acceptance of free trade in times of increased protectionism.

When I submitted a written question on this to Minister Johan Forssell, he replied that he felt the concept of fair trade was not sufficiently clear. Let me then clarify for the Minister, for the Member, and for this government what the concept actually means.

A fair trade policy is about safeguarding the environment, climate, and workers' rights, contributing to achieving the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030, welcoming and ensuring that the business sector can take a larger role when it comes to the work for sustainable development, and expanding and developing the Global Deal cooperation, not least by adding more resources and elevating that initiative in Sweden's bilateral contacts.

Don't the Moderates stand up for these things, now that I have clarified what the concept means? It is at least something that previous S-led governments have worked hard on within the EU cooperation, within the WTO cooperation, and in negotiations on free trade agreements, and which we Social Democrats still stand up for.

We want a trade policy that actually leads to jobs, welfare, and prosperity for everyone. Don't the Moderaterna want that?

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

Ann-Charlotte Hammar Johnsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, the member, for the development of the concept of justice based on how it is defined by the Social Democrats!

It is still the case that all these things exist in the rule-based tools that exist within both the OECD and the WTO. We have human rights, sustainability and so on. These concepts are used within this. Why then lift out and talk about individual concepts? That is what becomes a bit strange in the context. Let us talk about rule-based, robust regulatory frameworks where these parts are included, as they already are.

I do not understand the Social Democrats' penchant for highlighting individual concepts and running them one by one instead of talking about a whole: WTO's and OECD's rule-based frameworks work like this, and then everyone can embrace what it is about.

It is these frameworks for the trade system that we want to hold onto, in order to be clear in a world that is running in different directions in different ways. Then, one should not introduce more concepts but stick to what is and work with it moving forward.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Madam Speaker! Our trade with the rest of the world is, and has historically been, absolutely crucial for the jobs, the welfare, and the prosperity in our country. Exports account for almost half of Sweden's GDP and mean that approximately 1.5 million Swedes have a job to go to. Increased trade therefore means more employees in healthcare, more teachers in schools, and more police in society. Therefore, trade policy for us Social Democrats is an important tool for building the welfare society.

The Swedish labor movement has a long tradition of promoting trade and opposing protectionism. Free and open trade lies in the interest of workers. Sweden has repeatedly shown that it is possible to combine free trade with, for example, a strong protection for workers' rights. It creates jobs with decent working conditions, lifts people out of poverty, and contributes to a sustainable economic development. In this way, our economic policy, strong welfare, and belief in free trade are interconnected.

Exports and the green industrial revolution that Sweden is undergoing are also some of our primary contributions to the climate transition. Sweden has a unique opportunity to take a leading role in global climate work and to spread our climate- and environment-friendly solutions. Therefore, trade policy is also one of our most important tools to contribute to a more sustainable world.

Madam Speaker! World trade is currently facing major challenges. In a situation of geopolitical tensions, growing protectionism and increasing trade conflicts, more international cooperation is needed – not less. This is more important than ever in light of the pandemic and against the background of Russia's unjust war in Ukraine. Sweden must be a strong voice for free, sustainable and fair trade within the EU and globally. Here, the World Trade Organization, WTO, plays a fundamental role. Therefore, the WTO must be strengthened and modernized in order to be able to create fair, predictable and transparent rules of the game in the multilateral trading system.

Sweden must also be a clear voice within the EU, not least during the presidency, in order to strengthen competitiveness and cross-border trade. One must ensure that there is a well-functioning internal market, even in times of crisis. Continuing to remove trade barriers, strengthening compliance with existing rules, and adapting the internal market to new conditions is absolutely central. It is crucial for free movement and for the implementation of both the digital and the green transition.

Regarding the green transition, it is important to emphasize, especially in light of the USA's IRA support package, that the EU's focus should be on stimulating the green transition and securing long-term competitiveness rather than engaging in a so-called state aid race. That would not be good for a small, export-dependent country like Sweden or for Europe's collective competitiveness. The way forward is increased trade, investment, and technological development. That is how we manage the green transition together.

The EU must, furthermore, enter into more free trade agreements. Therefore, it is important that the government proceeds with ongoing negotiations, especially during the presidency. The government must also continue the work to ensure that trade agreements focus on all aspects of sustainability and safeguard workers' rights around the world. It is an essential part of the work for fairer trade.

Madam Speaker! To connect to the previous exchange: The goal of Swedish trade policy has long been to stand up for fair trade. Most parties in the Riksdag have been consistently in agreement that the benefits of global trade must come to everyone.

The need for fair trade was clearly evident from the previous goal for trade policy. But in the budget bill for 2023, the government changes the goal formulation and abandons precisely the part that concerns fair trade. Furthermore, Moderate representatives state that the Moderates no longer stand up for fair trade. It was clearly and explicitly evident from the latest industrial policy budget debate, and also from the latest exchange of remarks here. During the latest budget debate, the Moderate Member of Parliament actually stated—and it was broadcast live—that a fair trade policy implies more burdens for companies and makes it harder to do business.

This is remarkable, to say the least, when the government at the same time speaks warmly about the importance of rule-based trade. Fair trade is a prerequisite for rule-based trade. It is a prerequisite for maintaining the legitimacy and acceptance of free trade. It is a prerequisite for faith in free trade in times of increased protectionism. This government must realize that.

We need a trade policy that can distribute the gains of globalization more fairly. It is about – as I also mentioned in the exchange of remarks – protecting, for example, the environment, climate, and decent working conditions, contributing to achieving the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030, letting the business sector take greater responsibility in the work for sustainable development, and expanding and developing the Global Deal cooperation.

When it comes to Global Deal specifically, there is great potential to deepen the cooperation. Through Global Deal, Sweden can advocate for global trade that accelerates the pace of the climate transition, strengthens social dialogue, and contributes to decent working conditions for workers all over the world. Today, Global Deal consists of over 130 actors from all over the world, of which 25 are states. As mentioned, there is great potential to deepen the cooperation, which was a priority issue for the previous Social Democratic government.

I fear, however, that the current government's ambitions are not as high, especially with regard to the government's stance on fair trade. Even though the OECD has taken over the chairmanship, Sweden must go to the front line to strengthen Global Deal, not least by providing more resources and by promoting the initiative in Sweden's bilateral contacts. In this way, one can create more inclusive, long-term, and sustainable growth.

Madam Speaker! To solve today's and tomorrow's problems, more trade is needed, not less. When world trade is under great pressure, it is more important than ever to stand up for open, free, and fair trade. A trade policy is needed that leads to more jobs, stronger welfare, and increased prosperity for all. With those words, I would like to conclude by stating that we Social Democrats stand behind all of our reservations, but for the sake of time, I only move for approval of reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! On behalf of the Christian Democrats, I would like to move for the proposal in the committee report to be approved and for all motions to be rejected.

Sweden is a country that has created a welfare based on trade. We are a sparsely populated country in Europe's geographical periphery, but we are also a country that for centuries has sought ourselves out to create added value in different ways. It is a heritage we want to cherish and develop.

As a Christian Democrat, I want to be involved in creating laws and contribute to our collective cultivation of a culture where good trade is allowed to develop. The government's goals in this area are to promote free, sustainable and rules-based international trade, a well-functioning internal market, growing exports and international investments in Sweden.

I want to be part of creating an open international trade that supports the implementation of the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030. It enables continued strong foreign trade in the incomparably largest market for Swedish goods and services, which provides positive effects on the economy as a whole.

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats are warm supporters of free trade. Trade binds countries and markets together all over the world. The opportunity to export goods and services benefits both companies and consumers as well as the economy of society as a whole. Greater exports mean increased revenues and opportunities for specialization and economies of scale.

It does not stop there, however, because imports also have positive effects on the economy. They provide more choices and lower prices for consumers, and goods that would be expensive to produce in, for example, Sweden can be purchased more cheaply from abroad. This in turn means that Swedish goods can be produced at lower costs and become more competitive.

At the same time as exports are becoming increasingly important for the Swedish economy, Sweden's share of global exports has decreased. It is evident that Sweden needs a policy that strengthens our exporting companies but also enables more companies to export their goods or services.

There is no lack of good examples here; this week we received figures showing that Swedish exports of pharmaceuticals have hit new records. Over the last ten years, pharmaceutical exports have doubled, and they now account for 7 percent of Sweden's total exports. Vehicles for roads are Sweden's largest export commodity. Other important goods are mineral oils, paper, as well as iron and steel.

There is currently an export strategy that was developed in 2015 and updated in 2021. In the changing world we find ourselves in, I look forward to the new government developing a new strategy that is not only about export but also about import and investments.

Madam Speaker! We Christian Democrats are also warm supporters of aid to poorer countries. It is part of our DNA that we have a common responsibility for one another and that the responsibility does not stop at our country's borders. But the fight against global poverty cannot only take place with the help of aid, and there we in the Christian Democrats see that an even more important tool is trade.

A prerequisite for the large global inequalities to decrease is trade on fair terms throughout the world. It is primarily through trade that the least developed countries can rise out of poverty by their own power. Therefore, a free and fair trade, where geographical borders have diminished importance, must be developed. Here, the government acts so that the EU shall negotiate and enter into more strategically important free trade agreements with other countries and regions. Synergies between aid and trade shall be taken advantage of.

We agree that we want to promote a free, sustainable and rules-based world trade. The multilateral rules-based trading system within primarily the WTO creates predictability and equal and fair conditions for all countries, and the EU's regulatory framework for the internal market creates the conditions for a well-functioning trade on the incomparably largest market for Swedish goods and services. There is now a dispute through the WTO, and it must be resolved.

Madam Speaker! I do not want to conclude my speech before I have also highlighted Europe as a world-leading innovation actor where Sweden can participate in bridging the innovation gap. We can be proud that Sweden is at the forefront. Here, Sweden has a clear voice in the EU.

Technology-intensive innovation is of crucial importance for Sweden's and Europe's competitiveness. Innovation is particularly important for us to be able to drive the green and digital transition as well as increase resilience in the supply chain, and this is closely linked to research within natural sciences and technology. It is about developing technical solutions to the most acute societal challenges and bringing these solutions to the market.

An industrial plan in the Green Deal for the net-zero era shall be developed at EU level. It shall complement the ongoing efforts to transform industry in the European Green Deal and the EU's industrial strategy, particularly the action plan for the circular economy. Here, Sweden can participate in a comprehensive action plan based on predictable and simplified rules, faster access to sufficient financing, skills, and open trade for resilient supply chains.

With that, Madam Speaker, I move once again for the approval of the proposal in the report.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! I reacted when Lili André from Kristdemokraterna began mentioning the aid policy and that it is important for Kristdemokraterna - while Kristdemokraterna in the government are significantly cutting back on precisely the aid policy. The same government is also removing fair trade from the goals for the trade policy, something that is crucial for us to be able to strengthen the conditions for people in poorer countries as well as for poverty reduction and a sustainable social development globally.

Therefore I ask: Why does Lili André say one thing when the Christian Democrats in the government do the opposite?

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for raising the issue of aid, Elin Söderberg! We Christian Democrats advocate for generous and effective aid, and Swedish aid continues to be so. The aid amounts to 56 billion kronor, and in Europe, only Luxembourg gives more than that.

It is, however, that the aid does good that is important. A reform agenda for aid is being developed with a focus on long-term perspective, transparency, and efficiency. Focus on poverty reduction and health interventions for the most vulnerable is what our aid is about. It is democracy aid to human rights defenders and democracy fighters. We are expanding and streamlining climate aid as well as aid for women's and girls' rights and opportunities.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! We all agree that we should have effective aid, but this government is cutting aid significantly. When it comes to trade policy, which is also crucial for sustainable societal development globally, the goals for fair trade are being scrapped. It is extremely serious.

Globally, we are now in a situation where we see that the climate crisis is already worsening our conditions to reach the Agenda 2030 goals. In that situation, this government is making it so that Sweden goes from being part of the solution to being part of the problem, and that is extremely serious.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I do not agree that we are scrapping fair trade, Elin Söderberg. It is included in the whole within WTO trade, i.e., trade within the World Trade Organization.

The claim that the Christian Democrats have not protected or do not protect an effective and generous aid is false. The Christian Democrats have succeeded in warding off precisely a dismantling of the aid. We have negotiated the conditions for a more effective aid that continues to be world-leading generous.

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

TREDJE VICE TALMANNEN

I remind all members that we speak through the Speaker and do not say "you" and "you" in the speaking chairs.

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats have many important reservations regarding trade policy. But out of respect for the process, I choose to move for approval of only reservation 14, which deals with the EU's export ban on snus.

I thought I would start by speaking a bit broadly about our trade policy. We have a positive view of free and open trade with both goods and services. It reduces unnecessary protectionism as well as facilitates contacts and competence between countries and continents. Global trade is thus a major contributing factor to both increased prosperity and reduced poverty.

We also mean that good trade relations and competition-neutral multilateral trade agreements are of the utmost importance. This benefits, among other things, Swedish industry and their trading partners, who together account for approximately one-fifth of our GDP and three-quarters of the exports. They employ around 1 million people directly or indirectly and are thus to be considered the backbone of the Swedish economy.

In a time of uncertainty, it is of great importance to strengthen Swedish competitiveness, among other things through expanded trade with other countries. The goal should therefore be to increase the market shares, growth, and profit margins for Swedish companies, in real terms with comparable countries. It is a central issue for Swedish interests on an international level.

I mean that a total competition review is needed and thus also a review of these so-called competition factors. It is the market's task to review the competitiveness of its own sectors. Politics should not micro-manage at the smallest possible level. I do, however, see a need for an overall competition review of larger measurement areas in their entirety, not least in cases where Swedish companies have been affected by unnecessary competitive disadvantages as a result of political decisions.

Madam Speaker! Sweden as a nation must constantly develop the right conditions to be an attractive country for entrepreneurship. The Sweden Democrats work for sound trade. We therefore oppose distorted competition rules, both nationally and globally.

From a national perspective, it can be about ensuring that there are no unnecessary punitive taxes, rules, or fees that, to an unjustified extent, hinder Swedish competitiveness globally in relation to the actual positive effects. It is about conducting a detailed impact assessment for new legislation and effective regulatory simplification work, a basic principle of striving for the minimum level when implementing EU directives, and in general a review of other taxes, fees, and general bureaucracy.

In a global perspective, for example, neither large nor economically heavy nations should act protectionistically and provide market support and distorting subsidies to their own industry. In cases where this is noted, the government should point out the problems, in order to always strive for fair global trade.

We are fundamentally positive towards free trade as well as bilateral and multilateral trade agreements in their entirety. Sweden shall, within both the EU and other international forums, such as the WTO, work for open and free trade and counteract protectionism. Few things would harm our economy more than if we and our trading partners were to begin restricting or otherwise preventing or making international trade more expensive. Sweden should therefore pursue a free-trade-friendly line both as an individual nation and as a part of the European Union.

Sweden's EU membership means that the EU has exclusive competence to conclude trade agreements to which Sweden as a country is bound, which in turn are approved by the respective member states. Through membership in the EU, Sweden has access to the internal market. This benefits Sweden as an export nation. The Sweden Democrats see the value of a well-functioning internal market with predictable and fair rules of the game. The synergy effects of a streamlined market must, however, always be weighed against the risks of an overly bureaucratized internal market, as it risks involving unnecessary cost-driving red tape.

Madam Speaker! We Sweden Democrats view import and its importance for Swedish competitiveness positively, given Sweden's role high up in the global value chains. More and more products contain parts produced somewhere else in the world. The value chains that it generates are natural and to some extent also positive, even if geographical proximity to one's trading partners can of course represent an added value in itself. Swedish companies get to take part in a global market with an increased variety of products. Through this, the competitiveness in domestic production increases. Thus, exports are also benefited.

We consider, however, that the import need needs to be evaluated over the longer term. Political instability or pressure in exporting nations, countries' monopoly positions regarding certain products, or natural causes can change the global trade market. A long-term evaluation should be made of Swedish sectors' long-term import needs and thus of strengthening Swedish production of products with significance high up in the global value chains.

The outlook for Swedish competitiveness looks positive. The intention is to continue to strengthen Swedish export opportunities through good trade relations and by having world-leading products and services, high up in the value chains.

Our vision is to continue the development by refining the already existing national competitive advantages and thus strengthening Sweden's market shares as well as participating in new and growing growth regions around the world. This benefits the entire national corporate chain in the form of small, individual subcontractors to larger clusters of corporate collaborations, so-called dual companionship.

Even though free trade benefits Sweden on the whole, we should always work to ensure that Swedish interests are protected to the greatest extent possible. This can be done, for example, by trying to incorporate elements that strengthen Swedish comparative advantages into the agreements.

There are also a number of sectors in which we are more or less world leaders. Sweden must therefore actively take a stand for these during negotiations. In order for further value to be created as a result of future free trade agreements, emerging countries and larger economies should be prioritized.

Sweden shall be a clear voice within the union for the continued work with further bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements. In addition to the conventional economic benefits of free trade agreements, it also represents an insurance in the event of a full-scale trade war.

Furthermore, Sweden as a country should clarify the importance of ensuring that the focus in future negotiations lies on countering non-tariff trade barriers, as it is more than customs duties and taxes that determine the potential benefits of a free trade agreement. This becomes extra important in free trade agreements with advanced countries, as tariffs are often already low through the WTO.

Madam Speaker! Now I have accounted for large parts of the Sweden Democrats' trade policy. But there is one issue that is very close to my heart: Swedish snus.

Relative to population size, the number of tobacco-related deaths in Sweden is the lowest in Europe. It is well-documented that this is because Swedes chew snus more and smoke less. A low death rate in Sweden is positive. Sweden should therefore work to ensure that the number of deaths decreases across Europe overall. One step in that direction is to offer substitutes to smoking.

The EU's ban on trade with Swedish snus is, in our opinion, incompatible with the principles upon which the trade union is built. We believe that it is particularly important that this principle is protected and highlighted by a free-trade-friendly nation like Sweden when it concerns a product of national character that is being excluded from the free internal market.

According to Handelns utredningsinstitut, the historical economic consequences of the tobacco export ban amount to 3 billion kronor per year in lost export revenues or a total of 30 billion kronor since 1995. A repealed ban could, according to the report, lift Sweden's exports to the EU by 10 percent.

A doubling of snus production in Sweden would mean increased employment and a doubling of tax revenues. It concerns around a thousand jobs and 1 billion kronor in direct tax revenues, according to the calculations of Handelns utredningsinstitut.

In view of this, it is important to urge the government to work towards abolishing the EU's total ban on the export of snus.

(Applause)

In this speech, Josef Fransson (SD) agreed.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the speech!

Every day it is reported that workers all over the world are denied basic rights and that in many countries it is associated with life-threatening danger to engage in union activities. Therefore, we need a trade policy that strengthens and improves working conditions in the global labor market.

The European Commission's proposal for a directive on corporate sustainability due diligence is a step in the right direction. It is good that the business sector takes greater responsibility regarding sustainability issues. Therefore, I regret that the government and the Sweden Democrats are critical of the proposal in its entirety. The ambition is to make the proposal completely toothless and leave, among other things, trade unions without influence by primarily attempting to remove the civil liability for damages in the legislative proposal. We Social Democrats naturally declared a dissenting position at the last deliberation and emphasized the importance of strengthening the trade unions' influence.

I also note that in the Sverigedemokraterna committee motion, there is not a single word about the workers or the working conditions, and I did not hear it mentioned in the member's speech either. I must therefore ask a question, especially since the member raised the importance of fair trade in their speech. Is this an expression of an inability or unwillingness to pursue a trade policy that safeguards the workers' conditions, interests, and rights? Do Sverigedemokraterna have no policy in this area, or is the issue not sufficiently important?

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Aida for the question.

I just want to point out that if one looks at the Sverigedemokraterna committee motion 945, under the heading "Social requirements in trade agreements," one can read about our position. We believe it is of great importance that we maintain social standards in bilateral and multilateral agreements and in this way exert pressure on other states regarding what the member is raising about, among other things, workers' rights.

If one reads the motion during the mentioned segment and in some of our demands, one will therefore find what is sought and also that which I took up here.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the answer.

I have read the committee motion, and I have also read the section that deals with social requirements. There, the employees' rights or the importance of safeguarding good working conditions for employees are not mentioned.

We Social Democrats will always pursue a trade policy that provides workers with strong protection, a good working environment, and reasonable working conditions in Sweden and around the world.

Previous S-led governments have shown that it is possible to combine free trade with strong protection for workers' rights, which I mentioned in my speech. We have been insistent that the EU's trade agreements should include protection of workers' rights, including requirements to implement the ILO's core conventions. We have also taken the initiative and been at the forefront of developing the Global Deal partnership.

Furthermore, we take a positive stance on the EU Commission's legislative proposal on corporate due diligence. We believe that the business sector should take greater responsibility in these matters. But that being said, we are clear that the requirements must also be proportionate, purposeful, and not too burdensome for the companies, especially when considering small and medium-sized enterprises. We also think it is good that the corporate governance model is protected by reserving the regulation for the Member States.

Furthermore, it is fundamental that companies continue to sign collective agreements and be included in the Global Deal cooperation. Through Global Deal, we can work towards more sustainable trade.

Since the Sweden Democrats have spoken about fair trade and the member raised it in their speech, I must ask a question. Will the Sweden Democrats, as the largest party in the government support, work to ensure that Sweden is at the forefront of expanding and developing Global Deal, including by providing more resources and promoting the initiative in Sweden's bilateral contacts?

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member again for the question.

When we talk about Swedish trade policy and workers' security in the global arena, we must also mention the aid policy. In the latest budget proposal, the Social Democrats allocated 0.91 percent of GNP to aid. We, of course, cut significantly more; we want to see an effective aid policy. What I want to get to is that, when it comes to trade policy and workers' security, we can use trade as a tool instead of aid to influence other nations and other nations' working conditions, legislation, and the like.

If we are to truly have an impact, we can cut back the aid to an effective, streamlined aid while we conduct a trade policy that promotes social requirements. Then we can make demands in the trade area instead of in the aid area.

One can see things from different perspectives. If one looks at the trade policy and the social requirements that we mention in our committee motion, one discovers that we actually make a real difference. The Sweden Democrats always intend to conduct trade with social responsibility.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! For us in Miljöpartiet, consideration for the environment and human rights is completely central in trade policy. It is an important tool for us to both in Sweden and globally reach the global sustainability goals in Agenda 2030.

I noted that Daniel Lönn raised fair trade on several occasions in his speech. At the same time, the Sweden Democrats are part of the government base that has removed "fair trade" from the goals of trade policy. They are cutting the aid budget significantly. Furthermore, greenhouse gas emissions in Sweden are increasing, and they are opposing an active climate policy within the EU. These are several factors that cause the global challenges and problems that fair trade aims to curb to be exacerbated by the Sweden Democrats' and the government's policy.

Why does the Sweden Democrats' Daniel Lönn mention fair trade in his speech when, point by point in the government's work, they oppose the values that fair trade is intended to strengthen?

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

I want to point out first that the Sweden Democrats are part of the government base. We are not part of the government. We submit committee motions, and we stand behind all of them, even here today. We have policies that differ from the government's.

Regarding what the member mentions about fair trade, we have a requirement for rules-based trade, and that includes some form of fair trade. Fair trade is of course important. That is why I mention it, and the Sweden Democrats mentioned it in the committee motion.

We conduct fair trade. That it does not explicitly state so in the budget is perhaps a non-issue. I think it is a pseudo-debate, because we are not "at odds" on this.

I can mention again that we want a narrow and effective aid policy and conduct trade with social responsibility. We shall set requirements for other states through trade agreements and thus influence, for example, human rights and workers' security in other countries.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! I think it is extremely unfortunate that the aid policy is being scaled back and that the Sweden Democrats say they want a small aid budget when the challenges that aid has to handle are only growing today. The needs are much greater today, and they should be met by a responsible aid policy that maintains the goal of 1 percent of GNP.

Daniel Lönn from Sverigedemokraterna also mentions a social responsibility in trade policy. It is extremely important, but it is not what is being practiced. We see that the government has deleted the goals for fair trade, and Sverigedemokraterna is part of the government base and has negotiated the budget and stood behind goals such as these. It is extremely serious that a policy is being practiced that worsens the conditions for the Agenda 2030 goals when the needs are only increasing.

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for another comment.

We are currently on the topic of aid. It may not be exactly the right subject today, but we can still say something about it. What has been dealt with lately is the volume target of 1 percent of bni. Regardless of what it is for, the problem with a volume target is that one has a goal of reaching a certain sum of money and that one shall donate a certain sum in aid. The goal is not that it should be effective or make a real difference, but the goal is that we shall donate exactly 1 percent of bni.

It becomes a huge concern, because then one has no objective regarding what one is to achieve with the whole thing. What social responsibility should one, for example, achieve in the countries that receive the aid?

Furthermore, we know that more than a third of all aid goes straight into corruption. In practice, one could cut the aid by a third and eliminate the corruption. Then one might get a more effective aid policy.

The only thing one creates if one has a volume goal of 1 percent of GNI is grant funding, which leads to nothing, and that a third or more goes straight into corruption in poorer countries and does not benefit the citizens.

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

TREDJE VICE TALMANNEN

I want to remind of the subject of the debate, even though it was the last remark in the round. We are therefore dealing with trade policy and the Committee on Industry's report.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! I had not intended to reply, but I reacted when the member suggested that the trade agreements benefit small business owners. We know that the Sweden Democrats are against sustainability reporting and due diligence. I would like to know how the trade agreements benefit small business owners here in Sweden.

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question. Regardless of whether we are talking about national or international trade policy, it is clear that smaller companies benefit. If we enter into multilateral or bilateral trade agreements with other countries around the world, it is clear that a large party in Sweden, for example a large company, will hire subcontractors and take them into service. This contributes to their continued economic development and to their profit margins increasing. Large trade agreements are obviously positive for small businesses, whether it is in Sweden, in the rest of the EU, or in the rest of the world. I do not quite understand the member's question. To me, it is quite obvious: The more multi- and bilateral agreements we have with other countries, the more we will benefit both large and small companies in Sweden.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! I reacted because what is being supported are trade agreements such as, for example, the one with Mercosur. It does not actually benefit small business owners at all. It means that we will have a flow of a certain amount of agricultural products and other raw material products, which leads to small-scale farmers and other entrepreneurs here in Sweden being wiped out.

How one views the role of the subcontractor is also very interesting. There are very many subcontractors who are forced to take steps they do not want to take, such as reducing their wage costs or lowering the quality, in order to meet the incredibly long chain that has arisen both nationally and internationally.

There isn't actually that much to be gained from the trade agreements. The trade agreements are mostly created so that the transnational corporations can have functioning value chains globally and extract as much profit as possible both from developing countries and from the consumers here in Sweden.

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

Daniel Lönn (SD)

Madam Speaker! I did not perceive any question in Lorena Delgado Varas's second reply, but I can speak a bit more about competition and about the free trade agreements that Sweden has concluded internationally and which we, of course, want to continue to conclude, both bilaterally and multilaterally.

For me, it is a self-evident fact – the more trade agreements we have, both within the union and outside the union, the more Swedish large corporations, international companies, and small businesses in Sweden will benefit. If one strengthens competition and strengthens growth for large companies, it will, as the member himself mentions, bring subcontractors along with it. It is clear that one should set requirements, above all social requirements, not least in Sweden but also in other countries, in order to further strengthen the opportunities small businesses have to be good subcontractors. For me, it is obvious: More competition will contribute to more jobs and to a better world for both small business owners and large corporation owners.

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! For this government, it is of the utmost importance to stand up for rules-based and open trade. We are a small, export-dependent country that would not manage our survival, let alone our welfare, without interaction with the rest of the world.

In order to be able to strengthen the growth and resilience of our economy, we need more international trade and more cooperation with the rest of the world. This is shown, not least by the experience of the pandemic we have just gone through and naturally also by the war we have in Eastern Europe following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

This illegal and unprovoked invasion has had major consequences even for Sweden, not only in the form of disruptions in supply chains and rising raw material prices. We also see it in global growth and international trade policy. The current security situation, as well as the pandemic, has underscored the importance of resilient value chains, strategic partnerships, and open and rules-based trade.

For me as a liberal, it is entirely self-evident to emphasize the importance of free trade for a stable world order and free individuals. Free trade and a market economy are central to lifting people out of poverty, to manage the green transition, and to finance our common welfare. Within international trade policy, Sweden should therefore be a clear voice for free trade. In this work, the WTO shall have a fundamental role. In light of the discussion that has been held here in the chamber, it may be worth reminding oneself that the mission to monitor and cater to the needs of developing countries is built into the WTO's mandate.

I therefore naturally think it is very positive that free trade has returned in this bourgeois government. We will continue to work so that Sweden, through cooperation in the EU, will continue to build open, strong and sustainable trade relations with the rest of the world. It is not only desirable, but actually completely necessary, that Sweden and the EU enter into new bilateral and regional free trade agreements. Therefore, it is very positive that the government, not least during the Swedish presidency, has worked so clearly for us to move forward with the negotiations that are already ongoing regarding free trade agreements.

Madam Speaker! In light of the economic situation we face, Sweden must have the strength to pull itself out of a new recession. People and companies are being subjected to dramatic cost increases right now. We have high inflation, and we have for a long time had rising electricity and fuel prices. I say it again: A free economy, free entrepreneurship, and free trade are the foundation of our prosperity.

In order for our Swedish companies to be able to continue their production, be innovative, lead the way in the green transition, and thus have a trade policy edge, we need to be able to handle the problems we have in Sweden very quickly. We have too little energy production. We have rising energy prices. We have great difficulties for the business sector to obtain qualified labor. This applies in particular within the technology industries. We need many more engineers in Sweden, and we need many more who seek out STEM education. We also need to review the permit processes and significantly shorten the lead times to get in place, for example, the infrastructure that is needed for our companies to be able to grow and continue exporting.

An openness towards the outside world does not, however, mean that we should be naive towards the agendas of other states. Foreign direct investments in Sweden are important for the economy. At the same time, strategic acquisitions and investments in Swedish companies are one of the ways that foreign powers use to achieve strategic advantages. We must be vigilant about this. We will need to manage risks associated with these foreign direct investments. I suspect that we will need to see new legislation even in that area.

With that said, I move for approval of the proposal in the Committee on Industry's report.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! When we talk about trade policy, we most often talk about Sweden being a country dependent on foreign trade. The truth is that much of what we use daily would not exist here or be able to be produced here if it were not for foreign trade. So it has been historically. Trade with the rest of the world is therefore absolutely crucial for Sweden's prosperity and development. Many of our companies are dependent on both importing and exporting. They have global value chains, and the global value chains have a major impact on both growth and employment both here and in other countries.

We have a great responsibility to change how these value chains and the international agreements look, as well as to define what type of growth we need.

Vänsterpartiet wants a fair trade policy that puts people, social justice, animals, the climate, and the environment first and that focuses on social gains for everyone and not just on profits for large corporations. Vänsterpartiet wants a fair trade policy that does not involve deterioration for the citizens in the countries covered. The trade policy shall stand for a positive development in many respects.

It is also important to highlight that when the environment and human rights are sidelined, the opportunities to solve global problems such as climate and environment and, for that part, war, are diminished. It is a situation that we must counteract.

Many political parties argue that we can influence countries in a positive way through trade agreements, that is to say that dictatorships might increase democratic space or perhaps one can protect the environment and so on.

We mean: Yes, if they are shaped in the right way. Right now, they are not so effective. Today, the EU creates trade agreements without the participation of those groups who are affected the most by them, whose lives and environment are changed because of the trade agreements.

We must be willing to admit that our trade policy is based on favoring large corporations and putting Sweden and Europe in the forefront, and sometimes without taking into account the consequences of that.

Some of the trade agreements that are, so to speak, in the pipeline are the Mercosur agreement and the association agreement with Chile. I would like to highlight a bit about the inconsistencies and consequences of the agreements. In summary, it can be said that the implementation of the Mercosur agreement will accelerate environmental destruction and the climate crisis, increase violations of human rights, and increase impunity for companies. Small-scale farmers, indigenous peoples, and other people living in rural areas both in the Mercosur countries and also here in Europe will be particularly affected by the export-oriented and chemical-intensive agricultural model that is favored in the agreements.

It is the large-scale agricultural models, the monocultures, which destroy biodiversity and ecosystems, that benefit. We expect an increase in the import of, among other things, meat, chicken and soy. Increased imports naturally mean that production will increase in the Mercosur countries. Increased production means an increase in greenhouse gases and a larger area used for the animals and for the monoculture. Those who will be punished the most will be the indigenous peoples, the small-scale farmers and the rainforest. To open up the forests, they will be cleared and burned. Hopefully, it will change now when we have a new president in Brazil. But I believe that the conflicts will increase. The transnational agricultural companies are very strong. The cheap meat that is imported will also wipe out the small-scale farmers here in Europe.

Transport emissions will of course increase. Instead of encouraging locally grown products, we will have more and more agricultural products from Latin America. But that is not all. The agreement allows prohibited pesticides to be produced here in Europe to then be sold further in the Mercosur countries. They are prohibited from being used in Europe due to their toxicity, meaning that they are dangerous for animals, humans, and the environment. But it seems to be the case that the pesticides are not as toxic for the people and nature in the Mercosur countries, for there they are completely okay to use. There we are talking about the extension of colonialism. It is okay to poison people and nature in other parts of the world.

The truth is that during a ten-year period, approximately 2,000 people died in Brazil solely due to exposure to pesticides. I and Vänsterpartiet naturally believe that these pesticides should simply be banned everywhere. The same applies to other products that are banned here. They simply should not be produced here to be sold further in other countries.

The first thing the Minister for Foreign Trade Forssell highlighted regarding the Chile agreement was the access to lithium, the white gold. Since lithium is important for the transition, there is a rush to mine in the Atacama region in the northern part of Chile. What is at stake? Yes, fragile ecosystems, scarce water resources, and the way of life of indigenous peoples.

Chile is the second largest producer of lithium, a critical component in the batteries that power electric vehicles, smart devices, renewable energy facilities, and other technologies that help us move away from fossil fuels. That is good. But lithium is extracted through the evaporation of brine solutions found in the salt flats of the Atacama Desert. It is a method that requires quite a lot of water. Miners pump saltwater into large ponds. There, an evaporation process occurs that takes quite a long time. The technology, of course, drains the scarce water resources, dries up the few wetlands that exist, and harms indigenous communities around.

If the polar bear is a symbol for the threat from the melting glaciers, the pink flamingo in the Atacama Desert is the symbol for the destruction of the salt flats. Already, 30 percent of the flamingos have disappeared. A fair trade agreement must ensure that the exploitation of lithium results in a positive development, that the environment is protected and that the indigenous people are respected.

We need trade agreements that strengthen small-scale farmers, benefit biodiversity, and have clear control systems for the environment and legal requirements for the environment and democracy. We need trade agreements that strengthen workers' rights, so that they do not strengthen the exploitation of them. We need trade agreements where countries' management of natural resources is strengthened and where technology is shared. We need trade agreements that take into account how people are affected and how democracy is affected, and in particular how women are affected both economically and socially.

By having fair trade agreements, and by demanding that companies respect human rights and the environment throughout the entire supply chain, we go far.

Here I also want to highlight binding treaty. In order to reach the global sustainability goals and be able to manage global crises, the business sector must be fully involved. Therefore, it is important to take responsibility along the entire chain, to get companies to be driving in human rights, from raw material to finished product.

The problem today is that countries are not consistent or obligated to impose a responsibility on companies to act regarding human rights. A binding agreement, such as the one proposed by the UN, should regulate companies' responsibilities along the entire global supply chain and facilitate cross-border conduct.

With that, I hope that the current circumstances with inflation, geopolitical uncertainty, and the invasion of Ukraine do not lead to us choosing not to highlight MR issues and environment and climate within the trade area.

I move for approval of reservation 5 on reworked sustainability requirements in trade agreements.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! For many years, globalization and ever-growing free trade have been a given. We who grew up with Sällskapsresan, the first film, where money was carried out in Wasabrödspaket, know that the free movement of capital, services, and goods has not always been a given.

I do not know if anyone here has seen the film with their children – or perhaps the 90s-generation in the chamber have seen it on their own. Apart from the film being extremely slow, it is difficult to explain that one was only allowed to take 10,000 kronor out of the country, even if, by today's standards, it is 40,000 kronor. That type of trade barrier or mobility barrier is quite difficult to imagine today. But we can, if we are not careful, end up there again. We must constantly defend free trade.

Mr. Speaker! Free trade is not only important for Swedish growth, Swedish exports and Swedish jobs; it is also crucially important for the green transition, even though many are convinced of the opposite. In order to reach a world with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions globally, markets must continue to open and trade barriers must be removed. Only then can investments and innovations in renewable energy and low-carbon technologies be stimulated.

Another advantage of free trade is that it can contribute to reducing emissions that arise due to inefficient production. By opening up for competition in an open market, companies are forced to be more efficient and productive, which can lead to lower emissions.

Free trade can also lead to resources being used more efficiently by allowing goods to be manufactured in the countries where it is most cost-effective. This reduces energy consumption and emissions arising in connection with the production of both goods and services. But for this to be sustainable, there must be climate tariffs and global fair rules of the game.

Sweden and Swedish companies are working hard to reduce their emissions. This means that Sweden is far ahead of many others. That is good, because then we reduce our own emissions and simultaneously lower emissions around the world when our products and services replace those produced with much dirtier technology. Thanks to, among other things, Sweden's nearly emission-free electricity system, many of the goods manufactured here have a smaller climate footprint than those manufactured in other countries.

The EU shall impose strict requirements on environmental considerations and human rights in its free trade agreements, which can make a big difference with our trading partners and set good standards that others adopt in order to be able to sell their products in the EU.

Work is ongoing at the EU level regarding sustainability requirements in trade agreements and potential sanction possibilities that can be linked to these requirements. Centerpartiet believes that the sustainability chapters in the EU's trade agreements should be binding. This can, for example, be achieved by requiring the counterparty to ratify international conventions before the trade agreement can enter into force. There should also, according to the trade agreements that are concluded, be a possibility to terminate the agreement if a counterparty does not adhere to the sustainability commitments that have been made.

Climate tariffs should be introduced to the EU so that climate-destroying countries are forced to pay for their emissions. The government should therefore push for a - hold on now - carbon adjustment mechanism in the EU that is compatible with the WTO framework. Such a mechanism reduces the risk of carbon leakage, promotes fair competition, and strengthens the ambitions for emission reductions both in the EU and internationally.

But the world is larger than the EU, and more trade agreements are needed. More free trade agreements are of great importance for Sweden's labor market and economy. They also set the global standards that we want and contribute to more robust trade. The EU must therefore open up more towards the rest of the world and actively work to establish more global free trade agreements.

Sweden must work to ensure that more strategically important free trade agreements are concluded and that they safeguard both the environment and climate, health, workers' rights, and animal welfare. In these negotiations, it is also important to push for the general abolition of tariffs and trade barriers, including for climate-friendly goods. It is therefore very important that the EU and WTO continue to negotiate and that the government actively works towards this.

Mr. Speaker! Free trade is incredibly important for Sweden, and it is necessary for the climate transition. Free trade is also a tool for the climate transition.

I vote in favor of reservation 11 under point 8 on climate tariffs and trade in climate-smart goods and services.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving to approve reservation 25.

We are all mutually dependent on one another. Sweden and our surrounding world are mutually dependent on one another. Sweden has strong trade with other countries, and we are strong both in heavy industry and forestry as well as in music exports and the film industry. Trade is a part of our relationship with other countries and also affects global societal development.

We find ourselves today in a situation where the global sustainability goals in Agenda 2030 do not look to be reached by 2030. We see instead a negative development, where more people today suffer from poverty and hunger. The Climate Policy Council has today presented its report, which highlights how the government's policy actively increases Swedish emissions.

The government has opposed the LULUCF regulation in the EU, which aims to increase carbon sequestration in forests and land in Sweden. This can be seen in light of the fact that the IPCC launched its latest report last week, which with all desired clarity highlights the need to rapidly reduce emissions before 2030. All of this is connected.

Trade policy

In order for us to achieve a sustainable societal development in Sweden, we also need to fight for a sustainable societal development globally. We also need to ensure that we meet the Paris Agreement. An important piece of the puzzle in this is our trade with other countries. We need to ensure that we have a fair trade that takes into account the environment, the climate transition, and social sustainability.

For us in Miljöpartiet, it is completely central that trade ensures sustainable development and contributes proactively to such, to strengthened human rights and to the climate transition.

Against this background, I move for the approval of reservation 25 and deeply regret that the government's actions on several points lead us in the opposite direction.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 23.)

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