Regional development

Mats Green (M)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposed decision in this motion report.

Madam Speaker! Sweden's regions, municipalities, cities and localities all have different conditions and face different types of challenges. In large cities, the problems do not always manifest in the same way as they do for those of us who live in smaller communities in the countryside. The opportunities in the countryside, outside the metropolitan regions, are not the same as in the middle of the city bustle.

Here I know, Madam Speaker, that the Moderate-led government, together with our coalition partners, is moving forward with a policy that makes a real difference. Sweden is simply a large country. We shall take advantage of that and ensure that people can live, reside, work, and run businesses in all of Sweden.

We Moderates see the potential and the development opportunities for the Swedish countryside. It is here that good ideas and entrepreneurship grow. To reach this potential, however, a purposeful effort is required to remove obstacles and clarify the opportunities in the countryside. By making it easier to start and run businesses even in the countryside, we can create more opportunities for people to live, grow, and work in all of Sweden.

It needs to become easier for companies to operate in the countryside. Living and working outside major cities can involve great distances, not least for entrepreneurs. This is accompanied by high costs, for example in the form of high fuel costs. We can now gladly state that we can clearly see how our policy makes a difference on the ground at gas stations all over the country. Thanks to the moderately-led government's tax cuts on fuels and the reduction of the counterproductive reduction obligation, we now have the lowest fuel prices in several years in Sweden. This plays a particularly large role for entrepreneurs primarily in northern Sweden, where the distances between communities are tens of miles long.

What northern Sweden has, in addition to these long distances but which a large part of Sweden does not have many of, are mines, even though we also have some mines in southern Sweden, hopefully more within a few years. The mining industry supplies both Sweden and other countries with metals and minerals, in particular the minerals that are needed to meet the climate challenge.

Mines and minerals have been part of our country as long as Sweden has existed. For over a thousand years, we Swedes have engaged in mining. Sweden's oldest mine in operation, the Garpenberg mine outside Hedemora, was mentioned in text already 800 years ago. During these centuries, the ore and minerals have been refined in our industry and created prosperity for generations of Swedes.

The mining industry still forms the base of our industrial nation and constitutes the first link in a long processing chain that ends in all the fantastic products we live with today. Our thousand-year tradition of mining does not only contribute ore and refined steel. It has also created the world's most prominent technology companies within ore mining. Swedish companies are estimated to account for 60 percent of the world market when it comes to underground technology.

A new mineral strategy is currently being worked on at the Government Offices. Investigations to shorten the permit processes have been initiated. Furthermore, the mineral and mining industry shall be promoted in a large-scale manner. It is not a day too early. Above all, the mining industry also means that one brings strong regional growth and also a number of jobs outside the major cities, something that one can sometimes feel is lacking in the Swedish debate, especially when it concerns the mining and mineral industry.

Madam Speaker! With rapid steps, we are moving away from the previous government's bureaucrat policy and towards a business-promoting line that can build a prosperous Sweden for the future. Many things and matters went in the wrong direction during the eight years when the Socialdemokraterna and Miljöpartiet ruled the country. Sweden's position as an attractive mining nation was no exception. Year after year, we were in the leading group, but with constant demands for increased bureaucracy from the social democratic government, it went downhill quickly. In the international mining ranking, Sweden was in 8th place in the entire world under the Moderate-led Alliance government. After the Socialdemokraterna and Miljöpartiet took over government responsibility in 2014, Sweden plummeted from 8th place to 36th place in the world. I repeat: 36th place!

It has been a gloomy period, an unacceptable and unsustainable period, but we can now see a light at the end of the tunnel. With a forward-looking government, led by the Moderaterna, we will strengthen our position as one of the world's leading mining nations. I could stand here and completely exceed my allotted speaking time by going through everything that is now being done and will be done to strengthen the Swedish mining industry, but I do not intend to do that.

Madam Speaker! A type of business that is often found in the countryside but has long been opposed are microbreweries, cideries, vineyards, and distilleries. More and more such companies are being established in Sweden, which is unequivocally positive. A major problem for these companies, however, is that they are not allowed to sell their produced goods on-site, because farm sales are not yet permitted in Sweden. A regulatory framework that enables farm sales of alcohol – for the sake of the companies but also for the countryside, not to mention our Swedish food and drink traditions – is of great importance and is something that is currently being handled in the government. It is a task that I assume will lead to a liberal and countryside-promoting proposal without political finger-wagging.

Madam Speaker! We Moderates look with confidence toward the future for all of Sweden, from our vibrant cities to the endless opportunities of the countryside. We believe in the power of every individual community and every individual, regardless of where one lives. Through a policy that encourages entrepreneurship, strengthens regional growth, and unleashes the potential of our mines, microbreweries, and all other businesses, we build a future where all of Sweden grows.

Together we tear down barriers, lower thresholds, and build a foundation for a strong, free, and flourishing country. Let us continue to work purposefully to strengthen Sweden as a place where people, companies, and ideas can thrive - from north to south, from coast to coast. We cannot afford anything less, Madam Speaker.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Was Mats Green surprised that I requested a reply?

When I listen to Mats Green's speech, I think it is good that the Moderaterna are clear about how they view the issues of regional development. It highlights the differences in Swedish politics. At the same time, I become deeply concerned.

The Moderates are speaking here about rural areas and above all northern Sweden and are reducing the great challenges we have today to being about fuel prices. The solution they want to focus on moving forward is to exploit northern Sweden for the mining industry.

In northern Sweden and in all parts of Sweden's rural areas and countryside, there is a great variation of business life. It is startups, actors, community life, people who work within welfare, in civil society, in small companies, in large companies and in heavy industry. There are several challenges that the actors share.

It is the need for there to be a strong presence of society. There must be labor, competence, that one can recruit. There must be a good welfare with school, healthcare and care so that there is a security to move to the place, build one's future and take these jobs. Within all those challenges, the Moderaterna have no answers. Instead, they have made several reforms that worsen the situation.

No, I see no business-promoting for the whole of Sweden in the Moderaternas policy. I see a policy that risks impoverishing large parts of our country through a more exploitative view of our countryside and rural areas. It worries me.

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

Mats Green (M)

Madam Speaker! There is talk of a development perspective. If one has the view that the Green Party has, that everything outside Stockholm should be like a large Skansen that is just to be, without us being able to grow, develop, have growth, jobs, and tax revenues there, perhaps one sees it in the way I said it.

Then I am positively surprised that Elin Söderberg requested a relic on my speech. I had hoped it was the good Småland colleague Monica Haider who had done it, but we can have that discussion another time.

Madam Speaker! Every time Miljöpartiet is to speak about the countryside, it is a bit like putting an atheist in the bishop's chair. It does not go particularly well, because one cannot and one does not want to.

It is clear that high fuel prices hit extremely hard and hardest against the part of Sweden that Elin Söderberg herself represents, Norrland and in her case Västerbotten. It is clear that it is there it hits hardest. It is also they who have the most to gain from us lowering fuel prices and from us having abolished the counterproductive and environmentally harmful reduction obligation.

That we want to invest in the mining industry, does Elin Söderberg see that as a great insult to Norrland? It is that which builds not only Norrland's future but all of Sweden's future. That is, in essence, something positive.

Does Elin Söderberg think it was positive that Sweden, during your time in government, went from eighth place in the international mining ranking to 36th place? Is that something positive in the Green Party's world?

Madam Speaker! Once again: A prerequisite for the green transition that the Green Party says it wants to have is precisely the mining activity and the metals that Sweden and in particular Norrland have plenty of. To say no to mining activity is to say no to green transition. That is how it is, Madam Speaker.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! When we in Miljöpartiet were in government, we laid the foundation for the green industrial revolution we are now seeing in Sweden. It led to a strong societal development across the entire country and a huge number of jobs, not least in northern Sweden.

But we also see large investments on the West Coast, Gotland and so on, which could mean that we in Sweden transition our entire heavy industry. It strengthens Swedish competitiveness and contributes to a strong social development in the whole country.

It is a business policy that we in Miljöpartiet pursued in government and that we would like to continue to pursue. We also worked strongly so that we can strengthen service nodes in smaller localities so that society is present for all people in the entire country.

What concerns me is that the measures the government has implemented significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions, impair the business sector's ability to quickly continue working towards the green transition, and jeopardize all the business opportunities and opportunities for strengthened competitiveness that it provides.

At the same time, one locks people who are dependent on the car into fossil dependency. One locks people and companies into a dependency on fossil fuels where one risks having very volatile oil prices in the future.

It is not the Swedish government that controls the world market price of oil. However, the Swedish government could create the conditions for everyone in the entire country to have fossil-free, available, good and sustainable transport for both freight and passenger traffic.

But that is not the government's focus. Therefore, it creates greater concern for the business community regarding what the price development will look like going forward with the government's policy than if there had been a clear goal to create the conditions for fossil-free transport throughout the country.

What we in Miljöpartiet advocate for is a green transition that is precisely green and environmentally and socially sustainable. Then we can also promote the development of the entire country and rural areas.

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

Mats Green (M)

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet said no to in principle all new initiatives on Gotland, if we are to comment on what the member himself raised. It said no to everything there.

It was by no means favoring the green transition in Sweden to crash the world's best-functioning power system, so that one had to run the oil-fired Karlshamn plant at full capacity in Sweden. One surely burned more oil during Miljöpartiet's hopefully final two years ever in government than one has done during the combined 20 years before that. It was the result of Miljöpartiet's energy policy and industrial policy.

When it comes to lowered fuel prices, it is clear that the government's tax cuts on fuels and the reduction of the environmentally harmful reduction obligation have meant that it has become significantly easier and cheaper to drive a car in Sweden, something that has particularly benefited those who do not have a public transport system to turn to.

We can speak about Elin Söderberg's constituency. There, for very natural reasons, there is limited public transport. One is entirely dependent on the car there. Västerbotten would not be helped by raising fuel prices again, by raising electricity prices again, and by continuing to make it difficult for Sweden's basic industry, that is, the mining industry. It does not benefit Sweden, growth, and above all, not the green transition.

I want to ask a question, which becomes rhetorical as my opponent's speaking time has ended. What does Miljöpartiet want to do to facilitate for more mines in Sweden as a whole? We can have that debate another time.

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

Monica Haider (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the motion report NU12 Regional development. I wish to move for approval of reservation 1.

Public service is important for the countryside. The parliamentary rural committee noted that government jobs had moved back to the large cities for quite a long time. The Social Democrats then began a relocation of state jobs back out into the country.

What we are seeing now is that it has completely stalled with this government. Regarding the location of the new payment authority, the Social Democratic government had decided that it should be placed in Södertälje. The SD government changed that. It was decided that it should be located in Stockholm, and now the Payment Authority is located in Hammarby sjöstad and still in a large city.

A total of over 2,000 jobs were moved out of the country during the last two parliamentary terms. It is important to have a state presence in cities, in suburbs, and in rural areas. It is important that agency officials have different perspectives in their work. Sweden looks different depending on where you are. It is also important that qualified jobs exist in our entire elongated country.

What the Social Democrats did was obviously not enough; more needs to be done. Therefore, it is extra unfortunate that the sitting government is saving and stopping the establishment of new service offices. We need more offices, not fewer. We Social Democrats want to open more offices. We want to follow the plan that was laid out during our time in government. In our budget motion this autumn, we therefore added 20 million more to this.

We can also see that the savings on our various agencies will affect regional development. This applies to county administrative boards, Försäkringskassan, Arbetsförmedlingen, Skatteverket, among others. State jobs will disappear across the country due to the savings on these agencies. At Skatteverket in Växjö, 19 jobs will disappear. In Jönköping, 10 jobs disappear, and in Sollefteå, 7 disappear. An additional 64 jobs disappear in various places across Sweden. Everyone who is now being laid off has worked to prevent fraud in the population registry. One might think that this clashes quite poorly with the profile that the sitting government is trying to have. Regional development policy applies to the entire political field, and what is done in budgets affects regional development.

Madam Speaker! Both public and commercial services shall be available throughout the entire country. The support for grocery stores introduced by the previous government has slowed the death of rural trade. Everyone shall have a reasonable distance to be able to buy food or pick up pharmacy items, regardless of whether one lives in sparsely populated areas, in the countryside or in a city. In recent years, we have seen that the support for the grocery trade has been eroded given the cost increases that have occurred. The operating support therefore needs to be increased, and the state has a responsibility to ensure that there is good service to the citizens in the entire country.

We Social Democrats also consider that vehicle inspections need to be made accessible in larger parts of the country, and we want the authorization to sell Svensk Bilprovning AB to be revoked. One should not have to travel 25-30 miles to have the car inspected.

Madam Speaker! The policy we advocate aims for all of Sweden to live and grow and for the developmental power that exists across the country to be strengthened and utilized. The gaps between people and between city and countryside shall be reduced. To meet our time's societal challenges, every region must be given the opportunity to develop based on its unique conditions.

In order for Sweden to be able to lead the green industrial revolution and create the tens of thousands of new jobs, we Social Democrats believe that regional development policy needs to be in harmony with many other policy areas. Not least, a functioning labor and skills supply is an important part of a powerful regional growth policy. We want to take a shared responsibility for Sweden.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by, for the Christian Democrats, to move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and for the rejection of all motions regarding regional development.

The primary task of regional development policy is to contribute to the development of viable regions throughout our country. Viable regions are built when people cooperate locally with strength and will from a bottom-up perspective. Enthusiasts who burn for an idea can mean a great deal for a locality's development.

The general efforts at the national level for jobs, education, infrastructure, and an improved business climate need to be combined with regional growth efforts. We Kristdemokrater want to see opportunities for growth in all parts of the country, where regional advantages shall be taken advantage of. Country and city are not opposites but complement each other and make Sweden a better country.

Madam Speaker! Sweden faces major investment needs. Much of the basic infrastructure is increasingly approaching its technical lifespan, and great resources are required to maintain it all. I am thinking of roads and railways, I am thinking of sewers and I am thinking of the power grid. But I am also thinking of housing and a functioning welfare state. We cannot be satisfied with maintaining; we must also gather strength to build new and scale up.

Madam Speaker! The social construction that Sweden is now undergoing is something we welcome. The state shall not step in and take over the responsibility from municipalities and regions or from the private sector, but here, from the state level, there is a will and readiness to play a role in this important social construction.

In a time when efficiency and innovation are at the center of every successful economy, we need even more to break down the barriers between different sectors and levels and create a dynamic network of cooperation that extends from our local communities to the global arena. Every region should not only be an administrative unit but a powerhouse for innovation and growth.

We want to see government agencies that do not only carry out their tasks but also actively support and adapt their operations to realize the regional ambitions. This can happen through cooperation, strategic planning, and an unwavering belief that our regions' potential leads the way.

Madam Speaker! We must ensure that the resources allocated for regional development are used in a way that maximizes benefit for both current and future generations. Through relevant indicators and clear impact goals, which a clear and distinct governance can provide, and as well as through cooperation between the state, regions, and local actors, we can create a more dynamic and competitive economy.

Furthermore, the cooperation with the business community and civil society should not be underestimated. An important component for achieving success in regional development is coordination between different government agencies as well as between agencies and local actors.

Real cooperation is required – not just on paper, Madam Speaker, but in practice. This means open dialogues and collaborations where municipalities and regions are given the space to shape their own future in consultation with the business community and civil society. Their participation is crucial to creating a vibrant and innovative regional development, where both private and public sectors also work hand in hand to drive successful regional initiatives.

Madam Speaker! By setting clear goals and following strategic guidelines, we can ensure that Sweden not only grows economically but also becomes a more just and inclusive nation. To truly ensure efficiency, more than just broad measures are required. We Kristdemokrater therefore emphasize the importance of targeted and cost-effective strategies that reflect local needs and conditions.

We Christian Democrats strongly support increased cooperation between the public and private sectors, where innovation and entrepreneurship are encouraged and allowed to flourish.

Madam Speaker! With the right tools and the right attitude, we can make regional development a motor for growth and renewal in our entire country.

With that, I would once again move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and for the rejection of all motions.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin my speech in this debate on regional development by moving for the approval of reservation 2, which concerns letting an evaluation be conducted on whether the regional development work has benefited from moving it from the county administrative boards to the regions, or if there is reason to review the current distribution of responsibilities. There are, in fact, those who firmly assert this, and therefore it would be wise to see if the change in the distribution of responsibilities that was implemented a few years ago has actually borne fruit or if there is reason to make changes to move the work forward.

Regional development is a broad policy area that corresponds to a rather narrow expenditure area in the state budget. This does not mean that regional development is in any way unimportant, but rather concerns the fact that the opportunities for regional development depend on so much other policy that does not specifically belong to this policy area.

In debates about regional development, it is as is known spoken of that all of Sweden shall live. After the debate, however, it is as if this completely falls into oblivion for some parties' members, whereupon they go home and in the chamber tinker with proposals on aviation taxes, worsened travel deductions, increased fuel prices and a lot of other things that are destructive for people and companies outside the metropolitan areas. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I want to say that it is with pride that I stand here today and take a small look back.

A little over a year ago, a liter of diesel cost 28 kronor - 28 kronor! At times, we had the world's highest fuel prices, and people and companies experienced massive cost increases as a result of increased transport and energy prices. People and companies began to go to their knees. We promised to lower fuel prices at the pump, and I want to remember that it was during last year's debate on regional development that I was heckled because we had not yet driven down the prices. At the turn of the year, the reduction obligation was lowered, and we saw how fuel prices fell by approximately 10 kronor per liter - just as promised. At home in my constituency, several gas stations were emptied of diesel by hoarding motorists who hardly seemed to believe that the change was for real.

Not only that. We also sent the proposal for a new travel deduction where it belonged, in the wastebasket, and instead increased the levels of the existing travel deduction.

I mean that these were two individually very important reforms, if one takes the conditions for housing and entrepreneurship outside the Stockholm city limits seriously. We simply fulfilled election promises that made a difference in people's everyday lives.

Speaking of election promises, Madam Speaker: One of my political talking points is that out in the country there are masses of energetic people and innovative companies that can contribute to the development of their own village and region in many ways – provided they are given the right conditions. Right conditions involve a lot, but an important factor in this context is that the permit processes surrounding different types of business activities are reasonable and predictable. Therefore, we are working together with the government relentlessly and very purposefully to simplify these processes. A number of proposals are underway that should have a very positive impact on business activity out in the country.

Not enough with that. We are also launching a regulatory simplification council to reduce the burden for all business activities, which should create better conditions for growth regardless of where in the country one is located. That is the fact: An overly burdensome regulatory framework is what can deter ordinary people from giving outlet to their entrepreneurial spirit. A next step in the process will be that we gradually establish an implementation council that shall act as a kind of guarantee against over-implementation of various regulatory frameworks.

In addition to pure regulatory simplifications, there are industries that we believe are in need of entirely new rules and opportunities to create better conditions for regional development. The tourism industry is one such industry, not least. Here we have already begun to remove obsolete legislation, but we want to go further than that.

We are determined that farm sales shall be implemented and that it is important for both our tourism industry as well as our vineyards, breweries, and distilleries. We will do everything in our power to ensure that this becomes a reality during the current parliamentary term, and I perceive that there is a parliamentary majority for it. This shall, of course, be implemented in a way that does not threaten Systembolaget's position, as Systembolaget actually constitutes the other side of the coin if we are talking about regional development. Systembolaget is in many ways a guarantee that there is a good supply of alcoholic beverages throughout the country. Systembolaget thus constitutes a part of the commercial service which also belongs to the regional development policy.

Commercial services in the countryside are often the hub of a community. The general store or the gas station that acts as an agent for Apoteket, Svenska Spel, and Postnord, to name a few actors, is incredibly important to protect. This is currently happening with the help of various supports, and here we mean that it would be valuable to have an evaluation of whether these supports are always correctly designed, whether the levels are correct, and whether they hit the mark so that we, from the political side, get what we actually want for the money.

Madam Speaker! We live in a new reality and a new security policy context. Russia's violation of international law in the war in Ukraine led to Sweden seeking membership in Nato, and with our membership in Nato, new requirements are placed on us regarding both defense capability and infrastructure. It will cost money but also has a great potential to create a win-win.

In many places in our elongated country, the maintenance of our common road and railway infrastructure has been neglected for decades. An upgrade and modernization of the same creates completely different conditions for our business sector to operate in the whole country but can also come to shorten travel times for ordinary people in a way that makes more places attractive to live in.

This, however, presupposes another thing: that it is possible to live, have a meaningful leisure time, and run businesses in the entire country on equal terms, from Smygehuk in the south to Treriksröset in the north. We do, however, see how the possibilities for this are limited in large parts of the country as a concession to a single industry: reindeer husbandry. A parliamentary inquiry is currently underway on this. I will not anticipate its findings in substance, but in a debate on regional development, it must nevertheless be emphasized that if development is to be possible in all the country's regions, residency and business activities must be able to take place on equal terms throughout the country.

Land use conflicts are nothing new. That different interests stand against each other is a fact that must be handled with care and in a way that benefits the nation in the short and long term. Historically committed injustices are simply not undone by committing new ones. If one tries to look at it a bit objectively, it becomes completely absurd when the country's largest municipality by area, Kiruna, does not have disposal of more than approximately 1 percent of the municipality's own area.

The regulations surrounding the cultivation limit and the reindeer grazing land must be able to be reviewed and adapted to the reality of the 2000s. It must not be a taboo. One business's interests cannot consistently override the entire society's possibility for development. Regardless of whether one lives in Kiruna or Trelleborg, as a citizen, one should be covered by the same right of public access and have the same right to an active lifestyle. In Sweden, we are all equal before the law.

Last but not least, Madam Speaker, I see to my delight in the report that more and more parties are beginning to have thoughts on the redistribution of production values to the municipalities and regions in which they are created. I believe that this is absolutely necessary if we want people out in the country who get a mine, an industry, or a nuclear power plant in their vicinity to feel that it actually also benefits them and does not just constitute an intrusion into their local environment.

There must be a clearer connection between the living conditions of the local population and industrial interventions in the environment than what is the case today. I believe in the model that the Sverigedemokraterna propose should be investigated, namely a regionalization of the property tax for industrial properties and power production facilities. It is my conviction that sooner or later we must end up in a model that, in a clearer and more just way than today, returns money from power production and industry to where it is produced. I would warmly welcome if an investigation into this were commissioned as a first step in that direction.

Madam Speaker! In this type of debate, I usually focus very much on the mining industry. Mats Green said pretty much what I am thinking and likes the mining industry, so it was good that I focused on something else.

(Applause)

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! When energy prices soared as a result of the covid pandemic and Putin's horrific invasion of Ukraine, different parties began to review how we should handle the skyrocketing energy prices. For us in Miljöpartiet, it was obvious with a good distribution policy. With the right solution in the right place, we ensure that those who have the smallest economic margins are protected the most. The climate work must continue, because if we back down on climate policy, we will all be affected by the worsened climate-related risks that it entails. This involves costs, both economic and others.

The Sweden Democrats, in their speech, instead highlight a pride in having lowered the aviation tax and the tax on fossil fuels and abolished the reduction obligation. The consequences of that are that Sweden is now on track to not reach a single one of our climate goals - not our national goals which we here in the Riksdag have decided on together, and not even the goals we are bound by within the framework of what we have decided on together in the EU. This also involves costs in the form of worsened climate-related risks, a higher risk that the Paris Agreement is not met, and also costs in the form of risk of fines or high costs for having to buy emission space from other countries.

The measures that the Sweden Democrats, together with the government, implemented to handle the high energy prices also resulted in a completely inverted distribution policy with most resources to those who already have the most and least to those who lack resources. There are reasons why the Sweden Democrats did not mention, for example, public transport with a single word in the statement.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I was waiting to be asked a question, which is customary when someone requests the floor. However, I received no question, so I intended to take hold of a few points that Member Söderberg put forward.

The Green Party blames COVID and Putin. One does not feel at all [responsible] that one decommissioned six of twelve reactors and thereby decommissioned one of the most stable energy systems in the world and made it fragile and vulnerable. We see that several other countries in Europe where the Green Party's friends have applied the green policy have made themselves dependent on Russian gas and the like. Whose errands is one running?

If Miljöpartiet had not been involved and fiddled with the energy policy, we would have had the conditions to not be so vulnerable in that situation, but instead we were extremely vulnerable. And then people blame Putin. I actually think it is astonishing.

People talk about the lowered fuel prices as if it were a huge problem. It is some kind of reverse Khmer Rouge policy from the Green Party's side: Everyone should move into the cities. Member Söderberg shakes his head, but that is how it is. If high fuel prices mean that people cannot afford to transport themselves, the consequence is that people cannot take the jobs that exist within commuting distance, because the commuting distance decreases. Then people move to the cities.

I think it is bad and truly rural-hostile policy. It is visible, not least in the support for Elin Söderberg's party in the countryside in Sweden.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! The nuclear reactors were shut down for a period when electricity production was significantly expanded as a result of the Green Party's policy. It was a policy that led to us having the EU's lowest electricity prices and an increased electricity production, this in contrast to before the Green Party sat in government when Sweden imported German coal power.

The Green Party was not in the German government when Germany's Energiewende was implemented. The Greens in Germany, as well as here in Sweden, are clear that we do not want to import any more fossil gas from Russia, while the Swedish government fails extremely when it comes to stopping the import of fossil gas from Russia.

Instead, the Tidö parties have included fossil gas in the taxonomy within the EU. For us, it is obvious that we should rid ourselves of fossil gas and all fossil energy as quickly as possible, both for climate policy reasons and for security and geopolitical reasons. In view of the fact that the Sverigedemokraterna are conducting a policy that increases fossil dependence in Sweden, the dependence on rogue states also increases. There are therefore both security policy and climate-related risks linked to this policy.

When it comes to the conditions for mobility throughout the country, it is obvious to me as an MP for the Green Party that people should have the conditions to live and work in the entire country. People should be able to develop and work with what they want in the place where they want to work. This requires that we have the right solution in the right place. It requires that the railway traffic is expanded and that we get better conditions for motoring where that is the only alternative.

It requires that we transition to fossil-free as quickly as possible, and it is a policy that we have pushed for in order to enable this. Instead, the Sweden Democrats are now locking the population into fossil dependency. I take that seriously.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! If we start with the cars, under the rule of the Miljöparti and the Socialdemokrater, there was a bonus-malus system that made the new sales and new registrations of very expensive electric cars – around 800,000-900,000 kronor and upwards – take off in Stockholm. To the people in the countryside, who often had completely different transport needs, no electric cars were sold. They were involved in subsidizing luxury cars in Stockholm. It was a tax shift from the countryside to the city.

I think it is very bad policy, because in the countryside, the conditions do not exist to drive very expensive electric cars with relatively low range and low towing capacity. There is no charging infrastructure like in Stockholm and so on. Decisions are made without anyone actually considering the living conditions out in the country.

The conditions are completely different if you live in Arjeplog, Dorotea, Vilhelmina, or wherever you live. It is 35 degrees cold and sparse between charging stations. You might have a cottage far out in the country and a snowmobile trailer, horse trailer, or similar. Those cars cost somewhere between 800,000 and 900,000 kronor and still do not fulfill the entire family's transport needs.

You beat your chests and think that you have done something good. You cheer for the so-called transition to these cars and speak of them as if they were everyone's property. But this is not everyone's property, above all not out in the countryside.

I do not understand the rhetoric surrounding this. It is not a problem that we lower fuel prices and make it bearable for people and companies in the countryside. I cannot understand how one can see that as a problem.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Madam Speaker! I thank Eric Palmqvist for the speech.

I will stick to the reduction obligation. Eric Palmqvist proudly states that it turned out exactly as you promised, 10 kronor cheaper.

Now I am so curious that I am trembling. Tell me now how you managed to get the world market price to go down by 7 kronor. Tell me because it is a mystery. Perhaps the troll factories fix it; I don't know. The diesel became 4 kronor cheaper when the reduction obligation disappeared, and the gasoline became 1 krona cheaper. That is a fact.

Eric Palmqvist tells how proud he is when it is exactly as they have promised, namely 10 kronor cheaper. Tell how it is with the world market price. I live near the border to Finland, and now we have approximately the same price as Finland. There it is 7 kronor cheaper.

Tell us how you get the world market price to go down.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Birger Lahti for the question.

It is a bit strange that the world market dances to the Sweden Democrats' terms and that the world market price was lowered so deliberately during the night between December 31 and January 1!

From December 31 to January 1, a night and a few minutes' difference, the price was lowered by 10 kronor at the pump. I can guarantee Member Lahti that it was not the world market prices that caused the price to take a jump downwards of 10 kronor at 12:00 at night. It was not the case that the world market price took a ten-kronor jump exactly that night.

I would instead like to ask Member Lahti what he thinks – now it is a matter of faith, not knowledge – a liter of diesel would have cost today with S-V-MP in power. I think it would be a pleasant piece of information for the country's voters.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Madam Speaker! I thank Eric Palmqvist for his attempt at an answer.

I told where I live, and I use so much diesel that many come in second place. I have a distance of six and a half miles just to buy a liter of milk.

The diesel price went down by 4 kronor that night - not 10 kronor. I do not know when Eric Palmqvist refueled last. The price went down 4 kronor. The gasoline price went down 1 krona that night, not 10.

Just as Palmqvist told, the diesel today is approximately 10 kronor cheaper than when it was at its most expensive. But it is not because of the reduction obligation that the price is 10 kronor cheaper. The world market price has gone down by 7 kronor from when it was at its most expensive.

I told that I sometimes think of Finland. It is not the case that it is much cheaper here than in Finland. We have roughly the same prices. Just as Eric Palmqvist suggested; if the reduction obligation were removed, the diesel would be approximately 4 kronor more expensive. But to boast that it is 10 kronor cheaper thanks to the policy is not correct.

Somewhere there must be an honesty when we talk politics in the chamber.

I thank Eric Palmqvist for the exchange of remarks.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! Member Lahti is right about one thing, namely that it was not 10 kronor that night. It was 10 kronor from when we said we would lower the price by 10 kronor. It was when the price was up at the absolute ceiling of 28 kronor. We said that if the reduction obligation is removed, together with lowered VAT, several measures together, it will be approximately 10 kronor at the pump. That is what we see today. What we have not received an answer to today is what the fuel prices would have been today if S, V and MP had been in power.

There is a significant discrepancy, namely that we have done everything within our power to lower the prices of fuels to make it easier for people in rural areas to use cars. They are the ones who rarely have an alternative.

If there had not been a change of government, we would have seen continued indexations and continued increases in fuel prices, probably also an increase in the reduction obligation so that it would have become even more expensive, together with a worsened travel deduction. The proposal for the travel deduction that came from the previous government would have been a catastrophe for many of those who live in the countryside and have long travel distances. It was completely senseless.

No matter how you turn it, an S-V-MP government would have been extremely harmful for people in rural areas. It would have been very destructive. The closed railway line showed that. People were furious about the high fuel prices, which probably—I say probably because we do not have answers—would have become even much higher if it had not been for a change of government.

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin by stating once again that regional development is based on roughly the same things as urban development or development in general, that is to say that companies need access to skilled employees, to infrastructure and to electricity at affordable prices. There is therefore no structural difference in the development between different places in this country. It is clear that regardless of where you are or which companies you visit, there are recurring problems that we in politics need to address.

One example is what we see with the supply of skills. There are huge problems throughout Sweden with finding skilled employees who can go to companies that are in need of their competence. If the trained workforce with that competence does not exist, companies risk having to shut down operations, move them abroad, or altogether not start. It is a risk we see with many companies in the northern parts of the country.

Politics naturally cannot solve all these problems, but we know that in order to secure the supply of competence in the long term, there must be adult education, colleges and universities of high quality and breadth. I would like to put in an extra effort for the university college, which has an important task to fulfill. It is an efficient form of education linked to the regional labor market. Here, the local folk high schools are making important and large contributions.

In the same way, we also see that Swedish companies, regardless of where in the country they operate, are hit hard by the weak krona. It is expensive to be Swedish, and this naturally also applies to Swedish entrepreneurs. As the only party, the Liberals want to introduce the euro in Sweden, and there are several reasons for this, one of the more important of which is the significance the euro would have had for Swedish companies and the Swedish business sector.

If one wants to highlight something special about regional development, it is that the tourism industry in many cases constitutes a large part of the local economy. Sweden is an attractive country to visit. We have both natural and cultural environments that many want to travel to. That we continue to care for and take care of our cultural heritage is important. The potential for tourism is enormous. In the same way, we must therefore take care of our Swedish nature.

Storm Babet, which moved in over the southern parts of the country in the autumn, had major consequences, primarily along the coastal stretches. In towns such as Beddingestrand, Smygehamn, Ystad and Simrishamn, there were many property owners who saw plots and sometimes even houses washed out into the sea. This indicates that we need a more active coastal protection in the country than what has existed so far. We have much to learn from countries like Denmark and Holland and how they work with, for example, beach nourishment to secure the coastal strips.

Madam Speaker! If we continue to look at the tourism industry, we can see that for a time it has been one of Sweden's fastest-growing industries. The pandemic had major consequences, but it has recovered. Often, the companies are smaller family businesses with a strong connection to the local area. The companies must be given good conditions to run and develop their business. Many positive examples can be found. I have previously pointed towards Halland, where both hotels and restaurants have made the region a gastronomic destination. This means an enormous upswing for the entire region with an influx of visitors, not only from Sweden but also across national borders.

In Skåne, we have seen a similar development with increasing tourism primarily from our western neighbor. Here, the traditionally food-producing region has succeeded very well in creating a tourist destination with a focus on food and drink.

I raise this because it shows how important the bill that the government is currently working on regarding farm sales of alcoholic beverages is. Allowing small-scale, artisanal farm sales of wine and beer will mean a great deal for regional development and for Sweden to be able to continue positioning itself as an attractive food and drink region.

From the Liberals' side, we want to go further and also allow wine and beer to be sold in license stores. This would provide great opportunities for Swedish beverage production while we continue to have a safe and responsible sale of alcoholic beverages.

I hereby move for approval of the Committee on Industry's opinion under expenditure area 12 Regional development.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Madam Speaker! The Committee proposes that the Riksdag reject all motions regarding regional development, among others with reference to ongoing work.

Ongoing work? Without being sarcastic: ongoing work.

I have followed and truly felt how this ongoing work has drained the countryside for decades, actually regardless of the color of the governments. I really must restrain myself, Madam Speaker, so as not to say anything that could be perceived as bad behavior in the rostrum.

Well, so that is how it stands in the law, at least, regarding how the responsibility is distributed.

When it comes to regional development work, it appears from the law that a region shall

develop and establish a strategy for the county's development and coordinate efforts for the implementation of the strategy

establish goals and priorities for the regional skills supply work and provide assessments of the county's skills needs within the public and private sectors in the short and long term

decide on the use of certain state funds for regional development work

follow up, have it evaluated and annually report the results of the regional development work to the government.

A region may also perform tasks within the framework of the EU's structural fund programs. Furthermore, a region shall cooperate with the county's municipalities, the county administrative board and other relevant state authorities, as well as consult with representatives of relevant organizations and the business community in the county.

That sounds good.

The following is stated in the preamble: "In the budget bill for 2024, expenditure area 19 Regional development, the government presents that the conditions for living, working and residing in the entire country shall be strengthened in order to achieve the goal of the regional development policy. The development power in cities, urban areas and rural areas as well as in the countryside shall be strengthened and the business sector shall be given good conditions to strengthen competitiveness, create jobs and contribute to green innovations and to the transition to a sustainable development. The government emphasizes that it is significant to have good access to commercial and public services, financial capital, culture, healthcare, education and competence. Furthermore, there is a need for increased integration, increased housing construction, a developed competence supply and a strong welfare in the entire country. Additionally, accessibility in the entire country through digital communication and the transport system is fundamental for regional development. The government also states that the expansion and maintenance of socially important infrastructure is important to ensure good accessibility and that a stable energy system with competitive prices is needed in all of Sweden."

Here I could say that I was thirsty when I woke up, for what I said must be a dream.

Just take the Malmbanan! Has it been prioritized regarding infrastructure? Again, Madam Speaker: Regardless of the color of the governments, the infrastructure funds have been directed to projects where there are many voters that one wants to curry favor with. The ore and the heavy industry do not have the right to vote.

How does the state treat the countryside, which we have all talked about so much? I want to assert that I live in the most sparsely populated countryside that exists. I will only take a few examples; there are plenty more. Some have mentioned vehicle testing and such things. The police stations are becoming fewer and the opening hours accordingly. The road maintenance becomes worse and worse despite better equipment and technical development. Yes, everything that is financed collectively is withdrawn from the countryside and smaller towns.

Take, for example, this matter with Postnord! I simply cannot help but say it. They are closing their office in Övertorneå with five employees due to savings and efficiencies – while at the same time their CEO Annemarie Gardshol has a monthly salary of 899,000 kronor. Yes, you heard correctly: 899,000 kronor in monthly salary. We are talking about state-owned Postnord. Is that a saving? Is it good management of a socially important function such as the postal service? Does this example strengthen the view of the social contract and regional development?

Now I am going to say something that I actually do not want to say, because I think that the Moderaternas Mattias Karlsson is a good person.

On P4 Norrbotten on March 27, Moderate Mattias Karlsson criticizes the decision of Kiruna's Social Democratic municipal council to try to stop Talga's planned graphite mine in Vittangi. He says on P4 that Kiruna is a "banana republic" that "should be placed under forced administration." This is said by the Member of Parliament, who is also the Moderates' group leader from Luleå.

I take the liberty of making a small comparison between the Canary Islands and Kiruna.

The local population of the Canary Islands has begun to protest against mass tourism, which is their single largest source of income. They express clearly and distinctly that they are not against tourists. It is how society has changed and that the fruits of tourism end up far away from the local communities that are the cause of their frustration.

This could be compared to a lack of regional policy.

Every time a construction crane is erected, it is constructions for tourists that are being built, mostly by multinational hotel chains expanding their market share on the island. The construction of housing for the local population is conspicuously absent.

Then I ask myself: Is it strange that voices are raised in protest when the profits end up abroad and the own population can hardly afford to live anywhere?

So back to Kiruna, the discovery of graphite and Talgas plans for a graphite mine near Vittangi.

I have been on site twice and formed an opinion on how large the intervention in nature and the effects on other industries would be. My impression after those visits was that if one cannot open this mine, I believe it will become impossible to open a mine anywhere in Sweden.

When the municipal leadership in Kiruna announced that they opposed the establishment of a mine in Vittangi, this was my first gut feeling: "No, damn it! Why are they doing this?" I apologize for the language. I was surprised.

Just as the population of the Canary Islands is not against tourists, the people of Kiruna can hardly be against mines, for in Kiruna there is the world's largest underground mine. But with an awareness of the consequences, not only for nature but for the entire social fabric in Kiruna, I understand the municipal leadership's collective decision.

Today there are around 400 vacant jobs in Kiruna, and the number of job seekers in Kiruna is barely 100. Some are perhaps not so easy to place. What would 50 job opportunities at Talga then mean for Kiruna? Well, probably longer queues at the preschool and still understaffed healthcare and school. And LKAB is still screaming for people. Then one understands the Kiruna politicians' decisions.

As long as we do not have regional policy that provides added value to the municipalities and the citizens when they relinquish nature and the local environment to these initiatives, the population will act as in Kiruna.

A fair development would, of course, be that housing is built so that move-ins can occur in step with a normal societal expansion, which in turn would be the most natural when industry flourishes and seeks labor.

Madam Speaker! It is perfectly appropriate for me to move for the approval of our reservation 6 in the report. It concerns the fact that more of the values created out in the countryside and in rural areas – you can call the places whatever you like – should remain where they are extracted. Only then can we gain acceptance from municipalities such as Kiruna to say yes to mines, wind power, and other establishments that claim nature.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Madam Speaker! In Sweden, everyone should be able to live and realize their dreams, regardless of where they live. The Centre Party wants growth, jobs, security, and service in all of Sweden. This is something we have worked for for a long time, in fact, for more than 110 years, and continue to work for.

The most important asset in the work for a living countryside is the people who live there. It is therefore important that details in decisions are decided as close as possible to those affected. This is the core of the decentralization policy that Centerpartiet believes in.

It is also important that property rights remain strong. Savings, whether they concern forests, real estate, or assets in a bank account, and regardless of whether they are private or in companies, must be regarded as inviolable. That individual species of orchids or birds can threaten entire regions and cause land owned by families for generations to become completely worthless is unacceptable.

Madam Speaker! I am aware that the issue of property rights belongs in other committees and debates. But the question is of a fundamental, principled character and a prerequisite for what we are talking about today.

The questions more central to today's debate are those regarding a business climate that ensures that companies and jobs can be developed. Without these, there is neither a population base nor tax crowns for school, healthcare, and elderly care. A rich cultural and outdoor life often exists, built on equal parts enthusiasts and tourism.

Unfortunately, regional development policy often sounds like subsidy policy. It can, for example, involve subsidies to rural shops far from the main roads, compensation for transport so that processing can take place locally, or development grants to companies that want to develop and increase their production. But on that theme, it would be much better if subsidies were instead tax revenues.

About a month ago, I was back in Kiruna. Many people have talked about Kiruna today; there were several of us who were there. It is a municipality I often return to for both work, hiking, and skiing, at least when the season in Västjämtland is over. It became clear when we listened to the chairman of the municipal executive board that it is quite tough when the municipality grows but few pay tax there. According to their own calculation, in the autumn they lose 100 million kronor. In addition to the fact that those who work locally do not pay any tax, one also receives no revenue from the ore that is extracted.

Madam Speaker! Today, citizens in regions and municipalities with large-scale wind power or hydropower production or ore deposits primarily experience the negative effects of increased local production, while they to a lesser extent get to share in the benefits that an expansion entails. The Center Party believes that the values these natural resources create should, to a greater extent than today, remain locally. The simplest way to achieve this is to regionalize the property tax on electricity-producing properties. In this way, the values that these natural resources create can remain in the regions and municipalities where they are extracted.

Norway has had a system for compensation from hydropower for a very long time. Finland has compensation from local wind power. In Canada and the USA, states have found different variants of profit-sharing to ensure that locally one not only gets more jobs but also tax revenues.

This is an issue that the Center Party has championed for decades, and I was therefore very pleased to hear that even the CEO of Svenskt Näringsliv, in Ekots Saturday interview, said for the first time that it is important for the local acceptance of wind power that those who live nearby receive compensation.

For the Center Party, it is absolutely crucial that we methodically carry out the green transition and reach our goal of net-zero emissions in Sweden in just 20 years, and that all of Sweden can and wants to contribute to this goal. If the value from wind, water, and ore that is generated locally also stays locally, the need for redistributions decreases. It is with that pride that municipalities all over Sweden can and want to develop.

I therefore wish to move for approval of reservation 7 under point 3.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the speech, Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist! I became curious about one thing. I agree that several parties today have joined a line that aims for more of the values to remain - that is good. Regarding the tax base, I agree that it becomes very strange that Kiruna, which has contributed to the state treasury with over 100 billion over a ten-year period, still has the situation that the member describes.

The problem for Kiruna, for example, is that people are not building housing. I know that the Center Party differs greatly from the Left Party when it comes to the view on what the market will always solve. Is it market forces that will always be the sole deciding factor in solving the problems we face, now that we have a transformation in northern Sweden in the wake of the green transition? There is a lack of housing. It is not possible to move to Kiruna, because there is no housing.

How does the Center Party think this should be solved? In the Left Party, we are convinced that the state must step forward. The municipalities will not fix this. It is the same thing in my municipality. We have a mine establishment, but we lack people. Just telling people to move to our municipalities does not work – we have no housing. There is talk about market forces, but you can't even borrow money for it, if someone were to decide to do so. How does the Center Party view this? How do we get housing construction to move? You were very much for free rent setting in new production – everything is going in the wrong direction. What is the Center Party's solution? It would be interesting to hear.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Birger Lahti, for the question! Why it is not being built in rural areas is a very big issue. There are currently major problems with the fact that very many constructions are postponed. Amidst the great industrial growth we have, the interest rates are so high that many construction companies do not have the liquidity to start their constructions; instead, they let the constructions rest. This means that we must continue to have a responsible economic policy that drives growth so that interest rates are kept down. I believe that the small interest rate cut we saw today perhaps signifies hope for a new spring, but it will take a long time before we return to the favorable interest rate situation we had earlier.

The same problem as many of the Norrland municipalities with mines and those types of establishments also exists in tourism municipalities where one can build in certain areas of the municipality and the house is worth something. But as soon as one finds oneself perhaps five miles outside the town, one cannot build, because there is no bank that can provide. It is not even possible as a private individual to build a villa. There, the municipalities also have the problem that they are not allowed to build. This is not my area, but there is something in the conditions that is problematic and in some way must be reviewed. It cannot be that a residence is completely worthless seven miles from Åre while it is completely different two miles from Åre.

Whether it concerns market rents or not, it is difficult for the construction companies that are to enter those municipalities that have tried to do something about their housing construction to take all the risk when everything is to be new production. In those cases, the costs and rents become high, and they therefore choose not to establish themselves there. Some municipalities have thus made a kind of trade-off.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, member, for the answer! However, I did not receive an answer to my question on how the state's role is viewed. In the 1960s and 1970s, it was successful to build 1 million homes in Sweden. There were 70-percent state subsidies, and it was successful to build 1 million homes.

Today we see that the municipalities facing problems do not only consist of sparsely populated areas and rural areas. We are talking about Kiruna as a city that is not succeeding. There are obviously many other reasons - it is difficult to include national interests and to obtain land for construction - but there are also none who are prepared to take the risk. One knows that prices in the mining industry go up and down, and one does not know how society is affected.

But what is the state's role when it comes to getting housing construction started? We know how market forces work. It was the same when we had very low interest rates before 2019. Nothing was built in Kiruna then either. The only thing being built now is that LKAB is doing its part when they move the town.

How does the Centre Party view the state stepping forward and taking responsibility in a situation when it is needed? We are lacking human capital up there. It would require 80,000-100,000 more inhabitants in Norrbotten and Västerbotten combined. How does the Centre Party view the state's role in getting this started?

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Birger Lahti, for the clarification! I shall answer the question. The state's role is to ensure that we have an economy that keeps interest rates low. That is the first thing. The second, I still believe, is that we should have market conditions for new production.

That it is not being built is due to the fact that it is not profitable. There are two types of costs for a company. Interest rates are a part of the construction cost. A major problem, specifically in Kiruna, although it is not only there, is the construction wages. Kiruna has some of Sweden's highest construction wages, depending on the fact that the demand for labor is so high. But also in many other places, there are problems with getting new construction on site. If the revenues cannot increase for the one who is to build, then nothing will be built. There we probably differ in the view of what we believe is best.

I and the Center Party do not believe that it is through subsidies for construction that we will move forward. One must be able to secure the revenues required for the construction companies to want to build in the places where construction is to take place.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! As the last speaker, I would like to take the opportunity to thank my colleagues for this debate. I would especially like to thank Birger Lahti, Vänsterpartiet, for the speech that was delivered here in the chamber just now.

We live in a global urbanization trend that leads to an ever-decreasing proportion of the population living and working in rural and sparsely populated areas. At the same time, we are all dependent on one another. The values created in rural and sparsely populated areas cannot be created in cities, and vice versa. Society must exist for all of us in the entire country and provide all people with the conditions for personal development and equal access to welfare and public services.

For all too long, however, gaps between city and countryside have grown in Sweden. This has led to the fact that we today live under unequal conditions and circumstances. Inequalities lead to lost opportunities for both individuals and society as a whole. We in Miljöpartiet see that strong measures are now required for the rural and sparsely populated areas in Sweden.

Investments are required both to maintain an operation in the long term and to develop something new. In the exchange of remarks recently, the difficulties of obtaining loans to build housing were mentioned. We in Miljöpartiet take it seriously that companies and private individuals today cannot obtain loans to reinvest or invest in rural and remote areas. It could be a company that is running smoothly – the business is doing great. You export internationally and are growing rapidly. But still, one cannot get a loan from the bank to make investments in one's own industrial property simply because of where it is located.

When we were in government, we worked to try to improve the conditions. It is about support for top loans and other measures. We in Miljöpartiet see that that work must be continued, so that we level out the differences and the conditions for obtaining loans in rural and sparsely populated areas.

When we were in government, we also worked with support for housing construction and support for energy efficiency in properties, which also facilitates reinvestments in properties. It is support that this government has removed. One has thus actively worsened the conditions for construction in rural and sparsely populated areas, and I view that seriously.

The municipalities' finances are also crucial for investments and development in rural areas and the countryside. Therefore, we in Miljöpartiet want to, among other things, introduce an electricity bonus, which gives municipalities payment for the renewable electricity that is already produced today and that can be produced in the future. It would provide a welcome supplement to many municipalities' finances that can be used for local community development in the countryside.

Rural municipalities with many vacation homes are currently struggling with the challenge of providing social infrastructure while the residents do not pay tax in the municipalities in question. The finances of these municipalities would be further strengthened if everyone were to pay tax where they currently reside, even for shorter periods as a summer or seasonal residence. We believe that there is an opportunity to obtain tax revenue for tourist municipalities by changing this, so that one pays tax where one resides even if it is a seasonal residence.

Access to welfare is also completely central for regional development. Offering qualified care for people in rural areas or in smaller towns faces particular challenges today. It is difficult to recruit staff and to retain specialist expertise when operations are rarely performed and the care becomes too expensive. It is important to strengthen primary care and patient safety throughout the country by continuing to develop opportunities within e-health, mobile healthcare, and smaller care units for admission and monitoring. The research and development regarding rural medicine that is already being done in Västerbotten can be developed, which would strengthen rural medicine in the entire country.

Access to services and health and medical care is an important prerequisite for all of Sweden to live. It is important that we bring these aspects into the discussions on regional development. Access to community services is also completely central. The postal service has been mentioned here today.

We in Miljöpartiet would like to see the local service centers expanded to coordinate public and commercial services and contribute with support and advice. Such centers can provide agency systems for, for example, pharmacies, post, and Systembolaget, as well as offer so-called self-care centers, where patients meet healthcare staff via video link. Here, people can come into contact with authorities such as Försäkringskassan, Arbetsförmedlingen, or Skatteverket.

It is important that we ensure there is the right solution in the right place and that we have a presence, a community presence, throughout the entire country.

When it comes to a socially sustainable society with equal opportunities, there is a great need to promote good health throughout Sweden and to reduce the differences in health between different parts of the country.

A temporary gold rush in a region, when a green industry is established, must not lead to the people who already live in the area being unable to afford to move or to the creation of extensive housing speculation in a small town. We therefore want state guarantees to be introduced, so that temporary housing can be quickly provided where education and establishment lead to a dramatic increase in housing needs in the vicinity of green industrial establishments.

It is not enough with housing. Society also needs to plan for places for sports, recreation, and culture. Good preschool, school, leisure time, and nature are values that make it so that people do not just work in a location temporarily, but can also imagine moving there permanently.

We see today in several parts of the country that the rapid industrial development is creating new needs. For us in Miljöpartiet, it is absolutely central that there is a state presence in that work. I have mentioned housing construction, but we also see that we need to provide support to build entire communities with welfare, culture, and leisure.

Madam Speaker! A fundamental prerequisite for democracy is that the entire population has good conditions to participate in the public debate and to follow the development of society and politics at local, regional, and national levels. By modernizing and expanding media support to create better conditions for independent investigative journalism and a diversity of media across the entire country, the countryside and rural areas are also strengthened.

When it comes to equal opportunities throughout the country, civil society and its cooperation with public activities also need to be strengthened.

I have mentioned a number of different areas in my speech. I believe it is central to point out in this debate. If we are to have a strong regional development and a strong development in the whole country, we need to ensure, in all policy areas, the conditions that exist in the countryside and rural areas in Sweden. I have missed this for far too long. I hope that we, with the proposals that we in Miljöpartiet put forward, can achieve better development even in the countryside and rural areas in Sweden.

Against the background of the motions handled in this report, I would like to move for approval of reservation number 8.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I agree with Member Söderberg's description that there are unequal conditions between city and country. On that point, we are in complete agreement.

But why does the member then believe that her party is extremely unpopular in the countryside compared to in the big city? If the election results for Miljöpartiet in the rural counties were representative of Miljöpartiet as a whole, the coastal erosion in southern Sweden would appear modest compared to the erosion that would occur in Elin Söderberg's party group and party office after the election.

Is it the case that people in the countryside do not understand that high fuel prices are good? Is it the case that they do not understand that lottery electricity is something positive for Sweden? Is it the case that people in the countryside are wrong when they see that their cars are burdened with malus tax to pay for electric cars in the big cities? Are they wrong when they think that the Green Party's predator policy is not good for the countryside? Is it the case that people in the countryside think it is crazy with a high aviation tax for completely wrong reasons? They perhaps think that Sweden does not need domestic flights given the distances we have. Or what is it that people in the countryside do not understand? I do not understand, but I am just a simple resident of Gällivare. I suspect that the voters are smart. What is it that they have missed?

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! We are eight parliamentary parties. I can state that I am elected for Västerbotten, where there is much rural and sparsely populated area. There are several parties there that lack representation, but Miljöpartiet has representation. As it looks now, Miljöpartiet is growing in many parts of the country in both members and support, and I am very happy about that.

I, who since the election have become the newly appointed spokesperson for rural policy, will of course work actively to ensure that more people become aware of the Green Party's rural and outland policy, for we have debated it too little. I am very happy that we get to debate this today.

What concerns me is that several parties have tried to make the entire rural and country area policy only about fuel prices. As soon as that question has been raised, it is as if the Green Party is hostile towards Norrland and hostile towards rural areas because of fuel prices.

What I said in my speech was that we in Miljöpartiet want the right solution in the right place when it comes to the mobility and transport system in the whole country. Where people are dependent on cars, we shall ensure that they get good conditions to transition to fossil-free motoring. Where there are opportunities for public transport, we in Miljöpartiet want to support public transport and lower public transport ticket prices with Sverigekortet. Where there is opportunity for walking and cycling, we want to ensure that there are pleasant urban environments so that people can walk and cycle, have a good experience, and be safe in traffic. It must be the right solution in the right place.

But we do not see that, for example, handling the shortage of teachers, the disappearing welfare, that shops are closing and that the post office is disappearing, is done by increasing the fossil share in the tank. That is what the Sverigedemokraterna are actively pushing for - more fossil in the tank. That does not solve the major challenges we have in the Swedish countryside and rural areas.

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

Eric Palmqvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! We can drop the fossil and look at trains. It is significant for Miljöpartiet that during the last parliamentary term, there was a desire for high-speed trains between the country's three largest cities. It is an enormously costly project - a dreadfully costly project. Stockholm, Gothenburg, and Malmö would have high-speed trains, not northern Sweden. I think that says a great deal. It says a great deal about the view of our large cities as the regions that people should move to. I cannot discern anything else from this, and obviously, the voters cannot either. I actually have a very hard time understanding this.

Then Member Söderberg mentioned this matter of cycling. Yes, cycling is obviously very pleasant - I also cycle quite a bit, even if it might not show. I cycle quite a bit, go out with the dogs and so on.

Member of Parliament Söderberg does not need to defend his colleagues, of course, but I am thinking of something in my own home municipality that explains part of the Green Party's view. There, they insisted on building the new ice and events arena in the middle of the city, and it was so that the children could cycle to hockey practice. That is what they claimed—that the children should be able to cycle to hockey practice. It is as if they have never seen a hockey bag and have not thought about the fact that it can be 30 degrees cold and snowing. You cannot cycle with a hockey bag.

For me, cycling is quite recreational. Then some can live near their work and cycle, but for most who live somewhere where it is 20-30 degrees cold and who perhaps do shopping, drop off children and so on, the bicycle is not an alternative. It is completely out of touch with reality, and I think we here are putting our finger on exactly why Miljöpartiet performs so poorly in the countryside.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Perhaps it is that a huge number of actors claim that Miljöpartiet is pushing for people to cycle in -36 degrees that is the reason why we would have poor results. That is not true, however. We in Miljöpartiet do not push for people to keep cycling where it is not possible to cycle, in minus degrees or with heavy loads. That is foolish. There are, however, a huge number of people who are very comfortable trying to put those types of labels on us.

However, I can address this regarding the high-speed train. We see the high-speed train as part of a fundamental infrastructure in the entire country that ensures we have good conditions for both passenger transport and freight transport, for good regional development, and for development in the whole country. The railway is a fundamental infrastructure in Sweden that we in Miljöpartiet want to invest in.

Unfortunately, we see that the government is not investing in the railway. The maintenance has been too poor for far too long, and the necessary measures are not being taken moving forward. If the Green Party had been in charge, the Norrbotniabanan would have already been built, but it was stopped by the Moderates during the Alliance government's time.

We see the railway as a fundamental infrastructure that can strongly contribute to regional development and to us coming closer together across the entire country. One could ask the Chamber of Commerce in those towns and areas that would have been affected by the new main lines how they view the project being scrapped, Madam Speaker. These are main lines that, with their stops in several places, would have contributed strongly to development along all these routes. It is a strongly contributing factor to regional development that the Tidö parties have now stopped.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 15 May.)

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