Response to interpellation 2024/25:735 on the water shortage
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 water shortage in southern and south-eastern Sweden 1. L argues that the EU's water directives and strategies are the basis for securing water resources 1, that regional expertise is important 1, and that the financing of water and sewage systems comes from water and sewage fees, not tax revenues 2. L also argues that a national strategy has been proposed and that the government's climate policy is effective 2 3. S considers the water shortage to be acute 4 5 and demands a national strategy as well as support for municipalities 4 5. S argues that the government is doing too little 5, that increased fees are difficult for municipalities 6, and that climate issues must be taken more seriously 6.
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! Eva Lindh has asked me if I share the view of the challenges Sweden faces regarding water issues and whether the measures being implemented according to the EU Water Framework Directive are sufficient. She has also asked whether I intend to take any other measures to address the water shortage today and in the future.
I share the image that we have previously been able to take water for granted, but that water shortages have become a recurring challenge, especially in the southern and south-eastern parts of Sweden. Climate change entails great challenges for society. In addition to drought and water shortages, we must also increasingly manage the effects of heavy downpours leading to local flooding as well as the effects of sea-level rises.
At the EU level, there are several directives that in different ways contribute to meeting the challenges in the water area. The EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC, the Water Framework Directive), which was adopted in 2000, aims to protect and ensure the quality of surface water and groundwater, that is, the water used in the production of drinking water. Currently, a revision of two daughter directives to the framework directive (the priority substances directive 2008/105/EC and the groundwater directive 2006/118/EC) is underway, which will contribute to better protection of our water resources. In the latest revision of the Drinking Water Directive (EU) 2020/2184, in 2020, the link between the Drinking Water Directive and the Water Framework Directive, which are different directives, was also clarified. The link was clarified by introducing a risk analysis from source to tap.
The sewage directive (EU) 2024/3019 was also recently revised, in 2024, which means stricter purification requirements. In addition, there is the flood directive 2007/60/EC, which aims to reduce the effects of floods, as well as the EU's strategy for climate adaptation, where water is, of course, a very present topic.
The answer to the second question, whether the measures being implemented in connection with the EU Water Framework Directive are sufficient, is that there are several water-related directives and strategies that complement each other and which together form a basis for securing our water resources. But we need to continue working on implementing the various measures that are to be carried out according to the directives.
Regarding the last question, about other measures to address the water shortage today and in the future, several initiatives are underway. At the EU level, the Commission presented a European water resilience strategy in June this year, which aims to secure access to water for people and the environment, which is a prerequisite for a sustainable society with competitive industries and a strong business environment. The strategy has been developed as a response to climate change, problems with pollution, for example PFAS, and overexploitation of our water resources. Sweden has contributed very actively to the design of the strategy and intends to continue contributing to the work that is currently ongoing.
Nationally, the government has given several responsible authorities, such as the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management, SMHI and the Swedish Food Agency, government mandates that in different ways contribute to securing the water supply throughout Sweden. An example that can be mentioned is a mandate to develop a basis for water balances regarding the availability and extraction of water within drainage areas where the risk of water shortages is recurring. This is a particularly important issue.
When it comes to preparedness, the Va-beredskapsutredningen recently presented its report (SOU 2024:82). The report was issued in December last year and is now out for consultation until August 29. After that, the proposals will be processed within the Government Offices.
Finally, it can be said that the challenges are different in different parts of the country, and therefore regional and local knowledge is very important in these matters. Even engagement is an important prerequisite for us to be able to take the right measures in the right place, which is emphasized, among other things, within the framework of the EU's water resilience strategy. The Government shares this view and therefore already in 2024 gave the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management a three-year government mandate aimed at strengthening coordination within drainage basins.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Minister Pourmokhtari for the answer.
How would we manage without water? The answer is, of course, what we all know: We would not manage.
I have been one of those who perhaps have not thought so much about water previously. My eyes have been opened, above all, when I have met female parliamentarians, that is, colleagues, in other countries where the water shortage is catastrophic and received descriptions of how the situation is in countries where one does not have water, where one must save so much that it can actually be a danger to health and life.
It is 2.2 billion people who lack clean and safe drinking water in the world.
I was, as I said, one of those who perhaps also took water for granted. Unfortunately, many of us did. For me and several others, the problem became apparent in 2018. We have a small cottage with a privately dug well. There had never been any problems before, but all of a sudden the water began to run dry.
Unfortunately, that is how we humans function. In theory, we might know that this is a fear or a challenge for the future, but it is when we are actually hit that it becomes apparent.
Now several of us have also been able to read about this. Since last spring it has been clear that water is lacking in many places in our country, more or less. In my own home region of Östergötland, we also have water shortages, or at least low groundwater, especially in the southern parts. Perhaps it is not that many who have discovered it, even though the knowledge exists.
In other places, however, people have had to save. Especially in the southern and south-eastern parts of our country, the situation is even more acute than in my home region, just as the Minister was mentioning. Gotland went into emergency mode when the groundwater and surface water reserves reached record-low levels, and irrigation bans were introduced in the entire region. I am on Öland every year and know that Öland is also severely affected.
Now, many here in Stockholm have also experienced what it can mean – partly due to slightly different reasons, but the root cause is actually the same: We are starting to experience a shortage, and climate change is worsening it, just as the Minister was mentioning.
To meet this, long-term planning is required. More and more people are beginning to understand this now. Already today, many municipalities are adapting their operations to manage the periods with less water. Often, it is in the parts of Sweden where we talk about water shortages that the need for water is greatest. There are never as many people on Gotland as in the summer when the water shortage is great.
For me, this question is very important. It is good that it becomes a fundamental question. I wonder if the government needs to do anything more, such as developing a national strategy and supporting those municipalities that have particularly large problems, problems that will not become smaller in the future – for we can probably agree that this will become more common going forward.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! Let me also thank the member, as this is a subject I get to discuss all too rarely. It is almost to the point where question marks arise regarding who is responsible for water and sewage issues and such. Therefore, this is a good opportunity and a good time for us to discuss the issue, given what the member mentions: In a time when it is still summer and fairly warm in large parts of the country and many are returning from vacations and trips and begin to use large amounts of water again, we notice how the system becomes heavily burdened.
What we notice most of all is the important question of what we actually mean when we say water shortage. As the member also touched upon, it can mean many different things. I would say that it is a somewhat generic word that we use to describe the difficulties we have with the supply of water of good quality, for example drinking water, or groundwater, which the member also mentions.
This can have many different causes. For example, we have mentioned that effects resulting from climate change almost always have a direct or indirect connection to water. There is also a very strong connection between water quality and quantity. It is important to keep that in mind. During droughts, the amount of water decreases, which leads to an increased concentration of environmental toxins in the remaining water. As a result of flooding, the spread of dangerous substances increases, for example due to the overflowing of sewage water or the spread of pollutants that would otherwise remain stuck in the ground.
These questions, regardless of the reason for discussing the water shortage, are closely linked. There are many different angles that the government could look at. If I am to highlight one that we have particularly looked at since we took office, it is precisely our preparedness in these issues: What does our preparedness look like during an overload of our systems? How do we fare during a severely strained occasion? How do we stand?
Just this is what the Va-beredskapsutredningen, among others, has looked at: What pressures can we withstand? What is required for us to be better equipped and have a stronger preparedness in these issues?
It is very important that we ensure we have a sustainable water management generally. There are many issues within this field. As I mentioned, climate change in particular is something that affects how the systems function. I am a Stockholm resident myself and know that the situation that has arisen here, for example, is a consequence of Mälaren being warmer than usual.
There are many different perspectives in these issues. An important focus for us is to review the proposals that the Va-beredskapsutredningen has submitted and which are now out for consultation, as well as to focus specifically on the drainage areas. We know that it is a challenge for Sweden where we need to become better and also need to ensure that the measures we implement are cost-effective. These can be large costs, and in that case, it is important that what we do also has the right effect.
Finally, these measures may often need to be implemented further upstream in a different drainage area to prevent flooding in cities located downstream. That is where the national issues begin to come in: How do we ensure that the laws are equipped so that we can cooperate and coordinate in a better way?
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I will begin with something that the Minister touched upon, namely the lack of clarity in responsibility. I noticed it myself when I was writing the interpellation. It was not so clear that it was specifically the Minister Pourmokhtari to whom the question should be addressed. I believe this is a problem that we will need to address in the future. We must work together to take a great responsibility for these issues because they are so incredibly clearly connected – sewage, water, climate change. Very much of it overlaps with other things.
That is why I wanted to ask whether the Minister sees a need for a national strategy. It could be a way to address this lack of clarity and establish a shared responsibility.
I want to touch upon two parts where I am a bit more critical. Otherwise, I have asked questions because I really wonder and am curious, but there are two things that nevertheless touch upon this very clearly.
One part is what the Minister has touched upon; climate change involves increasingly extreme variations in the weather. Many Swedes believe that it does not affect us, because we up north have not seen so much of the consequences of climate change yet. But we know that it will become increasingly clear, with extreme rainfalls, droughts, and such.
Even though one might think that it cannot happen at the same time, droughts and heavy rainfall can absolutely become more common in the future. And it will have major consequences for us. It also creates a double pressure, a risk of both water shortages and floods in the same municipality during the same year. It is tricky to deal with.
Therefore, I have a question for the Minister. It is no secret that our party thinks that this government and the Minister are doing too little. It is a concern that we have. I carry it because we see that climate change actually has an impact on our lives. We should be upset even when it affects other parts of the world, for example when it comes to water shortages. But now it is also creeping closer, and the consequences will become clearer for Sweden. These are still the assessments, as far as I can read them. Then the need to act becomes even more clear. We need to take our responsibility.
When emissions are increasing anyway, it also affects this. My question, therefore, is not only whether a national strategy is needed. The Minister has himself touched upon that climate change has an impact. But is the Minister, like I am, worried that increasing emissions will actually also affect this area? I think we need to do more.
The second part, which we have also touched upon, is that it absolutely affects different municipalities and different parts of Sweden somewhat differently. Then we come to the municipalities, which are the primary authorities for the water supply in Sweden. Many municipalities are struggling hard and have made efforts, but they are simultaneously struggling with insufficient resources. Many municipalities are struggling to manage their welfare, to increase preparedness, and other things. Now they also have to tackle an increasingly pressing need to address the water shortage, sewage, and other related matters.
What does the Minister consider to be the national responsibility to ensure that the municipalities have both resources, competence, and the conditions to manage this issue?
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! If I begin with the thoughts regarding the climate and emissions, which can nevertheless be said to be a different issue than the subject being discussed in this interpellation, namely water and sewage systems and our preparedness in water issues, this time will be wasted.
I therefore begin at the other end and by highlighting the fact that when a municipal politician, a responsible local representative for water and sewage systems, works with these issues, one does not prioritize between elderly care, school, other municipal core missions and water and sewage systems. The reason is that the financing of water and sewage systems does not come from tax revenues but from what is called a water and sewage fee. It is a separate source of funds. It is an important assignment that local politicians and primarily municipal politicians have. There is a system for how the financing shall proceed, and it is through the water and sewage fee.
But back to the subject and what the government shall do and needs to address. I want to be very clear that the question the member poses, regarding whether we want to see a national strategy, is one of the proposals that the Va-beredskapsutredningen has come up with. Those proposals are now out for consultation. Consequently, I cannot, from the government's side, precede the process that is ongoing of working out proposals and gathering views by stating what the government thinks on the issue. The member puts me in a somewhat difficult situation. I simply cannot answer, even though the government obviously has strong opinions on how this area should be developed.
I can, however, highlight the measures we have taken through other tools. For example, in the work with the marine environment bill, for which I as Minister for the Environment am responsible, we noted that there is broad support among authorities, municipalities, industry organizations, and various local actors to achieve better cooperation at the catchment area level. That issue is truly raised as a national responsibility in terms of ensuring that processes are coordinated, but also ensuring that laws do not stand in the way of better cooperation and developed coordination. Even though different local measures are required, a local measure can indeed lead to an effect in another location. In that case, there must be room for that in Sweden.
It is a typical question that the government, in line with this discussion, has tasked the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management to simply take hold of. It is a work that is ongoing. In, for example, our regulatory letters for both 2024 and 2025, the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management received two different assignments to work with different measures and programs within the drainage area to strengthen cooperation and increase the pace of measures, so that we actually get started with these different measures. There shall also be a focus on ensuring that the right measure can be implemented in the right place.
If you work locally with an issue, for example, it is easy to look at what local needs exist and limit yourself there. But then the national contribution is needed by seeing that an intervention in this location would lead to a large effect in another location and possibly even at a lower cost because the interventions differ. Strengthened coordination is truly completely central, and it is a work that is underway.
Regarding the national strategy, I am bound to adhere to the rules. I shall not precede the process that is ongoing.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Like the Minister, I also shall not say that it is precisely a national strategy that is needed. But to develop a national strategy is nevertheless a way to address the ambiguities regarding the area of responsibility. I choose to interpret the Minister's statement benevolently when it concerns the fact that it is, at least, out for consultation.
I do not agree with what the government says when it comes to the fact that it does not compete at all with resources for schools, elderly care, or anything else. Many Swedes today are in an incredibly tough financial situation. Raising the fees in the municipalities is difficult, precisely because of how it looks. Many municipalities also say that precisely the preparedness issues cost money and resources for the municipalities. Then it still becomes a question of prioritization.
It is therefore important that we, nationally, stick to the financing principle we have. When we demand that the municipalities make interventions, we must send along sufficient resources so that they can manage this. Many municipalities are having an extremely tough time right now. It is about sending sufficient resources to the municipalities.
Then I still have a plea. Climate change will, according to everyone's assessment, affect the water shortage very much in the future. The water shortage will not be as rare as it has been but will become increasingly common. I truly plead with the government to take climate issues more seriously than is done today. It is not acceptable that we are now increasing emissions; instead, we must do more to reduce emissions and address the climate crisis that is ongoing. It is a plea to the minister, both regarding the water shortage and for all our futures.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! We are obviously changing the subject, from the questions about the water shortage to talking about emissions and a claim about a lack of commitment. I saw no accusations from the opposition when the red-green government increased emissions in 2021.
During several parliamentary terms in Sweden, there have been challenges, and during those challenges, it affects the emissions. In this case, it is an extremely strained household economy, which the member himself brings up.
There are quite a few Swedes who are quite relieved to have space in their wallets again. One should not interpret this as the government's climate policy or a lack of commitment in our work to reduce emissions, but one should interpret it as an effort for all those households that have had extremely difficult to make ends meet in their everyday lives when fuel prices, for example the price of diesel, have been at 28 kronor per liter in the Social Democrats' Sweden.
When talking about taking responsibility for reducing emissions, I think it is extremely important to also talk about the fact that Sweden's emissions decreased in 2022 and 2023 and are projected to decrease in 2025 and 2026. It was simply in 2024 that an increase in emissions occurred – one year out of four during the current mandate period, just as for the previous, red-green government.
When one speaks about how it is extremely important to show a commitment to reduced emissions, it is important to keep in mind that when large amounts of billions are invested in climate measures that do not yield an effect, it is responsible to take those funds and invest them in what works. That is exactly what the government is doing in climate policy. I am convinced that in the end, it is to our great advantage that the government has shifted climate policy to focus on measures that yield an effect and that reduce our emissions all the way.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.