Response to interpellation 2023/24:312 on the preparation of environmental permits
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns simplifying the regulatory framework for environmental permits for defense activities due to the deteriorated security situation 1. L argues that the Armed Forces need increased operational capability and that the current Environmental Code hinders this 1. The Government is working on increasing the exemptions from requirements for environmental assessments and aims for the regulatory changes to enter into force by July at the latest 2. L wants the processing to go faster so that the Armed Forces and the defense industry can operate effectively 3. SD emphasizes that the state administration must change pace because the threats are existential and that long processing times hinder the rebuilding of the defense 4. SD argues that exemption rules must be able to be applied at a national level 4. L wants to maintain good environmental protection while creating flexibility for the defense 3.
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)
Madam Speaker! I have been asked when the announced proposal regarding simplifications of the regulatory framework for environmental permits for defense activities will be submitted.
The Riksdag has decided on the bill Totalförsvaret 2021 - 2025 (prop. 2020/21:30), which states that the continued deteriorating security situation means that the military defense needs to be strengthened and that the operational capability needs to increase.
On 24 February 2022, Russia launched an unlawful, unprovoked, and unjustifiable full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The attack on Ukraine is also an attack on the European security order. Russia's actions entail a structurally and long-term severely deteriorated security policy situation. It has extensive and far-reaching consequences for Sweden. Sweden has since applied for membership in Nato and signed an agreement on defense cooperation with the USA, a so-called Defense Cooperation Agreement, DCA.
Due to the unstable security situation in Sweden's immediate vicinity and in Europe, the Armed Forces have a need to conduct operations on an increased scale. There is also a need for more joint exercises with other countries to be able to be carried out. In order for this to be possible, there is a need to change certain provisions regarding the defense's permit and reporting obligations according to the Environmental Code.
The Government has decided on additional directives for the Government Review Inquiry to examine the possibility of increased exemptions from the requirement for environmental impact assessments for defense activities. Just as Member Wistedt points out, the Government is working on the issue, and the matter is currently being prepared in the Government Offices.
Lars Wistedt (SD)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
What I can understand is that we share the insight regarding the need to remove the obstacles and limitations that exist in order to quickly strengthen the Armed Forces' capability. The only thing that worries me a little is that I didn't quite get an answer on when this will happen. It is almost three years since the Armed Forces submitted its first petition in the matter, and the global situation is moving quickly in the wrong direction.
We Sweden Democrats are well aware that the Armed Forces' activities have an impact on the environment. We are also well aware that the Ministry of Climate and Enterprise has its mandate and that every matter is important in itself. But everything must today be seen in a total defense perspective. It is our firm opinion that under ideal security policy circumstances, it would have been reasonable with a long and very careful processing time according to all the rules of the art. But when the situation is as it is now, when the world around us and the threats against us change and increase, the state administration must also be able to change pace. The processing of these issues does not occur in a vacuum, but there is a nasty world out there that - strangely enough - does not take Swedish bureaucracy into account.
During the Folk och Försvars national conference in Sälen recently, Hans-Christian Hagman from the National Security Council raised a point that I would like to highlight here. He, in fact, raised a very clear warning finger that neither terrorist acts, pandemics, disinformation operations, nor the war in Ukraine seem to have created any sense of urgency in the state apparatus with all its siloed processes.
Hagman's warning is completely in line with what we Sweden Democrats in the Committee on Defence have highlighted in meetings, in debates, and at departmental meetings for more than a year.
To this problem, we should perhaps set aside the self-image that many have – that Sweden, that responsible little country in the north, is to save the world alone. Everyone must be listened to, and everyone must be heard. Then everything takes a very long time.
We mean that there must be a reality-based balance between this responsibility and the very tangible existential threat that an increasingly aggressive and brutal Russia poses against Sweden and democracy. If we do not handle the immediate and existential threat that Russia poses, we will likely not need to worry at all about protecting the environment in the future.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to the member! This is truly an important issue. I feel that we in the government have a good picture of the problems that exist. I discuss, not least with my government colleagues, the other ministers, how we should handle this in the best way.
To start from the basics, we can state that we are working very broadly and have initiated many important processes generally when it comes to environmental permitting and the work that is ongoing when applying the Environmental Code, because we see major deficiencies that affect our society and many companies and private individuals to a fairly high extent.
The members of the committee highlight many aspects of this, Madam Speaker. We have very long referral processes where several different parties are to comment on behalf of the state but in different forums, which makes it very confusing just to understand what the state considers in a certain issue. Then there are very many different instances. We have a very arbitrary implementation of European legislation in many cases and much more that we really need to address.
Broad work is underway. We started all processes as soon as possible to fundamentally streamline permit processes for all operations once and for all. But now we have the security policy situation we have, and we cannot assume that the defense's operations should wait for these processes, wait for investigations and other things, to handle the reality they are in. Special measures are needed there, and that is something we agree on. They cannot wait for this.
As the timeline looks right now, the objective is that this proposal should be sent for consultation quite soon, i.e., at the beginning of this year. Based on how the timeline looks, I can say that if we work at full capacity on this, the objective will be that the regulatory changes can enter into force if not during the first half of the year, then in July – on July 1 in that case. That is the timeline as it looks now, and that is also the objective. All of this is influenced by how the work progresses, but we completely share the view that the Armed Forces have a special need to significantly expand their operations, primarily their training operations.
The Armed Forces cannot meet its needs with the processes for environmental permits that we have right now, and it is a problem that we need to address as quickly as possible. Current regulations do not allow for processes as we would have liked to see them. We therefore have both the fundamental broad [regulations], and the specific ones regarding the needs that the Armed Forces have submitted.
I have also wanted to highlight in my response that the government and I, as a minister, together with Carl-Oskar Bohlin, have accounted for the additional assignment to the Government Review Commission, which is also relevant in this context. We have tasked them with analyzing and potentially proposing under which additional circumstances the government should have the opportunity to review questions regarding permits according to the Environmental Code. We want to be prepared and prevent us from ending up in a situation where Sweden needs to act in a certain way for our total defense capability - it is therefore not only about defense but about the needs of total defense - but find ourselves in a permit process. We need to prevent this in some way, so we are working fully on that part as well.
This is an extremely important issue that the government is working hard on, so I appreciate that the member chooses to raise it today.
Lars Wistedt (SD)
Madam Speaker! It is very good to hear that there is a time horizon, for that is what we have lacked - and not just us, but many out there, both the Armed Forces and the defense industry. The threat from Russia against Sweden, Ukraine, our democracy, and our way of life is here and now, not in 2030 or 2035. The slow handling has delayed the Armed Forces' reconstruction, and it is good to see that we are moving forward.
The important thing here is the application of the Environmental Code and that we can achieve these exemptions. In a report from FOI, for example, this is highlighted with environmental permits as a major problem. If we look at what environmental permits mean for the defense industry, which supports the Armed Forces, we see that it concerns, for example, noise – when, where, and how often one is allowed to fire. Such a permit can take between seven and ten years to obtain, and that does not work. In a defense context, this is an eternity. It is therefore good to hear that something is going to happen.
But I would still like to raise a couple of examples to provide a background to this so that we see what needs to be done.
In April 2022, Gotlands regemente was granted permission to use its own firing range Tofta. That process took three years; it is strange.
Another example is Saab's test center in Karlskoga, where Saab test-fires ammunition intended for, among other places, Ukraine - the demand is therefore very high. Saab applied for the possibility to, from time to time, not around the clock and in large quantities, fire outside of regular hours. The County Administrative Board says no. The County Governor steps in and gets involved, and then you get yes. So far, so good. The decision is, however, appealed by a private individual, and the case is referred to the Land and Environment Court at Vänersborg District Court, which dismisses the application as it considers that no special reasons exist. Saab has appealed, but the process takes an enormous amount of time - time that does not exist.
Madam Speaker! It is almost laughable that a major war is taking place in the surrounding area but that this does not constitute special grounds for a bureaucratic instance. What is required then? I find it difficult to imagine anything. There must be exceptional rules that can be applied at the national level.
We can certainly assume that Putin hardly needs to apply for environmental permits if he wants to attack Sweden. He will also not need to wait for a green light from the Land and Environment Court to do so.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! There is much to mention here. Let me point out what we see as the objective. We want the processing of cases according to the Environmental Code regarding, for example, the expansion and modification of the defense's activities, which is very relevant in many of these cases, to go faster. This can involve airports, shooting ranges, ports, firing ranges, and facilities for handling fuels. This is a focus that the government works from.
In addition to these changes, we also see that the environmental permit processes need to be simplified and shortened by being made more flexible and predictable and thus more efficient. This is something that is also raised regarding the general environmental permits, but we can imagine the specific needs for flexibility and predictability of the Armed Forces and all parts of our society that are to defend our realm. We have as our goal to address these different pieces.
The idea is also that these changes shall apply for a limited period in order to give the Armed Forces, but also the Fortification Agency and the Defence Materiel Administration, an opportunity to update their permits. The Government also naturally has as a goal that these changes shall meet the Armed Forces' needs while a good protection for our environment is maintained, which is an aspect that shall not be overshadowed here. We know that we have the opportunity to have processes designed in a way that facilitates our ability to defend our country while we in Sweden continue to have a strong environmental protection, which we all safeguard.
It is precisely when it comes to the need for flexibility and insight into the reality that our defense agencies face that it has been deficient from the state's side. This is something we really want to address as quickly as possible. One of the examples that the member raises I have been aware of previously, but I note the one concerning Vänersborg; it is extremely interesting. It is always instructive to see how the events actually unfold in order to prevent us from ending up in such situations in the future.
Lars Wistedt (SD)
Madam Speaker! Again: Thank you, Minister, for a very clear answer! It feels good to now hear that we have a way forward and can remove these obstacles for the Armed Forces and not least for the defense industry. Perhaps it will now literally become more production in both Linköping, Karlskoga, and Karlskrona - that would be very good!
Finally, as a conclusion, I would like to convey my congratulations to the Minister of Defence following the vote on Wednesday. I hope that we will also be able to show the same unity in this matter going forward. The Armed Forces, the defense industry, and the Swedish people actually deserve it.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, member, for the question! It is a pleasure to be able to discuss these issues, which are of such incredibly great importance for our country and which I see as an important part of my work. In the times we live in and the serious security policy situation we find ourselves in, it is extremely important that all cabinet ministers review their part of the operations and how we in different ways can contribute to ensuring that Sweden's defense force, our total defense, and other parts of our country that in different ways shall contribute to defending us can manage it. This is, therefore, a very important part of our work.
We are working as fast as we can in different ways. I have mentioned some examples of this today, but there are many more that I would have liked to have told about. The work is therefore ongoing in full, and I am, not least, very grateful that it is our government and this cooperation that is at the helm in these times when one really needs to demonstrate flexibility and proactivity in politics and act before we stand in the middle of a situation that requires us to deliver for our country's sake. I am also for this reason and given the situation we find ourselves in very grateful for the opportunity to continue working.
Thank you for good cooperation in this and 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.