Response to interpellation 2023/24:17 on measures against high levels of PFAS in Swedish crayfish
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that the government is working hard to phase out PFAS substances and is setting the strictest possible limit values 1 2 3. KD considers that food producers are responsible for legal requirements, that municipalities have the right to fees for water treatment 1 2 3 and that authorities cooperate actively 3. KD looks forward to a basis for banning PFAS in packaging 3, views the spread seriously and is working nationally, within the EU and globally 4. KD considers limit values and supervision to be the primary tools 4. S argues that it is a political issue where responsibility slides between authorities and producers 5. S considers that the government is complacent 5 6 and that Sweden must gear up 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! Jytte Guteland has asked me what I intend to do within my area of responsibility to protect the Swedish people from PFAS and ensure that we fall below the limit values that the EU has set. Jytte Guteland has further asked me how I and the government facilitate for smaller municipalities so that their waterworks can meet the required limit values.
I have, of course, taken note of the news reporting that finds have been made of Swedish crayfish sold in stores in which the limit values in food for highly fluorinated substances, so-called PFAS substances, are exceeded. The test results that have been reported in the mass media are regrettable and show the spread that these unwanted substances have achieved globally.
Furthermore, I have noted that the results have been reported to the Swedish Food Agency and the supervisory authorities in the municipalities where the findings were made. I want to await these authorities' assessment and obtain a clearer picture of how extensive the problems with PFAS substances in Swedish crayfish are before I comment further.
The Government views the spread of highly fluorinated substances in the environment and in the food chain, where they can pose a risk to consumers' health, very seriously. PFAS substances are a large and complex group of substances, more than 10,000, with varying properties and a wide use in society. Some of these substances can have harmful effects, both for humans and for the environment. Common to them is that they are synthetically produced and that they do not break down, or break down extremely slowly into other PFAS substances. Many of the substances are also water-soluble and very mobile in soil, water, and air.
The work to protect the Swedish people from exposure to PFAS substances is taking place along two parallel tracks, partly by trying to limit continued spread, and partly by managing the consequences of previous spread in the best possible way.
The government therefore continues Sweden's active work both within the EU and internationally to, in accordance with the EU's chemical strategy for sustainability, phase out all use of PFAS substances unless it is shown to be necessary for society, in order to thereby reduce the input of these substances into our environment as much as possible.
Regarding the PFAS substances that are already present in our environment, these are unfortunately long-lived, and they will remain in our environment for the foreseeable future, despite efforts with remediation of soil and water. Through their presence in the environment, these substances will pose a risk in the food chain. To protect consumers' health, there are EU-wide limit values for PFAS in food and in drinking water. Since 1 January 2023, we have had common EU limit values for PFAS substances in certain animal-based foods, including crayfish.
Regarding drinking water, the Swedish Food Agency has had national action limits for PFAS substances in our drinking water since 2014. The agency decided in November last year on new drinking water regulations by reason of the European Parliament and Council's directive on the quality of drinking water. The directive establishes, among other things, minimum requirements for the maximum permitted amount of PFAS substances in drinking water, which drives technological development to increase the purification level of PFAS substances. The Swedish Food Agency has chosen to set a limit as strict as it is possible to do. The new limit is covered by a transitional period and shall begin to be applied on 1 January 2026.
The food legislation is designed in such a way that it is the food producers who are responsible for ensuring that the food they release on the market meets the requirements of the legislation, including regarding limit values for foreign substances. The Swedish Food Agency and the municipal supervisory authorities check that the producers fulfill their responsibility.
The Government is aware that the new limit value for PFAS substances in drinking water may pose challenges, especially for the smaller municipalities. According to the Act on Public Water Services, the municipalities are responsible for the public drinking water supply, and they have the right to charge fees to finance the water supply. It is important that the development of fees in the municipalities over time corresponds to the investment needs, including for the procurement of necessary purification technology in drinking water production. Finally, I would like to mention that the Swedish Food Agency provides guiding information to support and assist the municipalities and the municipal water service companies in the application of the drinking water regulations.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Rural Affairs for the answer to my interpellation regarding the long-lived substances.
We are gathered here today to discuss precisely dangerous chemicals. We have an invisible enemy, yet still a dangerous one, in the form of long-lived substances - especially PFAS. We know that this is harmful to public health and that with these substances in the body, one risks diseases. For the population as a whole, there is a risk of dangerous common diseases and certain types of tumors that can be dangerous. It can also be about diabetes and fertility disorders, i.e., difficulties in having children in the future.
This is, therefore, not just a question of crayfish, but it is about our health. It is at risk when it comes to certain foods today.
Now, the analysis company Eurofins, on behalf of Naturskyddsföreningen, has found that Swedish crayfish exceed the EU's limit values regarding PFAS. This is not something that has been discovered now, but it was already discovered last year. This is a follow-up, and it should be well known to both the government and the relevant authorities that the situation is as it is.
This is a serious discovery, because it shows that PFAS is spread throughout our nature and that we are ingesting it through our food. There is a risk that the population is ingesting this both through food and through drinking water. There are already examples of serious cases when it comes to PFAS, and it is now also being tested legally. It has been in the drinking water, and it can be seen that the risk of being affected by, for example, cancer is elevated. There is therefore a legal case in this area even in Sweden.
I think it is strange that the minister - and the government - seem to be quite reserved when it comes to my questions. I asked clear questions about what the minister and the government want to do to protect the population and how to facilitate for the smaller municipalities to handle this. It is of course very expensive for smaller municipalities to raise fees, which the minister referred to here in the debate.
I received an answer that the National Food Agency has chosen to set a limit as strict as possible. I also received an answer that it is the food producers who are responsible for ensuring that the food they release on the market meets the requirements of the legislation. I mean that this is not sufficient. The problem here is that the chemicals slip between the authorities' responsibility and the food producers' responsibility. It is obvious that the chemicals are present in these foods despite the way the distribution of responsibility looks. This is now a political issue. What do we need to do to protect public health?
I ask the question again: Should the minister wait for investigations, or is it time to act, gather the actors and talk about how we protect public health from these dangerous chemicals?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I begin with a counter-question: If it is not those who produce the food or our supervisory authorities, for example Livsmedelsverket, who have the responsibility for this, who would it then be? How would it practically work in the Swedish administrative model?
Since PFAS substances can be harmful, and because they spread easily in the environment and are long-lived, it is important that we phase out their use as far as possible so that we do not release more of these substances into our environment, where they can then enter the food chain and ultimately end up on our dinner tables and in our bodies. The primary tools we have to protect the people against risks resulting from the PFAS substances that have already been released into the environment, and which can therefore be present in food, are limit values and dietary advice.
The National Food Agency decided in November last year on new regulations regarding drinking water on the grounds of the Parliament's and the Council's directive on the quality of drinking water. For the first time, there are EU-wide minimum requirements for the maximum permitted amount of PFAS substances in drinking water, which the member knows very well. The National Food Agency has, as mentioned, chosen to set as strict limit values as possible at the national level.
In large quantities, PFAS can cause damage and increase the risk of negative health effects. Of course, we should not have food products that exceed any limit values. The government is aware that the new limit value for drinking water may entail challenges in the form of increased costs, especially for the smaller municipalities. It is clear that the government will follow up on this and have a dialogue. The municipalities also cooperate very much when it comes to water operations, and I believe that the exchange of experience there will be of great importance.
I also want to repeat that we are working actively both within the EU and globally to limit PFAS substances. This has yielded results, for example in the form of an EU ban on 200 PFAS substances that comes into force this year.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
I want to start by saying that I believe we can all agree that the Swedish people should be able to enjoy their crayfish in peace and quiet and not have to wonder whether there is poison on the plate. It should be a wonderful crayfish dinner for the Swedish people.
In the current situation, one actually cannot say that is the case. Both this year and in previous years, this type of shellfish surveys have shown that we have too high limit values in Sweden. In that case, it is actually not sufficient for the government to refer to any administrative order or talk about which authorities are responsible, but rather it is a matter of acting and seeing what it is that is lacking.
It is not about questioning who will ultimately take responsibility for the samples that are taken or who will take responsibility for what is placed in the grocery stores. I understand that the Minister for Rural Affairs cannot personally sit and work on this. However, there must be a political will to see why it is not working today. It is obvious that there is food that is far too toxic out in the stores and that the Swedish people are suffering from it. This has been going on for a number of years. The Government has had the chance to know about this throughout this entire year and has seen this investigation come again.
When we now see that the chemicals slip between the decision-making tables and end up in the water or on our plates in the form of food, what does the minister want to do to address this? I received a cautious hint that one might talk to those responsible about what it is that is missing, but it is a very small hint. Is it not time to clearly say that the minister wants to gather the relevant actors and see how one can ensure that we get toxin-free food on the plates for the Swedish people? Such a clear action would be appropriate when we know that there is toxic food out in our stores.
Another thing I noted in the government's response concerned the small municipalities. I was told that it is the municipalities and their companies that are responsible for this and that higher fees should be charged if there are problems investing in water treatment. I must say that this is very Marie Antoinette-like in relation to small municipalities – I believe the Minister for Rural Affairs is aware of this – which may have difficulties because they do not have as many citizens who can contribute in connection with fee increases. Then the fees become very high for the citizens who live in the small municipalities.
It is probably the case that some type of redistribution or some kind of support is needed to help the smaller municipalities. Exactly how this should look, we do not need to anticipate here, but I still want to hear that the Minister for Rural Affairs sees this problem for the small actors. It is not easy to manage increased demands, but at the same time, these smaller municipalities must also be able to manage to protect their citizens.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I do not think anyone is served by us trying to paint it as if someone is for or against PFAS. We are all against it – no one wants these substances to exist. That is why the current government, just like the previous Social Democratic government, is working hard.
In Sweden, we set the strictest possible limit values for this. It is in this way that we, from a state level, can control what comes out. It is obviously important that we also have follow-up and control so that this is complied with, and that lies with municipal supervisory authorities, the Swedish Food Agency, and several others.
In Sweden, it is the municipalities that have responsibility for the public drinking water supply, and they have the right to charge fees to be able to finance delivery and other handling. Municipalities are differently well-invested depending on the expansion rate of the water and sewage networks. Some have invested a lot in maintenance and have good water pipe networks and treatment plants, while others lag behind. Many municipalities and municipal water service companies are members of the industry organization Svenskt Vatten, and here there is a continuous exchange and they help each other.
Many Swedish authorities - Kemikalieinspektionen, Havs- och vattenmyndigheten, Livsmedelsverket, Naturvårdsverket, Sveriges geologiska undersökning, Statens geotekniska institut and Läkemedelsverket - are actively working on issues regarding contaminants and PFAS substances in soil and water and cooperate with each other to manage the PFAS issue. The purpose of these collaborations is to improve risk assessment, regulatory development, environmental monitoring, research, technology development and public control.
The Government has granted MSB special funds for 2023 to, together with Naturvårdsverket, continue to work with support and guidance for the management of contaminated fire-fighting water, foam liquids, etc. containing PFAS.
The Swedish Food Agency will shortly present a basis for developing a ban on PFAS in paper and cardboard that comes into contact with food. I look forward to reviewing it.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Rural Affairs for the answers in this important matter.
I am convinced that no politician wants to see PFAS in either our water or our bodies. What may differ is with what determination one wants to tackle the issue and how clear and important the issue is on the agenda. I hope that the Minister for Rural Affairs feels the pressure, understands that this is serious and, like me, I have noted the news that has come in recently that this is still a major problem and that we have high limit values. It is important that Sweden acts and protects the citizens against these serious substances.
Today, everyone is exposed to a chemical cocktail of hormone-disrupting substances, which entails risks. Some of these substances are extra dangerous, and PFAS belongs among them. Therefore, the work must be developed to protect the Swedish people. It is not about describing who is responsible for what or how the authorities should work. Now it is about stating that something has gone wrong because we still do not succeed in the work and actually are in a worse position than other EU countries and therefore must gear up and ensure that the Swedish people are protected against PFAS.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! The discovery of Swedish crayfish whose values exceed the limit values for PFAS indicates the spread that these substances have achieved globally and the need for measures. Both I and the government take this spread seriously, as said, and are actively working to reduce it in the environment both nationally and within the EU and globally. The broad and long-term use of PFAS substances has spread this substance in our environment, and since these substances are long-lived and difficult to degrade, we will unfortunately have to deal with the consequences of these substances for a long time.
I share responsibility for this area with Minister Pourmokhtari. Within my area of responsibility, the primary tools for managing PFAS risks are the existing limit values and our supervisory authorities' work to maintain a high level of protection for consumers. The Swedish Food Agency regularly conducts so-called food basket surveys, and these have shown that there are no high levels of PFAS in the food in Swedish stores.
It is important for me and the government that consumers feel secure that the food they eat is safe and that the water they drink is safe, and I can assure the members that both I and the government closely follow the issue of PFAS substances in the food chain and take it very seriously. Thank you for a good debate!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.