Maritime issues

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we shall debate TU10, concerning our shipping. I want to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and for the rejection of the motions.

After a long period of darkness, it looks very bright right now for Swedish shipping. One can say that Swedish shipping has gained momentum. That Swedish flags are being flown is due to nothing other than the solid work carried out by the Sverigedemokraterna and the government, which has listened to the shipping industry's needs. The changed stamp duty, which became a fee, together with an improved and expanded tonnage tax, has made it so that we have turned darkness into light.

Of course, we should not sit content in the boat with this and believe that everything will sail smoothly with these efforts. There is more to be done, and we are not finished with the work to make Swedish shipping more competitive. It is about regulations, costs, training, and so on. Shipping is international. We are therefore competing with other countries in the world, and it requires that one is interested and on one's toes to see how other countries act to attract ships to their flag.

The Swedish Maritime Administration plays a crucial role for shipping in maintaining and securing shipping lanes, providing maritime traffic services, seafarer services, pilotage, icebreaking, and leading and performing sea and air rescue. The Authority has important missions for shipping to function, but the Swedish Maritime Administration has long struggled with poor finances, and unfortunately, they have now for the first time been forced to issue redundancy notices to staff.

When ships become larger and shipping routes fewer, revenues decrease, and one then faces the choice of saving more to manage to carry out its mission or extracting more fees from shipping to manage its finances. We Sverigedemokrater consider that the Swedish Maritime Administration has an important task to fulfill, but we must also be realistic regarding the difficulty of the finances in the agency. Sverigedemokraterna has long worked to try to convert the agency from a business agency to a grant-funded agency. We also consider that the aviation and maritime rescue should be moved to the defense to bring down the costs.

The Swedish Maritime Administration has a great need to replace and renew its icebreaker fleet and has attempted to procure new icebreakers. This has been delayed due to appeals. The Sweden Democrats would gladly see that when new icebreakers are now built, they are equipped and constructed so that they can be used year-round, perhaps for cable laying, coastal surveillance, and firefighting. They could also be used as inspection vessels. Of course, time must also be available for the maintenance of the vessels that work heavily during the winter.

When it comes to pilotage, it feels like it is heading in the right direction with remote piloting. It is an important key to shipping given that it is more difficult to recruit pilots for this physically dangerous work.

We Sweden Democrats have long spoken about an opportunity that Sweden is not taking advantage of, and in that regard, I am thinking of our inland waterways. A major project is currently underway to build new, larger locks that will make it more profitable to transport goods on the Göta älv. On this stretch, the pilot is a major cost, and here we see great advantages with specifically distance pilots. It is said that if one can get the traffic moving on the inland waterways, one can free up the equivalent of 50,000 trucks from the roads. I believe the possibilities are greater than that.

There is very little traffic today on the inland waterways, which should make it possible to test exempting the inland waterways from fees for perhaps five years and then evaluate the effect of this. We have also proposed that a model could be introduced involving that traffic traveling between Swedish ports is exempt from fairway fees. This would benefit new traffic traveling along the Swedish coast and delivering cargo. If the ships go to a foreign port and then to a Swedish port, the fairway fee shall be paid for the journey to the first Swedish port.

Madam Speaker! I do not intend to speak about the Gotland transport, as the government, through Trafikverket, has commissioned an investigation to see how the next procurement shall be organized after 2035. We will likely have every reason to discuss this when the investigation is complete.

Madam Speaker! We cannot talk about shipping without talking about the ports. We have five core ports: Göteborg, Malmö, Trelleborg, Stockholm and Luleå. These ports have a special status and provide some advantages but also obligations, such as higher EU priority, greater opportunity for EU funding, requirements and support for modern, efficient and sustainable infrastructure, competitive advantages for logistics and business, a strengthened role in the climate and energy transition and international visibility and strategic importance.

What we politicians can do to strengthen the ports is to shine a light on the infrastructure to and from the ports, both roads and railways. Unfortunately, there are quite a few bottlenecks to certain ports, which is problematic not only for freight flows but also for passenger transport and, above all, for those who live in cities with frequent ferry traffic.

I would like to say that the Swedish ports are well-equipped and can receive more cargo. We see no need for a port strategy, but I can partially agree with the motion's author that it could be smart to investigate or review whether there should be foreign ownership of the operation of ports. It might not be any problem at all, but I would welcome such an investigation or review given how the global situation looks and the civil preparedness. It doesn't matter if we have 1,000 Swedish-flagged ships if we have no ports to dock at, especially in times of war.

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats and the government have arranged for seven new border crossings where the crew can get off or on, that is, perform crew changes. The new ones are Grums, Höganäs, Nacka, Stenungssund, Tjörn and Uddevalla. We know that more are desired, but shipping is reasonably satisfied with this expansion. Of course, we shall try to ensure that more ports come in the future.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I want to say that I am immensely proud of what the Sweden Democrats and the government have achieved with our maritime policy.

(Applause)

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

Ulrika Heie (C)

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

I would like to ask a few questions and have a couple of things elaborated on a bit more. It is always lovely to feel pride, but if we are to be completely honest, the stamp duty, the tonnage tax, and this fact that one can land in more places were rather low-hanging fruits linked to how this was investigated and so on since previously.

Now the member says that one does not need a port strategy. I wonder a bit about that, because the member himself highlighted the need for an infrastructure connected to the ports, both regarding the fairway charges, which the member mentioned, and regarding road and rail from the ports. What is it then that makes it so that one would not need a port strategy? I would like to hear a bit more about that from the member's side.

The committee members also point out that there are a number of larger ports and that foreign ownership should be reviewed when it comes to them. A few of us participated in a breakfast meeting yesterday and heard a fair amount about how Sund & Bælt in Denmark now owns six strategic Danish ports.

What is it that makes the Sweden Democrats not believe that one would need to review what is essentially a port strategy? We have a changed security situation, and we have a greater need for better communications. What is it that makes one not need such a thing?

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! Just as Ulrika Heie says, there is naturally a problem with any potential foreign ownership. That is the part I feel it is important to look at. It may be possible to write this out through the concession agreements that exist so that there are no problems, but it would have been interesting to look at just that part.

Otherwise, we have very good and well-functioning ports today. However, there are some small problems with access to roads in some ports, but I see, as I have said, no major point in creating a port strategy.

However, Madam Speaker, Ulrika Heie is welcome to state what she considers important to include in a port strategy. What is it that is missing compared to what exists today? I know that the government is currently looking at this. We are pumping many billions into the infrastructure bill to create accessibility, and the ports are an important part of this. The airports are another important part.

Personally, I see no direct advantage in creating a port strategy given that the ports are doing well today.

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

Ulrika Heie (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, member, for the answer!

I have another question. It concerns what the member said about how the stamp fee and tonnage tax are now implemented but that there is more to be done. The member mentioned regulations, costs, training and so on, but then it didn't become much more.

I am curious about what the Sweden Democrats, perhaps together with the government, intend to implement when it comes to regulations, costs, and education.

There was a bit of talk about removing fairway fees and so on. But could the member clarify a bit regarding what applies to training, regulations, and costs?

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is no strangeness at all. Regarding education, it is about giving sailors the opportunity to educate themselves in blocks. One should be able to start an education, perhaps study remotely on board the ships, and expand one's competence. It is no strangeness at all.

We could have a simpler education, just like in Denmark. Today, there are complicating circumstances surrounding the education that mean Sweden cannot compete with Denmark, which is a disadvantage. This is not good.

Regarding costs, the fairway fee is a significant cost for shipping. We have had the idea that it should be exempt from fees to travel between two Swedish ports, but if one leaves Sweden and travels to a port in another country and then returns, there would be a fee at the first Swedish port.

We have a totally underutilized category today, namely coastal shipping. If you run a bus between Swedish ports, you manage without fairway fees. But every time you enter a Swedish port today, you pay a fairway fee, and that of course means we lose great opportunities to get cargo on our ships. The cargo goes on trucks instead. Here I see a great development potential.

At the same time, we have the inland waterways. That traffic is almost non-existent, and one could absolutely carry out a pilot project today to get the inland waterways started and be able to utilize that traffic. This applies especially now when we are rebuilding and building larger locks in, among other places, the Göta älv. It provides great opportunities to shift towards shipping.

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

Ulrika Heie (C)

Madam Speaker! In TU10, a number of different issues regarding shipping are being addressed. To explain to those listening to the debate: We have a debate in the Committee on Transport that concerns infrastructure in the broad sense. We also have a budget debate that partly concerns these specific issues. Now, it concerns a motion report that deals with shipping.

This may cause certain questions to be missing from the debate, but I just wanted to explain how the whole thing is structured and why one does not discuss all issues in all reports that also concern shipping. However, there are plenty of important issues to debate when it comes to the development of shipping.

One must still say that the waterways are our oldest roads. I will not provide a long historical exposé on Sweden as a shipping nation. It is clear that there have been times that were prouder than the one we see today, even though I think there is reason to be proud of a number of Swedish shipping companies, which are doing a fantastic job. This applies to both the environmental transition and the ability to see that shipping is a fine opportunity to transport a lot of goods in a climate-smart way.

I personally had the privilege, together with another member of the committee, to visit Holland and Germany and be present at the launch of a boat that Thunbolagen had ordered and built here in Europe. This boat is to sail along the English coast.

Just as the previous speaker mentioned, coastal shipping is an important part both in our country and in the rest of Europe. Shipping is largely international and has an international regulatory framework, but there is really much that we can do here in Sweden as well.

The shipyards order a new boat every three months. It is fantastic to see the optimism that exists linked to Swedish shipping! This government has taken some measures that have been good for shipping; one must say that. But there is significantly more to be done in many different ways.

Even though we are now waiting for a national plan, I thought it sounded reassuring that the member from Sverigedemokraterna mentioned the locks in Trollhättan and that they are now to be built. It feels secure, because it is incredibly important that Vänersjöfarten can be developed in a good way. It gives us the opportunity to relieve the road network and the railway network. Shipping is indeed both a climate-smart and a relieving part in other respects.

Just as we all know, the fees that exist are very burdensome. The Centre Party thinks that one should be even clearer regarding the environmental fees and the fairway fees so that there is a significantly better differentiation for those who have ordered new boats that run on much more environmentally friendly fuels. This should be possible to do in the fairly short term.

In the dialogue we have with the companies that order new boats, it is exciting to hear that they mean that emissions can be reduced significantly in a short time. It is incredibly important for us in the climate work that this can happen, and therefore I truly welcome if future governments can continue to highlight shipping's opportunities for development as a priority area.

However, there is a very large focus on road and railway. Despite the fact that there is a goal to move more and more freight to maritime transport, but also to railway, we do not see that happening. It is therefore important to point out the obstacles that exist for this, and the fees are one such part, but also to review the entire system. It is about the opportunities to develop coastal shipping and inland shipping, but also about how we create opportunities for all ports along our coast to be a part of the future work with the green transition.

Here I think that one should look at the neighboring countries. In many other issues, we do look at both Norway and Denmark, and in Norway, they have developed a green strategy where industry, ports – which in Sweden today are often owned by the municipalities – and authorities join forces and jointly allocate resources to achieve a significantly better pace in the green transition of shipping.

I also want to say in this context that we obviously stand by all our reservations, but that I choose to move for approval of reservation number 6.

It is important to, which I think the government does, point out areas of various kinds. In the situation Sweden is in today, where the possibilities of airspace, land space, and maritime transport are closed in a number of different directions, it becomes extremely important that we take advantage of the strengths that exist in our infrastructure system.

Here, shipping becomes extremely important because a very large amount of the infrastructure is north-south. If we are to reach out with our export goods, then in principle everything, for the time being, must go by sea. There, I wish that the government seriously reviews how the entire system should function, raises port strategies and such parts, and also looks at the preparedness issue. It is also important that the transport buyers are given the opportunity to be involved in the transition work in different ways.

It is an election year this year, and we do not know which government will be in power after the election. But regardless of that, I wish that these issues do not fall into the shadows. We can still say that the maritime issues have not been raised in the way that would be needed for quite a long period.

We have spoken about coastal shipping. Along our entire coast, there are communities and people living there. Yesterday, some of us from the committee had the opportunity to visit Skärgårdarnas Riksförbund. That the ferries in the archipelago function is also a part of shipping. Now we have no specific motions in that area, but it is nevertheless an area for the entire transport committee to take on moving forward: to ensure that the communications, which partly consist of yellow or white ferries and other transports on the water, function and are given the opportunity to develop. For the competitiveness of our coastal communities, they are incredibly important.

The Gotland ferry will surely come up during this debate. It is important that the transports to and from Gotland function in a satisfactory way and at prices that are not too high. But there are actually many more islands in the country. We would need a strategy.

It is not pleasant to hear how it is on Holmön in the Bottenviken, where one can be stranded either on land or on the island for up to eight days because it is not possible to get there by boat and the fog means that one also cannot take a helicopter.

Regardless of party, these issues should be addressed in a somewhat more initiated manner in the upcoming government.

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

Johanna Rantsi (M)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin my speech in this debate by emphasizing how important shipping is for us in our society. 90 percent of everything we import and export to and from Sweden has at some point in its shipping chain been transported by shipping. We have almost 270,000 islands in Sweden. That is a world record. We also have one of Europe's longest coasts. 1.6 million people live on an island. This says quite a lot about how dependent we are on both shipping and boats. We are dependent on shipping as much in peacetime as in times of war and unrest. It is something that will always need to be there where we live.

Madam Speaker! During the maritime debate here in the chamber in 2025, I said that Sweden's merchant fleet had decreased drastically over the last 50 years, but that we would now break this gloomy trend during the current parliamentary term.

We want to see a competitive Swedish shipping industry. We want to see more Swedish-flagged vessels for more job opportunities, more Swedish tax revenues and a better supply capacity.

What have we then done, Madam Speaker, to achieve this?

The Moderate-led government has, during the mandate period, not only lowered the stamp duty but also abolished the stamp duty for mortgage on ships. We have introduced a new bareboat register, Skeppslega, which simplifies the chartering and hiring of unmanned ships. We have, therefore, listened to the industry and what it demands.

We are reforming the tonnage tax system, which will mean that more different types of vessels will be able to participate in it. We are also reviewing where they may operate and be exposed to international competition.

Competence supply is a major issue within many infrastructure areas, especially within shipping. The Moderate-led government ensures that we get more Swedish students to World Maritime University. We have introduced more flexible education to become deck officer class VII. The application pressure to these educations is also increasing now, Madam Speaker, which is pleasing. We also ensure that one can study to become a sailor as an adult, which previously was not possible.

The government has concluded several maritime agreements with other countries outside the EU to mutually approve various qualifications. We have simplified agency contacts and introduced a flagging pilot at Transportstyrelsen, precisely to facilitate flagging.

The shipping industry welcomes the government's maritime work. Several shipping companies have now chosen to flag their ships with the Swedish flag.

Stena Bulk was first out when they already in April last year announced that they planned to flag up to five tankers. Sirius Shipping is putting the Swedish flag on all seven ships that are now under construction. Furetank has, with its partners over the last two years, taken delivery of a total of nine ships, all delivered to the Swedish flag. An additional five ships are to be delivered within the next 14 months, with the intention that those too shall have the Swedish flag. The new bareboat register we have introduced has contributed to two new Swedish-flagged ships.

The Swedish-flagged vessels are simply increasing with the moderate-led government's diligent work. We have, therefore, Madam Speaker, reversed the gloomy trend. Now we have over 100 vessels with a Swedish flag. We Moderates say it as it is, and we also keep what we have promised.

We have not only worked with economic measures to strengthen Swedish shipping; we have also taken measures for a strong inland shipping. We have extended the national shipping coordinator's mandate with a focus on the shipping transition and the shift of freight to precisely shipping.

We prioritize infrastructure to and from our ports. One example is the Hjulstabron, which we want to prioritize in the national plan. We also say a flat no to a new low bridge in Gothenburg, which would severely limit the possibilities for shipping.

We have introduced a ban on the discharge of scrubber water. It is a good environmental measure to reduce emissions of hazardous substances such as sulfur and heavy metals.

We have saved the important railway ferries in southern Sweden, which are our floating bridges to the continent. We have ensured that Sweden remains in IMO and exerts an international influence over shipping. Shipping is not something that stops within Sweden's borders; rather, we must often reach agreements internationally.

Just as the previous speaker, Member Ståhl, pointed out from the rostrum, we have also introduced seven new border crossings, i.e., crossings where one can disembark and embark on different vessels. It is for the sake of the seafaring people, so that they can come home to their families. We are not finished just because new border crossings have been introduced, but we also need to ensure that the police extend their opening hours so that the border crossings remain open.

Transportstyrelsen has been tasked with facilitating the transition to electrified shipping, with a focus on converting ships to electric power.

When it comes to our dear pleasure boats, of which we have plenty in the country, we are working to stop the theft of these by granting new powers to customs personnel who shall counteract the export of such stolen goods from the country.

Madam Speaker! At least a lot is happening within shipping, but there is also more to be done. One area that needs to be strengthened even further is precisely the supply of competence to ensure that there is skilled personnel for our ships.

I have faith in the future when it comes to shipping. It is about green transition and innovation. There are prominent shipping companies in the area, and I believe in carrots instead of punitive taxes and the whip.

We have much to thank shipping for. This applies to both export and import, as I mentioned earlier. It is about the transport of both goods and people. Then, tourism must not be forgotten, not least.

According to statistics from the Swedish Maritime Administration, a total of 20.5 million passengers traveled by ferry within, to, or from Sweden during the last year. 20.5 million passengers! Ferry traffic is not only important for domestic travel but is also a significant transport route for foreign tourists.

Tourism in Sweden generates 419 billion kronor according to Svensk Turism, and it generates 70 billion in tax revenues. Our passenger shipping companies spread tourism to port cities across the entire country, and many travelers then continue to smaller towns and more remote destinations. In this way, ferry traffic promotes regional development, strengthens the local tourism industry, and creates growth opportunities even outside the major cities. Shipping is important for all of Sweden.

We in the Moderate-led government do not pit different types of transport against each other; all types of transport are needed based on their own purpose. But one thing is certain, Madam Speaker: Without shipping, Sweden stops. The government has delivered concrete measures: the stamp duty for the mortgaging of ships has been abolished, the regulatory framework for the hiring in and out of unmanned vessels has been changed, and we now see a trend break, namely that more Swedish ships have been flagged in. This is the result of an active industrial policy, not of state micro-management strategies. We have the ambition to get more Swedish-flagged ships, and the path there goes through competitive conditions, not through more bureaucracy.

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

(Applause)

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! Member of Parliament Johanna Rantsi has praised herself and the government for its work during the past parliamentary term regarding Swedish shipping policy. I will also, to some extent, praise the government because a number of things have happened, for example, an update of the tonnage tax system and the bareboat register. There is quite a lot that is good.

When I listened to the member's speech, I thought a bit. The member spoke about unrest, wartime, and the importance of Swedish seafarers on flagged ships. It is correct as the member says that a number of ships were flagged in 2025, no fewer than 13 ships. That is good. Now nine of the ships have received a fixed safety manning from Transportstyrelsen, that is to say who shall serve. This means 236 full-time positions on the ships. That is very good.

But the small problem is that 196 of the services went to foreign sailors. Only 17 percent went to Swedish sailors. That was not quite what we had intended. If there is unrest, we need Swedish sailors on our ships in order to sustain the country. Otherwise, there is the risk that they go home to Asia and leave the ships.

I have the following question for the member: How are we going to move the issue forward so that Swedes will start working on the ships? That is where I am a bit worried.

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

Johanna Rantsi (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for a very pertinent question.

I share the member's concern that we need more of the Swedish seafaring people in Sweden. One of the biggest challenges for ships and shipping companies to be able to fly the Swedish flag is precisely the supply of competence.

We have looked into the issue, and as I said in my speech, we have taken certain measures, but much remains to be done. We believe that more educational pathways into the maritime profession are needed. More than just officers work on a ship. There are many professions on a ship, and we would like to see more educational pathways in.

Just as I briefly mentioned in my speech, one can today study to become a sailor as an adult. That was not possible just one or two years ago. At that time, it was a basic upper secondary education where adults were not allowed to study. It is not everyone who knows at the age of 15–16 whether they want to become a sailor or not.

We are working on removing obstacles to education for maritime professions. I would like to see us develop a stronger cooperation with the navy. It is closely linked to what the member who was inside spoke about in their speech regarding defense capability. Many young people work within the navy and operate boats there. They receive a good maritime education within the military, which they cannot really credit towards other education systems today. I would like to see us better utilize the competence that exists within the navy. There I know the industry has a close cooperation, which has been expanded in recent years. They appear at each other's fairs and meet each other.

We naturally have a responsibility as politicians to remove statutory obstacles in regulations, but the industry also has a great responsibility to be visible.

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Johanna Rantsi for the answer.

I may not be entirely satisfied with the answer, and I believe there are problems even in the future. We have worked on these issues politically together with Blå Tillväxt, that is to say the industry on both the trade union side and the employer side.

But I feel that we are not really getting anywhere. I still want to place some weight on the flagging. The member himself raised Stena's flagging of the three large tankers. I did not say it earlier, but I can say it now, namely that there were zero Swedes on them. It is naturally not good when Sweden's largest shipping company handles the issue in that way.

Then the answer is that you are looking at shortening the training. I am not sure that it will be completely correct when it goes so fast. What will the consequences be? What is the impact analysis of this, that is, reviewing the work of speeding up the training in maritime safety? It feels like this is more about economics, administration, and short processes. Is it certain that it will result in better maritime safety out on the ships? I am not convinced of that.

I am also not convinced that this acceleration of adult education is completely perfect. It means that the opportunities for further education are limited because one does not receive higher education eligibility. It is clear that there is a need among the seafaring people to be able to expand this, so that one can become a mate or a commander. This naturally complicates things, and it may be the case that young people and others who are interested in working at sea will choose something else.

The latest proposal that has come from the employers' side is that English should be the language within Swedish shipping. I think that one should speak Swedish as well. Otherwise, I do not think that we will have Swedish seafarers on our ferries in the future without foreigners there as well.

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

Johanna Rantsi (M)

Madam Speaker! I was stuck, above all, on two of the questions that the member posed. What I want to start by answering is what the member mentioned briefly at the end regarding language requirements on our ships. I do not quite share the member's opinion that Swedish perhaps should be a requirement forever. We see that English is becoming more and more common and is something we live with in everyday life in our entire society. We also have very similar Nordic languages. It is entirely possible for someone who speaks Norwegian and someone who speaks Swedish to understand each other, just as for someone who speaks Scanian and someone who speaks Danish. I and our side in politics are open to reviewing this and, in any case, making an analysis of what it would entail. I do not want to close that door completely.

The Chairman also spoke about the supply of skills. I would like to raise the issue of getting our students to stay in the profession. When I visit our maritime colleges, for example in Kalmar, I meet students who testify that many of their older classmates who have trained in maritime studies go ashore and work with completely different things than maritime. The energy industry takes many of those who are trained, as the work tasks are similar. But the students themselves testify that they train because they want to work on Swedish-flagged ships.

This goes hand in hand. Without Swedish-flagged ships, we do not get students who move forward to work within the industry. Without students who are to enter the industry, we do not get Swedish-flagged ships.

I think we should sit still in the boat for a little while and see how this develops. But I share the member's concern regarding the supply of skills. It is one of the biggest challenges ahead.

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is an export country. Our industry, our jobs and our welfare depend on goods being able to be transported to and from our country. Almost everything goes via the sea. Around 90 percent of Sweden's imports and exports are transported by sea. Still, shipping is all too often a blind spot in Swedish transport policy.

When one reads this report, one is struck by how many decisive questions still lack a clear political decision. The Swedish Maritime Administration's finances are uncertain, icebreaker capacity needs to be strengthened, the role of ports in the transport system is unclear, and Sweden still lacks a national strategy for its ports. This is not sufficient for a country like Sweden, which is dependent on shipping. Shipping policy is not a niche issue. It is industrial policy, preparedness policy, and to a very high degree, security policy.

Madam Speaker! The first thing I want to raise is the situation of the Swedish Maritime Administration. The Swedish Maritime Administration is responsible for some of the most central functions in our transport system: shipping lanes, pilotage, icebreaking, sea and air rescue, and hydrographic information – nautical charts, as we say in Swedish. These are activities that are absolutely crucial for both safety at sea and the transport of the business sector.

But we also know that the Swedish Maritime Administration has had a strained economic situation for a long time. Revenues have been pressured while costs have increased. The result has been savings discussions, increased fees, and an uncertainty regarding how the operations will be financed in the long term. This is not sustainable.

This is fundamentally critical social infrastructure. Just like roads and railways, icebreaking and sea rescue are part of what makes Sweden function. Yet, large parts of this activity are financed through fees from shipping itself. This means that, in practice, shipping is forced to bear costs that should actually be a national responsibility. The government has admittedly provided some funds, but these are primarily short-term solutions. Sweden needs a long-term and sustainable funding model for the Swedish Maritime Administration.

Madam Speaker! Another central issue concerns the competitiveness of shipping. The Swedish-flagged merchant fleet is today significantly smaller than its counterparts in several comparable countries. This is problematic. When ships are flagged out, we do not only lose jobs and tax revenues. We also lose maritime competence and experience and, in the long run, a part of our national capacity to act. This applies particularly in a security policy situation where transport can become a strategic resource.

That is why it is important that Sweden has competitive conditions for Swedish-flagged ships. Some steps have been taken. The stamp duty on ship registrations has been removed, and changes in tonnage taxation are being discussed. I assume that the government will present the proposal, but it has not happened yet. These efforts are good but insufficient. Sweden must have conditions that are at least as good as our Nordic neighbors. Otherwise, shipping companies will continue to choose other flags.

Madam Speaker! This is not just a commercial policy issue. It is also a preparedness issue. A country like Sweden needs to have access to ships, seafarers, and maritime competence.

Madam Speaker! A question that sometimes receives less attention but which is absolutely crucial is icebreaking. Every winter we are reminded of how central it is. Sweden has ports far up in the Bothnian Bay and the Baltic Sea. From there, much of Swedish ore, Swedish steel, and Swedish forest products are exported. When the ice sets in, the shipping lanes must be kept open – otherwise, the exports risk coming to a standstill. Icebreaking is therefore not just a transport issue. It is also a matter of industrial policy and preparedness policy. In a security policy situation where transport can become crucial for supply, icebreaking is also a part of Sweden's total defense. Therefore, Sweden should ensure both investments in new icebreakers and a stable financing of the operations.

Madam Speaker! I particularly want to highlight the role of the ports. Sweden's ports are its gateways to the rest of the world. It is there that our export goods leave the country, and it is there that the imports arrive. The ports are also nodes where shipping, railway, and road meet. Despite this, Sweden still lacks a unified national port strategy. It is a problem.

Today, ports are often developed based on local initiatives and regional conditions. This is fundamentally positive. But since ports simultaneously constitute strategic national infrastructure, a national perspective is also needed. A national port strategy could identify which ports are strategically important for Sweden, strengthen the links between ports and other infrastructure, contribute to more efficient freight transport and strengthen preparedness in the transport system, as well as provide us with better planning conditions for investments in ports, shipping lanes, and connecting infrastructure.

For an export-dependent country, this should be a self-evident part of the transport policy. Yet, Sweden still lacks such a strategy. We Social Democrats consider this a deficiency in the government's policy.

Madam Speaker! Shipping also plays an important role in the climate transition of the transport sector. By transporting more goods by sea and rail, the burden on the road network can be reduced and emissions can be lowered.

Shipping has a great opportunity to contribute to a more sustainable transport system, but it also requires that politics creates the conditions through investments in ports, shipping lanes, and efficient logistics solutions.

Madam Speaker! Shipping is often invisible in everyday life. We see the trucks on the roads. We see the trains on the railway. But without functioning shipping, Sweden stands still. This applies in everyday life, when industry exports its goods, but it also applies in crisis and, ultimately, in war, when transport capacity and security of supply become decisive.

That is why Sweden needs a policy that strengthens Swedish shipping's competitiveness, the long-term funding of the Swedish Maritime Administration, icebreaking capacity, and the role of ports in the transport system. That is why Sweden should also take the next step and develop a national port strategy – for Swedish industry, for Swedish preparedness, and so that the transport system functions throughout Sweden.

With this, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of reservation 12.

(Applause)

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! I have some questions for Mattias Ottosson.

Mattias Ottosson was previously involved in an exchange of remarks with Johanna Rantsi and spoke about the number of Swedes in the shipping industry. There, I intended to ask Mattias Ottosson if the Social Democrats have any thoughts on how to go about filling the ships with Swedish sailors. I have verified that Seko sjöfolk have agreed with the employer on the number of employees and which nationalities they have. The same applies to Sjöbefälsföreningen. Then one can ask the Social Democrats if they have an interest in that politics should interfere in the agreements between trade unions and employers. It would have been interesting to hear.

Madam Speaker! Regarding this port strategy, which the Social Democrats are talking themselves warm about, I would like to assert that we indirectly have such a thing when it comes to core ports. There, we in Sweden today have, by the EU, designated important ports that have advantages. We also have comprehensive ports, which also have advantages but not quite in the same way as the core ports.

Madam Speaker! Mattias Ottosson raised the issue of the Swedish Maritime Administration and its funding. I would then like to ask Mattias Ottosson: How do the Social Democrats want to solve the funding for the Swedish Maritime Administration, which today is a commercial enterprise?

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Jimmy Ståhl, for the questions! These are always equally important questions that need to be discussed.

No, Sweden has no port strategy. We would need a port strategy. Basically, nothing is happening in the area.

The problem today is that the expansion and transformation of Luleå harbor has stalled. The transformation and expansion of Gothenburg harbor has stalled. Landskrona harbor, they can't even get around to. That question just lies there – nothing is happening! Therefore, we need to have a strategy where we talk about which harbors we are going to invest in. The government is not acting at all. It is very serious.

Jimmy Ståhl does not need to teach me how the Swedish trade union movement works. I come from it, and I belong to a party that was formed by the Swedish trade union movement. We would never politically interfere in the collective bargaining process.

But in times of crisis, there are certain needs. It is not so many years ago that there was a great war in Europe. It was when my grandfather was young. Then we needed war sailors. Then we needed Swedish seafarers on Swedish ships who could supply the country with the goods we needed. So it is now as well. It is restless in Europe again. We are dependent on Swedish shipping, and then we need Swedish seafarers on our ships. We need to arrange that.

The problem today is that it is going in the other direction: ships are being flagged to Sweden, but there are fewer and fewer Swedish seafarers. That is not good.

(Applause)

And when it comes to the Swedish Maritime Administration: The long-term contracts must end! It should become a regular state agency like all others that are funded via the state. Then, of course, one can introduce fees for certain things.

I also think that the government in the National Plan should ensure that they override the Swedish Transport Administration so that there is more shipping in the national plan. The icebreaking, the operation of our Swedish icebreakers, should be there. But last time the minister was in the committee, he said that merchant shipping should pay for the icebreaking. I think that is wrong.

(Applause)

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! Regarding trade unions, I can say that even Sverigedemokraterna have great experience of trade union work. I have that myself.

But there is a dilemma there; I agree with Mattias Ottosson on that. I would have gladly seen 100 percent Swedish employees on Swedish-flagged ships. On that, we agree. The problem today is that we have far too few sailors. But given the flagging that is occurring, we nevertheless have great opportunities to get training places, internship places and so on, as well as for someone older to enlist and become a sailor – to make a career change later in life. That is absolutely wonderful.

You don't damn well know what you want to be when you are a schoolchild or a high school student. I didn't know it. I became a dockworker and was satisfied with that. I would have gladly become a sailor, but unfortunately, I had defective color vision and had to stay on land.

Above all, I do not believe that a Swedish seafarer who trains late in life is a security risk. We have good safety judgment in Sweden. I believe that Swedish shipping is among the safest in the world. We have a safety mindset, and we get that with our breast milk.

When it comes to port strategy, I absolutely believe that core ports provide an expanded opportunity, especially when it comes to expansions and investments in infrastructure. They are Sweden's five largest ports. They are the most important ports that are designated as core ports. Indirectly, we have a port strategy.

Regarding the Swedish Maritime Administration, I personally think it is very unfortunate that it is a state-owned enterprise. It is not good as it looks today.

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! I also believe that education is important so that we can get more Swedish seafarers. I believe that we can streamline and improve the education in many ways, both when it comes to youth and when it comes to adult education. But I do not think that in those types of educations, one should close the possibility for higher education.

I also believe it is important that one feels that one can make a career if one goes to sea, just like in any other profession. It becomes more difficult if one closes the doors. There, one should consider how one works with education, so that it also becomes possible to make a career at sea. Someone who has been a sailor may want to have the opportunity to eventually become an officer on the ship and in that way contribute to Swedish shipping.

I also think we should be careful about removing the language requirement. On Swedish ships, we should speak Swedish, I think. I understand that one must also speak English, but it should not only be English. Having requirements that one must speak Swedish is also a way to push for us to get more Swedish sailors on Swedish ships. I think that is good.

Last but not least – I shouldn't really be interfering in that question – it is clear that if Swedish sailors receive better pay, there will also be more of them.

I do not share the member's view that we manage the port activities in a good way. We really need to establish a port strategy where the state takes primary responsibility. Then, I view the local initiatives and the regional development that occurs regarding Sweden's ports very positively. I am not of the opinion that we should nationalize ports, but it is about getting shipping lanes and connections to the ports on land established. In that case, we must select some ports that are the important ones. Perhaps it concerns a few more than the five core ports.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating maritime issues. We can well observe that Sweden and Norway in many respects are an island. We obviously have a connection with Finland, but given where the population center is located, we are completely dependent on shipping.

It has already been pointed out on several occasions that approximately 90 percent of all transport of goods coming into and out of Sweden actually takes place by boat. It is the same situation when it comes to passenger transport. A large part of the passenger transport between the Nordics and the rest of Europe actually takes place by boat. We are completely dependent on Swedish shipping.

We can also observe, Madam Speaker, that we find ourselves in a new security policy situation. A few years ago, a ship got stuck in the Suez Canal. It affected the world economy. It was a ship that was stuck for perhaps some month – I do not remember. It was difficult to get it free. It affected the entire world economy. It affected companies' ability to produce, as goods got stuck in that queue of ships that built up.

We currently have a situation in the Strait of Hormuz. It is a military situation far away from us, but it affects us directly. Shipping is therefore incredibly important.

When it comes to the security situation, it is not just about what happens far away from us. Swedish authorities have now taken two Russian ships – which are flagged with another flag, which are substandard and which are in Swedish waters. We have an entirely new security policy situation. In that case, I am grateful that we have a government and, in this issue, an opposition that has stood very united when it comes to the conflict regarding, for example, Ukraine.

When it comes to shipping, we can state, as several speakers have already done, that we are achieving quite a lot. I am a bit surprised when I listen to some of the exchanges. One thinks that the government should do even more. It is perhaps in the opposition's nature to think that the government should do very much more. But then I can wonder: Why didn't they do that four years ago?

We can look at what the government has actually done. We have dredged. We have introduced new environmental requirements. This includes, among other things, that scrubber water may not be discharged anywhere in Swedish territorial waters. We are working on developing fuels and electrification. One can state that work is ongoing. Several of us have made study visits, and the business sector is extremely active. Then there are – and I think this can be pointed out even from a government party – requests that it should go faster. It is only fair to take that with us into the future work that I hope we will get to do after the election.

There are other important things that have happened, which are of a more economic nature. It concerns the abolished stamp duty. It concerns the change in tonnage taxation. It is completely correct that it is not in place yet, but we know that it is on its way. We have the English word bareboat register. This facilitates for companies to rent boats for shorter periods. All of this together improves the economic situation for shipping. It has also had as a consequence, which has been pointed out, that more and more boats are being flagged in.

Madam Speaker! When it comes to flagging specifically, I believe it is important with the debate that has been about education but also about the flagging itself. But one thing that I miss in the debate and which I believe we will all need to look at together is: What type of boats are being flagged in? We are going to need a range of boats. We are going to need to have a mix of boats, especially if we end up in the dreadful situation where, for example, the war in Ukraine spreads to the Baltics. From that perspective, I believe it is very important that passenger transport boats are also flagged in. We need a breadth of vessels, and we need to have a continuous review of this.

There is another important thing that the government has implemented. It is about more border crossings now having been completed. I, as an Uddevallabo, am of course happy. When it comes to our port, we have longed for this. In Grums, people are also happy, but they are not as happy in other places around Vänern.

There are different ways to look at this. One could have more ports. I believe that one also needs to think a bit about how the police work. When it is a smaller port where there are few arrivals, it could be the case that one perhaps reports a day in advance: We are on our way in. Then the police could meet them. I believe, therefore, that there is more to be done here, but I am very happy with what the government has done so far.

Icebreakers are a very important issue. Here, I am also happy and grateful. I have the privilege of being in my eighth year during this double period in the Riksdag. How it will be moving forward is decided by the voters. We discussed icebreakers very much even during the previous mandate period. And now the government has been involved in financing, so that an icebreaker has been purchased. We are in the process of producing two more. That is good, but it will not be enough. A long-term strategy was needed. I regret a little that one could not reach an agreement with Finland earlier – then we could have moved forward together. But we are where we are, and there is work ongoing where we will improve the ability to break ice.

Then there is the discussion about costs. Especially when it comes to shipping, I would wish that we find another way to finance this. I hope that we can return in the future to the discussion on how to finance the Swedish Maritime Administration. As it is now, it is the organization we have and the one that we, from a government perspective, manage. But we have, as said, been able to come up with a strategy for icebreakers here.

Madam Speaker! Education is one of the major Achilles' heels. I have previously sat in the Committee on Employment. The tough part regarding education is that this applies all the way across. I do not believe that we in the Committee on Transport have had a debate here in the chamber without us having talked about the shortage of truck drivers and taxi drivers. We can listen to our friends who work in healthcare. They will talk about the shortage of healthcare personnel. We can listen to the friends who work in education. They will say that there is a shortage of staff in education.

We are, therefore, entering a very exciting situation, where we have a shortage of staff in almost all occupational categories.

But the government has still done some things. It has been made easier for adults to become merchant sailors. We are, for example, having discussions about validation when it concerns sailors from the Navy, which I hope one can reach a conclusion on. We have made it easier when it comes to obtaining the qualification of ship officer class VII, which is positive.

I thought there would be a big debate about Gotland. The debate does not seem to have become so big so far. But it is the same thing there; it is a big and important issue. We must look at Gotland from both a civil perspective and a military perspective. The government will continue to work with the ongoing dialogue regarding Gotland.

Then it concerns the connection to the ports. I personally – I am clear that it concerns me personally; then no one needs to bark at the government – believe that it is somewhat wise that we look at this regarding the ports. I believe that I have said in previous debates that it was ten or twelve years ago that the last port investigation arrived. We indeed have an agreement on core ports, which has been highlighted here in the debate. But we have not in Sweden found a very good solution for how we should connect ports to other infrastructure. Therefore, I promise that at least I will continue to argue for that line in the election campaign and also internally: that we need to take a holistic approach when it comes to the connection between ports and other infrastructure.

It is about both road and railway. When it comes to other infrastructure, with the future environmental goals we have, it will be about electrification. It will be about where we are to bunker and store new fuels. I personally believe that there is a need for a new port study. One will have to see where such a study lands in that case. But if I remember correctly, it is ten or twelve years since the last port study.

We see other areas where we are actually making a course correction. The government has made a huge course correction, for example, regarding aviation, and I am not at all unfamiliar with the fact that a similar course correction is needed even regarding the ports and shipping.

With this, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and rejection of all motions.

(Applause)

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

Malin Östh (V)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating shipping, a very important mode of transport. Many have emphasized the importance of shipping here today. All parties also express a desire to strengthen the conditions and competitiveness of shipping.

The government has taken several measures during this mandate period. But there is one issue that the government has not handled, and that is the financing and organization of the Swedish Maritime Administration. There are no proposals from the government there. It is no small issue in this context. On the contrary, it is a key issue for shipping, a real sticking point. It is also an issue that has been investigated. But the investigation, which contains several sharp proposals, has been on the government's desk since February 2023, i.e., for more than three years. It is a failing grade for the Tidö parties that they have not succeeded, or wanted to, handle that issue.

The Swedish Maritime Administration is today organized as a business entity with return requirements and is financed to 70 percent by fees, primarily fairway fees and pilotage fees. The Swedish Maritime Administration's conditions are therefore closely linked with the conditions of shipping. They really go together.

Vänsterpartiet has long had several proposals to handle this. We say: Transform Sjöfartsverket from a business agency with return requirements into an administrative authority without return requirements.

Also take a proper grip on the state funding. Increase appropriations that have not been adjusted for a very long time, and also index the appropriations so that they are not eroded over time.

Work with long-term perspective instead of the short-term jerkiness that now characterizes the state's commitment. Also introduce an appropriation with full cost coverage for the operation and maintenance of icebreakers.

It is some of the proposals that we are putting forward in this area and which, taken together, would make a big difference, and then not just for the Swedish Maritime Administration but for shipping as a whole.

Madam Speaker! In last year's maritime debate, we in the Left Party highlighted the Gotland traffic. Now we do it again. The ferry traffic is Gotland's highway to the mainland and the most important means of transport for freight and passenger transport to and from Gotland.

The ferry traffic must be built on frequent trips, short travel times, and low, predictable prices. All of these things must be in place at the same time. They are not today. Consequently, the state – and the government – also fail in their responsibility for functional accessibility. Accessibility is not just about it being physically possible to transport oneself. It must also be practically possible. Today, the prices in the ferry traffic are so high that they become a barrier that very palpably worsens and limits accessibility.

New figures came out the other day showing that every fifth Gotlander has considered moving and leaving Gotland. It is 52 percent who travel significantly less than they had desired and needed, and 11 percent of Gotlanders do not travel at all. These are incredibly alarming figures that we here inside must take most seriously.

The last maritime debate was in June, and now we stand here and highlight the ferry traffic again. It is an issue that has been up for debate in the chamber many times. It has also been taken up in the transport committee and most recently in the finance committee. Seminars, demonstrations, and petitions have been organized. Much has happened in this issue, and at the same time, far too little.

Time is passing, and the high ferry prices persist. Gotland and the people of Gotland are being squeezed. Nor will the new ferry agreement that applies from 2027 bring the change that is needed. The prices will continue to be both unpredictable and too high.

Measures were needed in both the short and long term. Here and now, a compensation was needed. Vänsterpartiet has for several years budgeted an annual compensation in accordance with what Region Gotland has requested in order to be able to press down the ferry prices. Now we expect the government to do the same in the autumn budget.

In February, after the issue was raised in the Committee on Finance, the Moderates promised that an annual compensation of 250 million would be in place from 2026, i.e., in the autumn budget. According to the chairman of the Committee on Finance, it was needed to properly bring down the prices for the Gotlanders. Now it is up to proof. We are waiting, and Gotland is waiting. Do not betray, but tear down the economic wall against the mainland and take responsibility for a functioning accessibility for Gotland!

Madam Speaker! As I said initially, it is important to strengthen the conditions for shipping. It is needed. The cargo volumes in Swedish ports have increased compared to last year but are still at a level that is lower than they were before the pandemic.

Shipping plays an important role in the transition to a transport-efficient society where we meet our climate goals, but in that case, shipping also needs to transition. From the industry, a climate step for shipping is requested to accelerate and facilitate the transition.

From Vänsterpartiet, we think this is an interesting proposal that needs to be investigated. We also want to see measures to increase the proportion of fossil-free fuels within shipping and an investment support with state co-financing for green technology development.

Madam Speaker! Finally, what concerns the competitiveness of shipping must be built on good working conditions and a good working environment. Strengthened competitiveness is not built through worsened conditions. It is important. Sweden has acceded to the ILO Maritime Labour Convention, and that obligates. Sweden has a responsibility to ensure that the convention's rules on working conditions are followed.

From Vänsterpartiet, we are also, just like the other parties, concerned about an increased proportion of Swedish-flagged vessels. But then we need to ensure that as the proportion of Swedish-flagged vessels increases, we also see an increasing proportion of Swedish maritime personnel. This is needed to secure the supply of competence, but also to ensure that Sweden has a robust shipping industry where there is capacity to man the vessels also in a crisis situation.

The figures show so far that the flagged vessels have resulted in a limited number of job opportunities for Swedish maritime personnel. This is an issue that really needs a focus forward, which Mattias Ottosson has also accounted for in a previous exchange of replies in a good way.

I move for approval of reservation number 19.

(Applause)

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

Helena Gellerman (L)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating maritime issues in the Committee on Transport. Sweden has fantastic natural resources and world-leading companies that export the majority of their production to all continents.

I come from Gothenburg. Every day from my house, I see the freight trains passing by to the Port of Gothenburg. It is timber and endless amounts of container wagons. I therefore see very clearly the connection between the railway and maritime transport.

Shipping accounts for 90 percent of our exports abroad. Therefore, it is incredibly important for Sweden's companies, jobs, and welfare. At the same time, the war in Ukraine has shown that we must strengthen Swedish shipping, regarding both Swedish-registered ships and Swedish seafarers, to strengthen preparedness. It is one of the primary reasons why the government has placed a great focus on facilitating the country's shipping.

Madam Speaker! The importance of shipping for our Swedish companies and for our preparedness means that we Liberals want to remove obstacles for the registration of ships to Sweden. This applies in particular to the stamp duty for new ships.

The stamp duty also had a negative impact on the development towards climate-friendly shipping. Therefore, we in the Liberals and our coalition parties have ensured that the stamp duty was removed on July 1 last year. Since then, the flagging has increased, which is very positive. Finally, we have succeeded in reversing the trend that has been talked about since long before I entered the Riksdag in 2018.

The government is also changing the tonnage tax to further facilitate shipping. Sweden cannot have radically different rules compared to what exists in our neighboring countries, for example Denmark. The new tonnage tax is introduced on 20 July, but it applies from and including the tax year 2027. It now also covers special shipping.

We also remove the requirement for international speed. It is replaced with a requirement that the vessels are used in traffic exposed to international competition on the shipping market. I think this is a very good change, and these are requested changes that will make it more attractive to register ships in Sweden.

Another thing we have done is to introduce bareboat charter from February 1. We have changed the regulations regarding the chartering of foreign vessels and the chartering of Swedish vessels. Among other things, it is possible to temporarily register the vessels that are in the bareboat register under the Swedish flag. The purpose is, of course, to improve the possibilities for Swedish shipping companies to organize their operations in a rational way and finance new vessels. As we have heard earlier here in the debate, it is also about obtaining more climate-friendly vessels.

This week, the government decided to open seven new border crossings to facilitate international transport. There has been a problem in that sailors have not been able to go ashore because there have been a lack of border crossings in a number of ports.

The Liberals and our coalition parties take the competitiveness of shipping and its importance for Sweden's prosperity and preparedness seriously. It has been neglected for eight years with a Social Democratic government. In previous debates, it has been said that it is bad that one thing after another has not been done. But the problem is that all the things we have done during this mandate period were not done during the previous mandate period.

Madam Speaker! The Swedish Maritime Administration has a central role in how shipping is developed. The authority is primarily financed by fairway and pilotage fees from commercial shipping. The Liberals think that is good. At the same time, it is important that the fees take into account the impact on the competitiveness of Swedish shipping and that they do not differ significantly from our neighboring countries – again, so that we get many ships coming to Sweden.

The impact of berth fees on the competitiveness of different ports needs to be reviewed. A developed digital berth service is very central, not least in Western Sweden up to Vänern.

The Swedish Maritime Administration has a strained economy, which affects the fees. We are looking into whether certain parts can be grant-funded, but in general, the Liberals believe that the Swedish Maritime Administration should remain as a commercial company and that it is the trading companies that should pay.

Madam Speaker! The Swedish icebreakers are in urgent need of replacement. The icebreakers have a very important function, namely to keep Swedish ports ice-free. They also have an important function regarding preparedness. Companies must be able to plan risk-free to be able to export their products via our ports next year; otherwise, these companies will move. In the proposal for the national infrastructure plan, funding for two icebreakers is now included, and Trafikverket is collaborating with the Finnish Trafikledsverket to look at how a joint procurement can be carried out.

Here in the chamber, there is often talk about the shift of freight from road and rail to maritime transport. We have introduced an investment support of 200 million to facilitate the shift of freight transport from rail to maritime transport. At the same time, a specifically increased focus is required on the infrastructure leading out to the ports. Roads, railways, and dry ports are a prerequisite for maritime transport to function, and we know that it can be done. A successful example is the Port of Gothenburg and the connection to the Västra stambanan, where over 60 percent of the port's freight is transported.

Göteborgs Hamn, which operates Sweden's, Finland's and Norway's most important port, forecasts an increase in freight of 80 percent by 2035 – that is, in less than ten years. How will that freight be able to travel by rail when it is already utilized to 100 percent today? To prevent an infarction regarding freight transport to all of Scandinavia, the Liberals want the entire stretch of Göteborg–Alingsås to be expanded to four tracks now for the sake of passenger traffic, companies, and preparedness.

Madam Speaker! Well-functioning ferry traffic to and from Gotland is vital for the transport needs of the residents and the business community, as well as for our preparedness. In this regard, the price level is important. The new agreement, which applies from 2027 to 2035, reflects this. Destination Gotland will continue to carry out the transports. We have also tasked Trafikverket with investigating whether the state should own the ferries after 2035.

The availability of Swedish seafarers has decreased. It is concerning when we see more non-registrations and more who want to sail under the Swedish flag. All the positive measures the government has taken for shipping have received attention. It is pleasing that more are now seeking maritime training, not least the officer training, at Chalmers and Linné University. The government has also adjusted the eligibility requirements so that more can obtain eligibility to operate medium-sized vessels in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! Shipping accounts for 3 percent of global climate emissions, with an increasing trend. The EU has taken the lead and decided at the beginning of this mandate period on the Fit for 55 climate package with four policy instruments that have a major impact on shipping: the emissions trading system ETS, which is to be fully implemented this year, a revised energy taxation directive where the tax exemption for shipping fuels was removed in 2023, an increasing reduction obligation through FuelEU Maritime, and requirements for infrastructure for alternative fuels and electricity.

We Liberals welcome that there will now be competition-neutral rules throughout the EU. This also strengthens the competitiveness of the Swedish shipping industry, which is far ahead in the climate transition. The government has also addressed the environmental issue that washed exhaust gases are discharged into the sea and pollute the marine ecosystems. From July 1, 2025, open ship scrubbers are prohibited, and from January 1, 2029, all scrubbers that discharge water in Swedish sea territory are prohibited.

All the questions I have raised were on the table for the Social Democratic government during the previous term, without results. It is this government with the coalition partners that has taken a long series of measures to facilitate Swedish shipping – for the sake of the companies, the climate, and the country's preparedness and prosperity.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision and against all motions.

(Applause)

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! I shall be very brief.

In the presentation, I believe the member expressed that one is looking at a joint procurement of icebreakers together with Finland. I believe the Christian Democrat member expressed something similar as well. My question is whether the member could elaborate on that a bit more.

My view is that Sweden purchases and procures its icebreakers itself, that Finland will procure slightly fewer icebreakers than what Sweden wants, and that Sweden was told no regarding participation in the option that Finland had. I would like the member to elaborate on the issue of joint procurement with Finland when it comes to icebreakers.

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

Helena Gellerman (L)

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

I think it is very important that we work together with Finland on these issues because we have the same problems, even if the difficult problems actually lie on the Finnish side due to sea ice and such. But we have big problems in Sweden when it comes primarily to the Norrland municipalities.

We have a huge need; we actually need to replace all four icebreakers. It costs a lot of money, and therefore, according to the infrastructure plan from Trafikverket, we are to step in and finance two of them. There is a need for four, and therefore it is important that we continue to have a dialogue with Finland to see how we can procure them.

There are different ways to do this. One might procure one but have an option on several. It is extremely important that one can then exercise the option and that there is money for more ships. Now we have money for two, and therefore it is important to continue the discussions with Finland to see if we can move forward and find common areas.

It is also about the technical specifications for the icebreakers. There, one can find common parts and exchange experience. Finland also has extensive experience in building these boats, and that is why it is important to continue the dialogue.

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

Mattias Ottosson (S)

Madam Speaker! I share the member's view. We are already breaking ice together with Finland – it is an ongoing work, and we are trying to find as much cooperation as possible. But both Sweden and Finland are in a situation where it concerns the procurement of new icebreakers. We have already procured one, although it has been appealed, and the green light has been given even for the next procurement. But just as the member says, all our older icebreakers need to be replaced.

Finland is in the same situation, but my impression is that we were not allowed to participate in the procurement they were going to carry out – or if we chose to stand outside. I repeat the question, because I assume that in the current situation there is no cooperation with Finland when it comes to specifically investments in new icebreakers. There are many other forms of cooperation, but I am mainly looking for how things stand with the procurement of Swedish icebreakers. Is it to take place together with Finland, or do we continue on our own?

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

Helena Gellerman (L)

Madam Speaker! As I mentioned in my previous reply, we have an exchange of the technical specifications for how these icebreakers shall function. Many requirements are common. In that case, one must take into account the competence that exists in Finland, and in Sweden, and the experiences we have of breaking ice.

Looking ahead, we see that we need to procure two more icebreakers. Therefore, this dialogue must continue. Do all the vessels currently in the Baltic Sea cover all the needs? Can we carry out some procurements and Finland some others? Given that we have such a good exchange with Finland, one wants to see that all these boats together cover all the needs that exist in the Baltic Sea.

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

Linus Lakso (MP)

Madam Speaker! We see a war breaking out in the Middle East, where the USA and Israel have attacked Iran. Iran has responded, among other things, by stopping shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, where a large part of the world's fossil fuels pass.

Everyone who has not listened to this debate might not know that 90 percent of the world's trade takes place via maritime transport. This also applies to imports to Sweden – 90 percent of the trade to Sweden depends on maritime transport functioning. Functioning maritime transport is therefore incredibly important for Sweden.

But there is a problem here, which has only been raised in passing in this debate: Shipping today is completely dependent on fossil fuels from what we can describe as rogue states – non-democracies and so on. Miljöpartiet has long warned about the risks of being stuck in a dependency on energy from rogue states.

Madam Speaker! At the beginning of the mandate period, this government made a big deal out of changing the long-term energy goal to fossil-free. All fossil-free types of energy were to be welcome. But the truth is that the development has been exactly the opposite. The energy source that has increased the most during this mandate period is fossil energy. It is about 14 terawatt-hours, corresponding to 10 percent, between 2022 and 2024.

This, Madam Speaker, occurs at a time when Europe is spending more money on buying fossil fuels from Putin than on supporting Ukraine. By driving up the dependence on fossil energy, we are thereby undermining our own security. The Tidö government has spent 57 billion on subsidizing fossil fuels and thus deepening this dependence.

Madam Speaker! A shipping industry with more Swedish-flagged vessels running on Swedish sustainable fuels, of course together with an expanded railway and electrified transport on the road, could have made Sweden strong, secure, and long-term sustainable in a restless world. But the government is failing fatally in this.

Instead, we see an increased fossil dependency and a tragic laxity and paralysis when it comes to acting against the Russian shadow fleet in the Baltic Sea. More than two years ago, Miljöpartiet submitted an initiative in the Riksdag regarding tougher action. Only now do we see that the authorities themselves are taking action on this, without greater enthusiasm and backing from the government. I think that is tragic.

Madam Speaker! We in Miljöpartiet are very eager to accelerate the transition. One of the absolutely most important reforms is to achieve a production of fossil-free fuels in Sweden, not least electrofuels. This would facilitate the transition of shipping in a world where we want to safeguard both the environment and climate as well as security and Swedish jobs.

Mr. Speaker, during this government period, we have unfortunately seen the opposite. We have been informed that investments in Sweden are being canceled. These are investments that could have contributed to more sustainable fuels, more jobs, business development, and so on. Flagship One in Örnsköldsvik, for example, was stopped and has now been delayed by several years. I can mention Uniper, which wanted to make an investment in Långsele but where they have also pulled the handbrake. Skellefteå Kraft has big plans to invest but hesitates due to insufficient support from this government.

Sustainable fuels are absolutely crucial for shipping, but for shorter distances, electrification is actually a good alternative – not least where Sweden's geography is well suited for shipping on inland waterways, such as canals, lakes, rivers, and so on. An average barge can carry as much as 200 trucks, so it is an efficient way to transport goods in an environmentally friendly manner. But to enable such a development, a simpler and more purposeful regulatory framework is needed, and for example, pilotage requirements and fairway fees must be reviewed to remove obstacles.

Madam Speaker! When I meet the shipping industry and Swedish shipping companies, I notice an incredibly great desire to be part of the climate transition. But we see very little initiative from this government to capture the great enthusiasm that actually exists.

The committee was recently in Norway. There, we could be inspired by the Norwegian government, which, together with the shipping industry, has developed a long-term plan and a coordinated program to accelerate the transition to sustainable shipping.

Madam Speaker! Shipping has, as I have mentioned, very great potential to transport large amounts of cargo in an efficient and climate-friendly way. But at the same time, I want to take the opportunity to remind of the Swedish National Audit Office's latest review of the state's efforts regarding the marine environment. Scrubbers have been mentioned, and it is very good that we are introducing a ban. But the total ban will not come until 2029, and that is quite slow. I would have liked to see that one acted faster. We have continued problems with that one can wash tanks and empty them directly into the Baltic Sea, which is a very heavily burdened marine ecosystem. Here we need to see more initiatives and that one follows up the Swedish National Audit Office's recommendations.

Madam Speaker! We naturally stand behind all our reservations, but I choose to move for approval of reservations 3 and 16.

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

Johanna Rantsi (M)

Madam Speaker! Thanks to the member for an interesting speech!

I particularly appreciate the member raising the issue of inland shipping. It is something that several motions have also been submitted on, and which I have reservations about in the report. It is written that the government should take measures to strengthen and develop shipping on inland waterways and accelerate the development of the same.

We in the government parties also want to prioritize inland shipping. We are investing in extending the national coordinator's mandate. We are creating an investment support for the relocation of cargo. We highlight important ports in Vänern and Mälaren, and we Moderates want all ports in Vänern to retain their national interest, which Trafikverket is arguing a bit about. Above all, we are building new locks in Trollhättan, which has been prioritized for a long time and is a major step in developing just the Vänern shipping.

Madam Speaker! I, however, harbor a strong concern regarding a new, low bridge planned in Gothenburg. I am fully aware that Member Lakso is not a municipal politician in Gothenburg, but this is an initiative driven by the governing parties in Gothenburg, in which Linus Lakso's party is included.

This would have devastating consequences for the entire Vänersjöfarten and also for a large part of Sweden's inland shipping, so I wonder what Miljöpartiet wants with the inland shipping in Vänern. The member says themselves that shipping and inland shipping have great potential, but why do you then want to limit it in Vänern?

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

Linus Lakso (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is entirely correct that I am not a municipal politician in Gothenburg. I know that question has been discussed, but I cannot engage in it in detail.

It is as I see it, two important perspectives that stand against each other. I know that one wants to make Gothenburg more accessible. Rivers, streams and other infrastructure do constitute barriers in cities, and it is always a problem. Railways were needed. People want to live near the water. There are perhaps some conflicting interests – to increase accessibility and to favor different industries and different parts of society. One simply has to try to include these perspectives when making decisions about infrastructure in Gothenburg.

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

Johanna Rantsi (M)

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

Skärgårdsredarna have expressed in this matter that this would be a death blow even for the local commercial traffic in the Port of Gothenburg. We should remember that the Port of Gothenburg is not only Sweden's largest port but also the largest port in the Nordics, so I would very much like to see the member also raise the national perspective in this matter – perhaps with their colleagues in Gothenburg.

I experience that the issue is larger than cycling in Gothenburg. This will also affect a large part of the rest of the country when it comes to both local commercial traffic and the city's identity and all of Sweden's shipping.

Madam Speaker! On Monday, there will be a bicycle debate here in the chamber, so what could be a better transition than to ask the final question to Member Lakso: What is most important, shipping or the bicycle?

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

Linus Lakso (MP)

Madam Speaker! I think it is a somewhat funny question from a party that has made a point throughout the entire parliamentary term that we should not compare different modes of transport against each other. I think Johanna Rantsi is falling on her own sword here. All types of means of transport are naturally needed and should be used where they perform best, is my simple answer.

But when the question is still raised, we would, as I mentioned, like to see a shift towards shipping. There perhaps we can be quite in agreement, but I lack initiative from the government for a transition to a sustainable shipping.

We see far too little initiative from the government, even when it comes to producing sustainable fuels in Sweden, which is both industrial policy and security policy. I am surprised that one does not pick such low-hanging fruit. We see how barge traffic is being electrified in Europe. It would be an incredibly smart and environmentally friendly way to transport more goods in Sweden. It also has implications for security policy that we can produce our own electricity and not be dependent on fossil fuels and, of course, also reduce climate emissions.

I look forward to a new government that can forcefully take on these problems seriously and both strengthen shipping and, above all, accelerate the transition within shipping in Sweden, which I know is an industry that truly wants it.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! In an exchange of remarks here, a question was posed by the Social Democrats regarding icebreakers. It was difficult for me to comment on that because I was not part of that exchange of remarks.

According to the mental image I have, it was indeed the case that the negotiations between Sweden and Finland regarding icebreakers came to a halt. The picture I had then was that the ball was in our court. Whether that picture is correct, however, I do not dare to bet on.

What I do, however, dare to be clear about is that in September 2024, a cooperation agreement was signed between Sweden and Finland. This was presented on February 13, 2025. At that time, an agreement was reached, which is now on the government's website, regarding how they will work, for example, a strategy for the icebreaking that is ongoing.

In the agreement of 13 February 2025, it was also agreed that one would look at joint procurements and also other issues where Sweden and Finland can cooperate to strengthen icebreaking, especially in the Bay of Bothnia.

I just wanted to clarify that. My recollection, unfortunately, is that it didn't quite go through during the previous government, but now it is completely obvious that this government has signed agreements with Finland. I am grateful for that because I believe it is extremely important for the entire Swedish shipping industry that we get a functioning icebreaker fleet, especially with the great values we have up north. It is not always about individual boats, but there are very large values on these boats.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 7.)

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