Food policy

Joanna Lewerentz (M)

Madam Speaker! Swedish-produced food products have many advantages. They are characterized by good animal health, low antibiotic use, restrictive use of pesticides to protect nature and human health, and sustainable food production with low emissions compared to the world average. The Swedish food industry also creates jobs throughout the country and contributes to a vibrant countryside.

In these restless times with armed conflicts in our immediate vicinity, unpredictable world leaders and trade wars, the Swedish food industry fulfills another important task: to provide the population with food for the day in times of war or crisis.

Today, Sweden has a self-sufficiency rate of approximately 50 percent. For a long time, we have become increasingly dependent on imports to secure our supply – import of food but also of input goods such as fuels and mineral fertilizers.

In an uncertain world where climate change, pandemics, and geopolitical conflicts can disrupt trade and the availability of food, we must take greater responsibility for our own self-sufficiency. The importance of a robust and long-term food supply that strengthens Swedish production and makes us less vulnerable in times of crisis is more palpable now than it has been in a very long time.

Increased domestic food supply requires profitable and competitive farms and food companies. Today, Swedish farmers have significantly higher production costs than their European competitors, partly due to high diesel and electricity prices and complicated regulations. This causes profitability to deteriorate and fewer people want to invest in Swedish food production. We cannot have that.

We must facilitate for agriculture by reducing bureaucracy and creating better conditions for Swedish farmers to compete on equal terms. Our farmers take an enormous responsibility to produce and deliver food, natural values, biodiversity, and preparedness to Sweden. From a political standpoint, we must ensure that we facilitate for those who work day and night to put food on our tables.

With an increased focus on preparedness and with opportunities and incentives for farmers and entrepreneurs to grow, we can also kill two birds with one stone. We can achieve a more secure and robust food supply and lucrative growing companies that create jobs throughout Sweden.

If we were also to increase production to the extent that we can both put Swedish products on Swedish dining tables and simultaneously export more, Sweden could also contribute to more sustainably produced food being consumed in the world.

Madam Speaker! When we talk about food preparedness, we often focus on agriculture, but we must not forget the resources we have in our seas, lakes, and waterways. Sweden has a long coastline and large fishing waters, but today we import more fish and shellfish for consumption than we produce ourselves. As little as 5 percent of the Swedish-caught Baltic Sea fish becomes food. From a preparedness perspective, where a production chain is required that holds together all the way, this is far too little.

In order for us to maintain a fishing fleet that fishes so that food ends up on the plate, processing ports that receive the raw material and factories that produce and deliver finished products, fishing for human consumption needs to increase. Provided that the entire chain hangs together, fishing is the industry that can scale up the fastest in a crisis.

The Swedish fishing industry has, however, decreased sharply in recent decades. The number of Swedish professional fishers has halved since the 90s, and the extraction of fish has steadily decreased since the 80s. Perhaps the most important prerequisite for the blue industry to be able to provide part of the preparedness is that there is fish in the sea. There we have a job to do together, both at home and in the EU.

Another prerequisite for more fish to become food is that someone must want to eat the fish and that the demand for blue foods increases. Fish from the Baltic Sea, with decades of pollution in its wake, has at least a bad reputation. We have quite strict recommendations today for how much fish from the Baltic Sea is suitable to eat. There may be a point in looking at these and, for example, starting to weigh the health benefits of eating fish against the disadvantages that levels of unwanted substances entail.

Madam Speaker! The world at present does not look like it is becoming a safer place, and Sweden cannot continue to be as vulnerable as it is today. We must strengthen our food security by increasing production and better utilizing the resources we have, both on land and in the sea.

It is therefore pleasing that the government has initiated the work on the food strategy 2.0, which I know many are waiting for. It aims to strengthen the competitiveness and robustness of the food chain. It is also positive that the government has allocated funds specifically to strengthen food preparedness.

It is also important to mention the work on regulatory simplification that the government has begun. This aims, among other things, to make Swedish food production more competitive. An implementation council shall also be established, which shall ensure that directives from the EU are applied in a way that does not disadvantage Swedish companies and interests – something that has burdened Swedish agriculture for far too long.

We in the Moderates want to continue to see a policy that benefits Swedish farmers and Swedish food production, which reduces our import dependency and ensures that we have a secure and stable food supply in both times of peace and crisis.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.

(Applause)

(cont. § 16)

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