The National Audit Office's report on the Industrial Leap

Anna-Caren Sätherberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Since we are talking about popular acceptance, I would like to start by saying that there is a large popular acceptance for removing the profit motive in welfare and instead letting the profits go to the elderly, to the students, and to the sick. But nothing is happening there.

But, Mr. Speaker, that is not what we are going to talk about today. Today we are going to discuss the National Audit Office's report on Industriklivet. It is, as you know, a benefit at all political levels to be scrutinized. That is how we get politics to develop, to become sharper and to become better.

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

Mr. Speaker! The climate is the defining issue of our time; we have heard that here in the chamber today. The earth is getting hotter. The year 2024 was the hottest year in the world ever after many years of new heat records. Ice is melting, seas are rising, and the Alps' glaciers are disappearing at record speed. The European Environment Agency's report shows that Europe is not ready for the risks of a changed climate. What is being done to reduce emissions and adapt society is not sufficient.

Climate change threatens energy and food security, ecosystems, infrastructure, water resources, financial stability, and human health. According to the European Environment Agency, many of the climate risks have already reached critical levels that could become catastrophic. To reverse the development, we need to accelerate the transition now.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats know that Swedish industry has a key role in our social construction. It will also have it so that we can manage the climate transition. We are also convinced that Swedish industry is part of the solution to the climate threat and that Swedish industry shall be world-leading.

Mr. Speaker! In order for Sweden to reach its climate goal of having no net emissions of greenhouse gases by 2045 at the latest, a massive transition of all sectors is required, not least the industry. Heavy industry, iron, steel, cement, refineries, chemicals and many others, account for a third of Sweden's emissions today.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, the Social Democratic-led government introduced an investment support for industry in 2018. It is Industriklivet, which since it was introduced has increased from 300 million kronor per year to over 1.3 billion kronor per year. And now in the year-end budget, Mr. Speaker, an additional 2.1 billion is being invested.

Industriklivet is a financial support, a contribution to research, to pilot and demonstration projects, and to investments aimed at reducing emissions from our most carbon-intensive industries so that Sweden can transition in line with the climate goals. But at the same time, Mr. Speaker, Industriklivet shall promote competitiveness and jobs in a fossil-free future.

Industriklivet started in 2018 as a relatively delimited initiative for the process industry but has since been broadened to several areas. Today, the program primarily covers three areas.

The first is the emissions from the process industry. Here, projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions linked to industrial processes are supported, for example, new production technologies for steel, cement, chemicals or refineries.

The second point, Mr. Speaker, is negative emissions. This includes initiatives to capture and store carbon dioxide so that it is removed from the atmosphere – something that may become necessary to reach net zero.

The third, Mr. Speaker, is strategically important initiatives. This includes groundbreaking technology or systems that do not directly reduce the industry's own emissions but which enable emission reductions in society at large, for example, the production of fossil-free fuels or materials.

The Swedish Parliament, that is, we here, has decided that in 2045 Sweden shall have at least 85 percent lower emissions than in 1990, and the remaining emissions shall be balanced by complementary measures, for example CCS. Therefore, Industriklivet is one of the political tools that shall make it possible to achieve the goal by ensuring that the industry's transition accelerates.

Mr. Speaker! Industry has, as we know, a long investment horizon and a high threshold for new technology. Often, expensive pilot plants and development are required before a solution can break through. Here, Industriklivet fulfills an important function in sharing the initial risk and cost with the companies so that groundbreaking projects can be realized.

The project spans several exciting sectors such as fossil-free steel, the cement industry, chemical production, refineries and fuels, plastic returns, bio-CCS and CCS, recycling, circular processes and additive manufacturing in the aviation industry. Several of the projects are noticed internationally and are co-financed via EU programs as they are considered strategically important in the climate transition.

This, Mr. Speaker, underlines that Industriklivet is not only about Swedish emissions but also about showing the way globally with a technology that can be spread. But it is also, of course, about a transition for Swedish industry that increases Sweden's growth and creates thousands of new jobs.

As I said, many projects are still at the pilot and demonstration stage. It is not until the technicians move from pilot operation to commercial operation that large emission reductions are expected. But we know, Mr. Speaker, that the future competitiveness of Swedish industry is strengthened by the fact that we are at the forefront technically.

We have in the Swedish Riksdag and jointly in the EU decided on climate goals that we must achieve to meet the Paris Agreement. We have already for several years had floods, fires, and droughts that result in diminishing harvests. The message is clear: Sweden and the world must reduce their emissions now.

Sweden needs a growth agenda for Swedish industry and more industrial workers. Here, Industriklivet is an enabler.

(Applause)

In this speech, Joakim Järrebring (S) agreed.

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

Kajsa Fredholm (V)

Mr. Speaker! The National Audit Office has, in its report, audited the state support Industriklivet. Industriklivet is a climate policy instrument to support new technology and other innovative solutions that are to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is an important instrument because Sweden's industries account for a third of all greenhouse gas emissions within the country.

The National Audit Office directs sharp criticism towards the government, which the government largely dismisses. The National Audit Office also submits a number of recommendations to the government to address the problems.

Mr. Speaker! The government's almost non-existent climate policy proves to be even more deficient in the letter. Despite the government considering Industriklivet to be one of the most important measures for the industry's climate transition, the Swedish National Audit Office's criticism leads to very little action from the government.

We in Vänsterpartiet consider that this is remarkable if the government has the ambition that the extremely limited climate policy it pursues should at least be as effective as possible.

In its climate action plan, the government itself makes the assessment that "there is a continued need to review and potentially develop the steering measure to ensure that Industriklivet continues to be an effective tool for achieving emission reductions from the industrial sector and promoting an industrial sector that is competitive and growing in a fossil-free economy. In the budget bill for 2024, the government proposes a reinforcement of Industriklivet."

But when the government's action plan completely lacks concrete proposals on how the government shall achieve the climate goals, we in Vänsterpartiet believe that the government should at least adopt the well-founded recommendations that Riksrevisionen gives to the government to ensure that existing climate management tools are as effective as possible.

Mr. Speaker! The National Audit Office's report shows that there are major deficiencies in the political management and coordination, which risks further increasing the gap for Sweden to achieve its climate goals. Not least, the already insufficient supply of electricity for industry in project applications risks being further worsened because of this. We in Vänsterpartiet take the National Audit Office's report seriously and have the following proposals:

The government should carry out a review of which target group and what types of measures and projects Industriklivet should cover in order to become more effective, as well as how the agency responsibility should best be designed to respond to this.

The Government should be given a mandate to coordinate the state climate transition grants for investments in order to ensure that equivalent investment projects can be assessed in a uniform manner regardless of which grant the application concerns.

The Government should be given a mandate to coordinate climate policy with other policy areas so that the risk of missing effects from Klimatklivet does not become unnecessarily large.

The Government should be given a mandate to return to the Riksdag with alternative measures to reach Sweden's climate goals even if the high expectations for Industriklivet are not met.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I move for approval of reservation 3.

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

Martin Kinnunen (SD)

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to public acceptance, I do not believe there is any great public acceptance if Industriklivet is used to provide grants to companies that fail completely in their operations. We have seen examples of that. I believe that the public acceptance for such support systems is sensitive if the money goes to complete failures.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we welcome that the National Audit Office reviews Industriklivet.

The report points out exactly the problem that I hear about when I speak with companies seeking such support, namely that one is not sure which support to apply for. This can, for example, lead to companies being forced to spend quite significant amounts of money and time on hiring consultants who can help them determine which support system suits them best.

One can certainly reason about whether it is the state's task to give money to often large companies to make their operations cheaper. Fundamentally, there is an ideological problem with this. At the same time, we have the situation today that Sweden operates in a European and a global market where there are significant elements of state aid in very many of the countries that our companies compete with. This makes the ideological starting point complex, which is why one must also look at exactly what one is doing.

It is positive that the government has ongoing work to streamline and review the systems and that earlier this year a mandate was given to the authorities to investigate precisely this issue of boundary demarcation. I am not unfamiliar with the idea that we in the future merge the supports into one, for example.

It is not uncomplicated to have such support systems. Which company should receive money, and which company should not receive money? How administratively costly is it to apply for the support in relation to the value of the money? There is good reason to exercise caution in the future.

When the subsidies fail, it is the Sweden Democrats' opinion that this should be carefully investigated. When it comes to Northvolt, we have called for a commission to review why it went the way it did, how it happened that, for example, the AP funds likely violated various forms of regulations in order to push in more money than they were authorized to do, and also what assessment was made by the authority when money was granted from Industriklivet.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! Dagens industri has recently reported that there is an agreement or a deal, depending on how one wishes to express it, between the government and SD regarding not providing further support to green projects, for example Stegra. At the same time, Ebba Busch and others in the government claim that no such agreement exists.

Can Martin Kinnunen just help to clear this up? What is the actual situation? Is there any agreement, any contract or something similar, and what does it consist of in that case?

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

Martin Kinnunen (SD)

Mr. Speaker! What happened in the supplementary budget was that funds were moved from one place to another. That meant that Industriklivet received increased funds to use. At the same time, a discussion was held regarding a single company – we can say it was called Stegra, for example.

What the Sweden Democrats and the government agree on is that this transfer has not occurred so that money should go to an individual company. One can also state that the authority, according to the regulatory framework it has today, does not grant a company several grants for the same project.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much for that answer, Martin Kinnunen! I think it is good when we can clear up such things that seem a bit unclear.

Just so I have understood things correctly: What is stated in the supplementary budget is what applies. There is nothing else that applies, except of course what normally happens at agencies, for example when one applies. It is the supplementary budget that applies and nothing else.

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

Martin Kinnunen (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Rickard Nordin asks if it is the spring budget that applies and nothing else. It is clear that it is the government's and the Sweden Democrats' budget and also the government bill that applies – naturally!

What is emphasized is that this transfer had nothing to do with a certain company called Stegra receiving more money. We can state that in the way the authority works with the grants, they do not grant grants to the same companies for the same projects. I would be surprised if they suddenly changed all of this so that a certain company received money. But there is no secret agreement mentioning what sums different companies should receive.

I also thought that the communication from the representatives of this company in the media, where it was expected that the politics would manipulate the forms of support and secure more money for the company, was provocative. But it is naturally not the case that the Sverigedemokraterna and the government have a list of exactly which companies should receive money and which should not.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Industriklivet was introduced in 2018. It was introduced to support the industry's climate transition. Since Swedish industry accounts for approximately one-third of our domestic emissions, climate transition and reduced climate impact from the industry is a prerequisite for us to be able to reach our climate goals.

Industriklivet is a climate policy instrument to support new technology and other innovative solutions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The support is given to companies all the way from research and innovation projects to demonstration facilities and full-scale facilities. It focuses on new technology, for example carbon capture, hydrogen and recycling. This is definitely something that could contribute to Sweden's competitiveness in the future.

Energimyndigheten is responsible for Industriklivet, and since the start of Industriklivet, it has granted approximately 7.4 billion kronor in support. It has been co-financed with an additional approximately 87.7 billion kronor. Within Industriklivet's projects, there are so far over 200 unique project partners. I perceive it as that most parliamentary parties seem to have a consensus on Industriklivet's importance for the Swedish industry to be able to transition to fossil-free and that we should be able to reach the long-term climate goal of net-zero emissions in 2045. Industriklivet has, as we have discussed in the previous debate, been broadened in two steps and restructured. Most recently in this year's spring budget amendment, Industriklivet received extra budget supplements from the government.

What we are debating today is the National Audit Office's report. They have audited Industriklivet and identified a number of problems that could mean that Industriklivet does not contribute sufficiently effectively to the industry's climate transition or to reaching Sweden's climate goals. I also agree with previous speakers that the National Audit Office has an important role in improving governance and efficiency. Therefore, we believe that this is an important opportunity to listen to the National Audit Office and actually review the support so that it contributes to Sweden's climate transition in the very best way.

The Swedish National Audit Office highlighted in its report, among other things, that the Swedish Energy Agency's process for collecting information to evaluate a project application is unclear, which could lead to different applicants being treated differently. It is not good if one does not have clear frameworks for who should receive funding or not.

The revision also considers that the Swedish Energy Agency has not provided sufficient instructions or sufficient guidance to either internal or external assessors on how the assessment criteria for applications should be interpreted and applied, which could lead to the application process not being fair and comparable.

Since Industriklivet handles a lot of money and also plays an important role for Sweden to be able to transition and modernize the industrial sector, it is of course important that the support distributed is used in the best possible way. I think there is a good reason to review whether the preparation process and the assessment criteria need to be improved and whether they need to be clarified. Is there a reason to establish a preparation group with representatives from more expert agencies, for example, Naturvårdsverket and Tillväxtverket, to further give Industriklivet better accuracy?

The National Audit Office also recommends that the government coordinate climate policy with other policy areas so that the risk is reduced that potentially missing effects of the support lead to the Swedish climate goals not being met. The government needs to ensure that not all eggs are put in the same basket and see to it that there are alternative measures to reach Sweden's climate goals, even if the high expectations for Industriklivet are not met. It is important.

We see today that climate emissions are increasing at the same time as the government has reduced its climate ambitions. It is of course urgent that necessary emission reductions occur in the near term and with reliability. Sweden needs a climate policy that rests on several pillars and is not solely based on the business sector's possibilities for a rapid climate transition and industrial transition.

The government needs to ensure that there are alternative measures to reach Sweden's climate goals. This requires that Sweden returns to a serious climate policy that is coherent, aims high, reduces climate emissions, and involves all policy areas. Therefore, I want to move for approval of reservation 4 in the report.

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

Helena Storckenfeldt (M)

Mr. Speaker! Industriklivet is one of the state's largest and most significant climate policy support programs. It is not just about emission reductions, but it is also about the industry of the future. The purpose is to enable major technological leaps within industry in everything from steel and cement to chemicals and mining. These are investments that strengthen both our competitiveness and our ability to lead the climate transition globally.

But as the National Audit Office's review shows, there are deficiencies we must not turn a blind eye to. The goal-setting and follow-up have been insufficient. A lot of money has been paid out in support – without us knowing with 100 percent certainty what climate benefit has actually been achieved. It may be difficult to achieve that degree of certainty. However, we are convinced that it is incredibly important to track every single krona.

The investments that have been made thanks to Industriklivet are important, but it is also important to be able to acknowledge when one needs to adjust the systems.

Mr. Speaker! The green transition of industry must take place if Sweden is to continue to be a strong industrial nation – but that requires that every krona yields maximum effect. The policy must be technology-neutral, cost-effective, and results-oriented. The subsidies shall go to the projects that have the greatest potential to reduce emissions and simultaneously build up exportable technology, new jobs, and global climate benefits.

We cannot build climate policy on hopes, we must build it on results. Here it is evident that clearer follow-up is needed.

The Government has already taken concrete measures in line with the recommendations that have been submitted. A joint assignment has been given to Naturvårdsverket and Energimyndigheten to review the regulatory framework and any overlap between Industriklivet and Klimatklivet. It is a step toward improving governance, increasing efficiency, and ensuring that state funds are used where they do the most good. The assignment is to be reported in December 2025.

The industrial step is a crucial tool for achieving net-zero emissions by 2045, but it must function and fulfill its purpose with respect for the taxpayers' money. Sweden has a unique opportunity to show the world that it is possible to combine economic growth with ambitious climate policy. Our industries stand ready with technology, innovative power, and the will to transition. The task of politics is to create conditions, not obstacles. With the right conditions, stable rules of the game, and a policy that focuses on results rather than symbols, Sweden can continue to be a pioneer country – not just in words but also in action.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Storckenfeldt. I intended to keep it brief.

I think it sounds like Miljöpartiet, the opposition, and even the Tidö parties have the same direction. We think that Industriklivet is an important support and that it is important that it goes to the right projects and actually contributes to the industry's transition. The member highlights that it is important to ensure that every single krona goes where it should, that is, efficient use.

I therefore have a question. The review that the government is now conducting is about ensuring that climate steps and industrial steps do not overlap, that there should be no ambiguity about which support one should apply for, and that one should not wobble between them.

What we want to follow up on in the National Audit Office's report is actually the application process. It is considered to be unclear, meaning that different assessors for the different projects have received unclear instructions, which means they might assess the same project in completely different ways. This can create an injustice and mean that it does not become a sufficiently efficient process.

Why does the government not consider it important to move forward and fundamentally investigate the process, so that every krona is used in the most effective way?

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

Helena Storckenfeldt (M)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by welcoming Miljöpartiet to the efficiency debate. It is often we on the bourgeois side who point out that one should be able to track every krona, but it is not quite as often we hear it from the left side of politics. A warm welcome! It is very important that we both push this line of an efficient climate policy that also has a focus on results.

I believe there are several things here that we can take with us moving forward. As I mentioned, I believe that for the industry's transition, it is important with such large systems but also that future support systems are developed. We have, for example, launched Kväveklivet and the like. I also believe it is very important that we can see when there are deficiencies and adjust those systems.

We need a climate policy that is precisely effective and results-based. And we must continue to have respect for the taxpayers' money. I believe it is extremely important to maintain the acceptance for the climate policy and actually all policy areas. It is fundamental.

We have, as I mentioned in my speech, started with the first assignment to the Energy Agency and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. One is to review a part of how one can adjust Industriklivet to achieve the best results. I am convinced that there is more that we can tackle.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Mr. Speaker and members! As I understand the matter, the government considers it incorrect that it is an unclear process and that one therefore does not need to proceed with preparing the application process, look at clear guidelines for those who apply and give clear instructions to those who are to evaluate. One skips that step and says that it was not needed.

I would like to know why. What is that opinion based on – that one thinks it works well?

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

Helena Storckenfeldt (M)

Mr. Speaker! I must say clearly and directly to Katarina Luhr that I do not know exactly why it has been chosen to carry out only one of the recommendations and not the other.

This is an area for development, and I believe we must be open to the development potential that exists within all support systems in Sweden. We must be able to be open to reviewing and changing things within the systems.

It is not only when a report from the Swedish National Audit Office arrives, but one must also keep it in the back of one's mind moving forward when working to ensure that the support systems become as effective as possible. It applies to Klimatklivet, Industriklivet and Kväveklivet; it applies to politics in general.

I keep all doors open to review how Industriklivet can become even more effective and contribute to Sweden's climate transition.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is time that we stop talking about climate policy as a hindrance for households and companies, as if it is about increased costs and reduced acceptance. It is instead an enormous opportunity.

Centerpartiet knows that green growth is the solution to many challenges. With our policy, business and climate transition go hand in hand. It is not about braking, but about transitioning and doing so with full force. Then we get falling emissions and increased growth. Unfortunately, this government is doing exactly the opposite, and both emissions and unemployment are skyrocketing.

It is the companies that develop the technology of the future, that build out the charging infrastructure, that produce the fossil-free energy and that develop the climate-smart materials. It is through a strong, innovative and competitive business sector that we reach our climate goals. In that case, the state also needs to help out sometimes.

Industriklivet has been an important piece of the puzzle to enable the scaling up of various technologies. But it can also be used better. The applications are at times too narrow. A prime example is pyrolysis of biomass to produce biogas and energy gases. Despite it being new technology, it is not possible to get support because it happens to be about biogas. When the same technology is also excluded from other types of support, it becomes a double error on the government's part.

It needs to be corrected, especially as we know that the potential of pyrolysis specifically is three times as great as it is with digestion, according to the final report from the Industry's Biogas Commission which was recently released.

Centerpartiet wants Sweden to be a world leader in the green transition. But for that, the right conditions are required. We need to simplify the rules for companies that want to invest. We must ensure that permit processes for wind power, electricity grids, and industrial transition go a bit faster. And we must ensure that the whole country, not just the large cities, has the capacity to grow and contribute.

Being at the technical forefront is crucial for a small, export-dependent country located in a remote part of the world, just as Sweden is. That is when Industriklivet is needed. Swedish companies are already far ahead in the forest industry, in green chemistry, and in fossil-free steel. They compete globally. That is also when stable and long-term rules of the game are needed with a state that helps where it is truly needed.

Climate policy cannot be a shaky patchwork that changes every mandate period, especially not when it is so brutally torn to pieces, as has actually been done here and now. In that case, it is good that Industriklivet can continue and that Klimatklivet has also been taken forward. The government has done well, even though on several occasions it has failed to provide sensible authorizations, which has also caused problems along the way.

The climate transition is our time's greatest opportunity for jobs, growth, and regional development. With the right policy, Sweden can become the first fossil-free welfare country. With the right policy, we get more companies to do the right thing: to choose renewable, to choose circular, and to choose climate-smart. That is what we in Centerpartiet fight for, in our budget but also here in the chamber of the Riksdag and in other areas.

We have a climate policy that relies on trust in people's innovative power and an industrial policy that drives transition. We want a Sweden where companies are seen as the opportunity, not the problem.

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

Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I intend to be brief. I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the proposal in the report and the rejection of the reservations.

Just as I mentioned in the previous debate, regarding the motion report on climate, Swedish industry and Swedish entrepreneurship are a crucial part of the transition. The business sector is the new environmental movement, as our Prime Minister has said. It is clear that we must set things right so that the business sector can carry out the transition.

The Government naturally welcomes the National Audit Office's report. Certain parts have already been addressed by appointing investigations. Other parts, the Government has a different view on. Despite the statements that have been made from this rostrum in this matter, it is clear that a large majority of the Riksdag's parties stand behind the assessment that the Government has made. It is only the Left Party and the Green Party that have reservations. The other parties are in favor of the proposal in the report. I think it is a clear sign that we have, somewhere, despite the criticism in this debate, nevertheless landed correctly.

In order for Sweden to be able to transition all the way to net zero, a number of prerequisites must be in place. In that regard, Industriklivet is a very important part.

(Applause)

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

Elin Nilsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I too intend to keep my remarks brief.

Sweden shall be a leading country in climate policy. This requires that we have an ambitious policy that is doubly sustainable. It must be effective and long-term, and it must work in everyday life both for companies and for private individuals. Research and innovation are crucial for this. In that part, Industriklivet is important. It is one of our most important measures to achieve just this.

Our climate policy aims largely to create the conditions for companies to be able to transition. The structural transformation that is currently underway and is required demands a number of systemic shifts. Creating conditions for this is very much about ensuring long-term conditions, adjusting legislation, and promoting access to everything from fossil-free energy to a well-educated workforce. At the same time, there is sometimes a need for financial support during an early establishment phase.

Just as has been said here earlier this evening, it is important that the steering measures we create are accurate and effective. It is also important that we review and reassess them. That is why the report from the Swedish National Audit Office that we are debating here today is so important.

The Swedish National Audit Office's report on Industriklivet

The National Audit Office has pointed out a number of deficiencies. That these deficiencies have been identified is important and good. It gives the government an opportunity to review the supports that exist and, in cases where it is judged appropriate, to rectify them. This is something that applies to all state supports – money must go to the right things.

Action has now been taken on the report. One deficiency that has been identified is the overlap between Industriklivet and Klimatklivet. The government has now tasked Naturvårdsverket and Energimyndigheten to review current regulations and, if necessary, propose changes so that the work can continue and the money goes to the right things.

With this short speech, I thank you for your attention and look forward to the next time the Committee on Environment and Agriculture meets here in the chamber for debate – in exactly one week, when it is time for the debate on shoreline protection.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 8 May.)

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