Response to interpellation 2022/23:112 on the climate action plan
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the climate action plan and how Sweden should reach its climate goals. L advocates for an ambitious and effective climate policy to reach net-zero emissions by 2045 1 2 and wants to lower the reduction obligation to the EU's minimum level in 2024 so as not to hinder households and companies 3 1. L wants to build upon successful initiatives such as Klimatklivet and Industriklivet 2 and wants more people to be involved in the design of the plan 4. L argues that the plan is being prepared according to the Government Offices' routines 3 2. S criticizes the government for halving the investment in climate and environment and argues that the government cannot reach the goals with the current strategy. S wants Sweden to be at the forefront and take climate policy seriously without buying emission allowances 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! [A member] has asked me if it is my continued position that the Sverigedemokraterna shall not be involved in negotiating the government's climate action plan and, if not, how I intend to act in the design of the government's climate action plan so that Sweden reaches the climate goals we have decided on for 2030 when the Sverigedemokraterna shall be involved in designing the climate action plan. Furthermore, Anna-Caren Sätherberg has asked me if I, within my area of responsibility, intend to work for a changed level of the reduction obligation and what I consider to be a reasonable level of the reduction obligation.
I would like to start by thanking you for the great interest in the government's action plan. If I may speculate, I believe that the interest in the action plan, since the Climate Act came into force in 2018, could never have been as great as it has been under this government. It is good to see.
The Tidö Agreement describes how the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates, the Christian Democrats, and the Liberals in a collaborative project will develop and implement political reforms to secure the energy supply and achieve an efficient climate transition. The draft of the action plan is being prepared in accordance with the preparation procedures that exist in the Government Offices.
I will advocate for an ambitious and effective climate policy that is long-term sustainable. Therefore, I will, for example, work for a changed reduction obligation which, together with other effective steering measures, contributes to the climate goals and Swedish commitments in the EU being met, but without fuel prices in Sweden hindering Swedish households and undermining the competitiveness of our Swedish companies. The Government will propose that the reduction obligation be lowered to the EU's minimum level on 1 January 2024, which shall apply during the mandate period.
Anna-Caren Sätherberg (S)
Mr. Speaker! Today is 100 days since the government took office and Sweden received a new Minister for Climate and Environment. I want to say congratulations to the minister, even though it is difficult to congratulate the climate and environmental policy.
One can see 100 days as a short time, but in 100 days many decisions can also be made or announced. The decision to shut down the Ministry of the Environment is one thing that the 100-day government has managed to do. After 100 days, the minister has presented a budget in the climate and environment area which means that Sweden moves from investing over 23 billion in 2022 to taking out the big axe and more than halving that investment by 2025.
After 100 days, Sweden's forest owners now find it difficult to obtain compensation if they voluntarily wish to take conservation-value forest out of production or if they are denied logging permits, as the government has during these 100 days chosen to significantly reduce resources.
After 100 days, the Minister for Climate and the Environment has also reduced the resources for environmental monitoring. The length of Swedish measurement series is in many cases unique in the world. By comparing current values with previous measurements, we detect the changes in the environment so that we can see whether the measures have the desired effect or not. Why the government does not want to continue with this, I find difficult to understand.
These are some of all the cuts in the climate and environmental area that the minister has chosen to make in 100 days, and in the government's budget it also states that emissions are increasing.
But the minister has, unlike some of his government colleagues, been clear that we are to reach the climate goals. How these ambitions align with the budget cuts has not been clarified. It is somewhat like an 800-meter runner strolling through the first lap to then max out the second lap.
Mr. Speaker! The Minister has said that she will return to the Riksdag with an announcement on how the climate goals are to be achieved in the climate action plan that the government is required by the Riksdag to deliver in 2023. We know that this government relies entirely on the support of the Sweden Democrats. It is the only party in Sweden's Riksdag that does not stand behind either the climate policy framework or the Swedish climate goals.
The Minister has been very clear in the media that the Sverigedemokraterna shall have no influence over the climate policy. In Svenska Dagbladet, she stated, among other things: No, it is the government that is designing the climate action plan. Her party colleague and the Liberal Party's party leader, Minister for Employment Johan Pehrson, has on the other hand, in the same news outlet, allowed it to be stated that the Sverigedemokraterna shall to a large extent be involved in designing the climate action plan.
That is why I asked these questions to the minister on December 14 - simply because such completely different messages were given regarding which parties will negotiate the climate action plan together. I must thank the minister for giving me an answer after a month and twelve days, even if it might not quite be answers to my questions.
The question, then, is: Should the Sweden Democrats, together with the government, participate in the negotiations on the climate action plan? Is it as the minister says – no, they shall not participate – or as the minister's colleague said – yes, they shall to a great extent? Should it be negotiated between the parties, perhaps in the government's and the Sweden Democrats' coordination offices, or should it not be negotiated at all between the government and the Sweden Democrats?
The answer to my question regarding what the Minister considers to be a reasonable level for the reduction obligation, despite having asked in this interpellation, in previous interpellation debates, and in the Committee on Environment and Agriculture, I have still not managed to obtain. Now I await with anticipation to hear the Minister's answer to the question.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! Yes, a lot can happen in 100 days, unlike how it was in 2014, when the government, with a Social Democratic lead, 100 days into the mandate period had not even taken office – no government had been put in place.
Mr. Speaker! Anna-Caren Sätherberg is welcome to explain which part of the Ministry of the Environment's activities no longer exists. What is it that has disappeared from the Ministry of the Environment? I would like to hear an answer to that question, but it will be a bit difficult to find because there is nothing.
We have merged the Ministry of the Environment with the Ministry of Enterprise - no funerals are arranged for any ministry of enterprise in Sweden. We have merged energy and climate issues and formed a Ministry of Climate and Enterprise, which, in good dialogue, works together with and closely with all those actors within the industrial and transport sectors who can contribute to the actual climate transition. We are in a hurry, after all, and it is not moving fast enough. It did not move fast enough with the previous government either.
Let me also account for the Tidö Agreement. There seems to be a great deal of misunderstanding. I have not said that the Sweden Democrats have nothing to do with climate work. Within the Tidö Agreement, we have seven areas of cooperation, and climate and energy is one of them.
We can discuss which different parties are involved in the process of producing a climate action plan, but I would rather focus my energy on getting everyone who wants to be involved in working to reduce Sweden's climate emissions to contribute. I want to listen to companies, research, and organizations. I want industries, companies within the transport sector, and households to be able to tell how they can contribute to us in Sweden reaching our goals, which we are not on track to reach and were not on track to reach during previous parliamentary terms either. I want all these parties to tell me how we in politics can contribute to them reaching their goals. We can no longer work in silos, because it is obviously something that is not working. That is why we have merged the Ministry of the Environment with the Ministry of Enterprise and started the Ministry of Climate and Enterprise.
Mr. Speaker! The government has restructured the climate policy to reach net zero by 2045. We are starting from a long-term perspective. We all have a responsibility in the transition. Everyone will be affected by climate change, and we politicians have a responsibility to ensure that the right instruments, the right legislation, and the right processes are in place so that the transition can take place and so that primarily the market actors, who are the largest emitters, can change the way they conduct their operations to become fossil-free.
This government focuses on several important climate issues during this mandate period. I have previously accounted for the expansion of fossil-free energy that we want to carry out to enable electrification and how we want to work with carbon capture both through natural carbon sinks and through CCS and bio-CCS. The measures that we implement shall enable the transition, which is ongoing in some parts and which people pretend is ongoing in other parts but which must occur in a rapid and comprehensive way.
I also received questions about the reduction obligation, which we have debated repeatedly. The reduction obligation was too large given the supply that existed. There was a shortage of biofuels. Sweden imported very much, and it became a problematic situation, which makes this government want to lower the reduction obligation to the EU's minimum level on January 1, 2024.
Anna-Caren Sätherberg (S)
Mr. Speaker! I can agree with much of what the Minister for Climate and the Environment says. We have a climate crisis that I see the Minister for Climate and the Environment takes very seriously. On the other hand, the largest party in the government constellation does not.
The question I asked the Minister for Climate and Environment was not about the Tidö Agreement, but about the Minister's statement in Svenska Dagbladet, where she said that the Sweden Democrats will not be involved in negotiating the climate action plan.
The Minister for Climate and Environment spoke in the previous debate here about the anxiety that many people feel regarding the climate. Many feel an anxiety, but one might still feel secure knowing that there are parties that truly care about climate policy, even if one sees that there are other parties that do not do so to the same extent.
I listened to the Minister for Climate and Environment's press conference yesterday. The Minister for Climate and Environment has, all along, told the Swedish Riksdag that she would return with an action plan and that it is there we are to see the effects. But not now, that is, because now we are to increase emissions. As I said, it is like having an 800-meter runner who is only supposed to jog around a bit on the first lap and then try to max out their way out of it. It will not work. It must happen here and now.
To my surprise, I see today's headlines regarding yesterday's press conference. There, the Sweden Democrats clearly state that Busch and Climate and Environment Minister Romina Pourmokhtari are not following the Tidö Agreement, which the minister herself just referred to. The Sweden Democrats say that it has not been agreed to reach the goals by 2045, but that it must be negotiated.
The Minister for Climate and Environment owes me an answer. There was a choice to be made. The Liberals have a choice when it comes to climate and environmental policy. It was the Social Democrats and the Green Party who came up with Klimatklivet and Industriklivet. It was we who took the initiative for bio-CCS, biofuels, charging stations, restoration of wetlands, and so on. All of this, which we laid out as a carpet, the Minister for Climate and Environment now wants to continue with, and she can do that together with us. But she cannot do it with those who, the day after the minister's press conference, go out and say: We have not negotiated this!
The Sweden Democrats have held a press conference as the largest party in the government-forming constellation, and they have said: No, this does not apply! Here, one has failed, they say at that press conference.
The question remains, then: How are we to succeed in taking this further? It concerns Sweden's population and the political parties. The Riksdag is in agreement. It is up to each government to produce its own climate action plan - that is absolutely true - but it is also each government's task to ensure that we meet the goals. One cannot bypass the Climate Act.
Now we also have the EU's decision which will increase the pressure on the Minister for Climate and Environment. How is this going to work? Are negotiations to be conducted with a party that is not even interested in us meeting the goals by 2045?
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! One might think that it is a debate now taking place between the Sweden Democrats and Member of Parliament Anna-Caren Sätherberg, but that is not the case. Now, it is I who stand here. I am a liberal minister in a government that conducts a climate policy aimed at achieving the goals that we have set in our Climate Act.
In the Climate Act, we have set goals to reach net-zero emissions by 2045. It is a law that has been voted through in Sweden's Riksdag. When we presented the Tidö Agreement yesterday, some members may have considered that one should not enter into other parts of the climate policy.
We can absolutely get stuck in a discussion about who has said what. But one must notice the choice of words here. What I said to Svenska Dagbladet was in response to a question about whether the Sverigedemokraterna are involved in designing the government's climate action plan. Then I answered what I said here in the chamber, namely that we have a process that proceeds in exactly the same way as previous processes when the climate action plans have not been as much in the spotlight. We are working on and preparing a task. Which officials are sitting at that table and handling the different parts, I hardly have a handle on myself. There are processes for how we prepare documents in the Government Offices, and it is in accordance with them that we produce our climate action plan.
This is what I have meant when I have said that the Sweden Democrats are not involved in designing the climate action plan that the work is currently underway on. It is simply in accordance with the Government Offices' preparation processes. Then the action plan is to be voted through, and that is at a later stage. It might affect what is written in the document, if anyone were interested in discussing that instead.
It is the content I am interested in. We can stand here in the chamber and reflect on the fact that this government has not halted all the work that previous governments have done with climate steps, industrial steps, and bio-CCS. And regarding just bio-CCS, I want to point out that there are other parties, for example my own, that have been particularly keen to move forward. I remember how a few years ago I started talking about CCS in Swedish politics and most did not know what it meant.
Many people contribute to shaping our climate policy in Sweden. I do not think it would be wise for any government to scrap everything that has been done and then start with completely new initiatives. What we have instead done from this government's side is that, upon taking office, we began by stating that we want to conduct an ambitious and effective climate policy. The meaning of that is to actually develop what works.
It is about investing further in wetlands. The investments that previous governments had made were about to expire. In 2023, it stood at zero kronor. Then we must expand that investment if we see that it works. We must expand the investments in Klimatklivet and Industriklivet when we see that they work. We do not continue them, but we build on them with additional funds. We build further on the work that we see gives an effect. This is what we mean by an effective climate policy.
If I may speculate, I believe that many expected us to shut down, for example, such initiatives that have received criticism in certain parts. There are instances that have criticized the content of Klimatklivet. But we chose not to do that. We chose to prioritize effective work. It does not mean that one takes a step forward and two back, but instead, one should reflect on which values one enters the climate work with. For our government, it is about ambition and efficiency.
Anna-Caren Sätherberg (S)
Mr. Speaker! I will nevertheless remind the Minister and the Chamber that not all parties were present when we introduced Klimatklivet and Industriklivet, but they joined in only later, when things started to go a bit better. Sometimes one must dare.
I want Sweden to be at the forefront. I do not want to see jobs disappear from Sweden because we do not invest. I do not want to see us buying emission rights instead of taking our responsibility. I want to see a Sweden that is at the forefront, takes climate and environmental policy seriously, and sees the opportunities within it.
My questions were delimited and clear. The Minister for Climate and the Environment first said: No, the Sweden Democrats are not involved. Then she says that preparation is taking place, as always, among officials in the Government Offices. Her party leader, Minister for Employment Johan Pehrson, went out in the same news newspaper and said that the Sweden Democrats shall to a large extent be involved in designing the climate action plan. Is there a rift in the Liberals? Is there a rift between the Minister for Employment and the Minister for Climate and the Environment?
The Minister for Climate and Environment says that it is prepared by officials as a matter of course, and she does not know which parties are included. The party leader, however, says clearly that the Sweden Democrats shall to a large extent be involved in designing the climate action plan. I cannot make it fit together. Somewhere, someone knows something that I cannot find out.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! That is the information I can provide. One can read different articles and different interviews. And journalists can always stop someone and ask questions in detail about how a preparatory process is proceeding. I was asked at a press conference how we selected the municipalities to which we send a referral. I do not have the answer to such a question. Sometimes one receives questions at pressed moments. Perhaps they touch upon what happens if goals are not met or what processes look like for certain documents and plans that the government has.
I can only account for what happens in my department and how we work. I may, of course, need to account for other parts. But if I am to account for something with clarity and content, I will account for my area and the work for which I have responsibility.
We are currently preparing the work on the climate action plan. We have reported in Dagens Nyheter on a meeting that we want to convene. We want more people to be involved and for more people to work closely with the design of our plan, so that we actually ensure that the measures we implement are long-term and work, and that they can be implemented by everyone who is to do so. I think that is an important perspective in climate work.
We can discuss again: Which parties should be part of the process? Which parties should vote this through in the Riksdag? But I much prefer to put my energy into ensuring that everyone who wants to be part of the work and who wants to contribute to lowering Sweden's climate emissions can be included. Everyone is invited to our meeting to discuss what is the best method and the way forward. That is the only way we can solve the climate crisis. But then one must also want to lower the emissions. Hopefully, at least there is agreement on that.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.