Response to interpellation 2025/26:127 on Green Cargos ability to fulfill its assignments and its financial goal
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M argues that Green Cargo has no social mission but should be operated on commercial terms and is expected to turn a profit 1. M believes that the new ownership policy gives state-owned companies better conditions to be competitive and that the government takes responsibility for the climate, the state's finances, and the state-owned companies 1 2. M emphasizes that the company's economic challenges are not new but have existed for over a decade 3. M argues that the government is investing heavily in infrastructure and electrification to strengthen the railway's competitiveness 3. M believes that Sweden is a stable country with world-class public finances 2. M highlights that inflation is being fought and that Sweden is expected to climb the growth rankings 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me first welcome the guests in the gallery!
Isak From has asked me three questions: first, whether I have taken the initiative for an analysis of how the government's decisions, based on the wording in the Tidö Agreement, affect Green Cargo's ability to fulfill its assignments and its financial goal moving forward and if I can, in that case, report the result; second, whether I have taken the initiative for an analysis of whether an increase in Sweden's emissions has affected the company's opportunities to develop its operations and if I can report the result; and third, whether I have taken the initiative for an analysis of how the state ownership policy affects the company's opportunities to act in a value-creating and long-term manner since more and more transports are being shifted to trucks and if I can, in that case, report the result.
It is Green Cargo's board and management that are responsible for the company's development, organization, and daily operations. This is stated, among other things, in the Companies Act (2005:551), which applies to both state-owned and privately owned companies.
Green Cargo does not have a social mission. It conducts its operations on commercial terms in a market with free competition and is expected to make a profit.
There is nothing in the state's ownership policy that would affect the company negatively, on the contrary. According to the state's new ownership policy, companies with state ownership shall act commercially, have good corporate governance, generate sustainable value creation, and have long-term ambitions and good adaptability. With the new policy, the government wants to give the state-owned companies even better conditions to be competitive and develop in a sustainable way over time.
I have full confidence that Green Cargo's board and management are doing their best to ensure that the company handles the market conditions. As the owner, the government has clarified its expectations through the ownership policy.
Isak From (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Finance, for the answer, and thank you also for it coming so quickly! I appreciate that.
Why have I submitted this interpellation? Green Cargo is a Swedish limited company that is 100 percent owned by the Swedish state. The company's task is to transport goods on the Swedish railway. What has prompted my interpellation is that Green Cargo recently announced that it is continuing the reductions. This is a recurring issue as Green Cargo, during this parliamentary term and under the Finance Minister's leadership, has already announced reductions and layoffs. Now, notices are being given in Hallsberg, Gothenburg, and Nässjö, and furthermore, it is assessed that there is redundancy at an additional ten locations. It is, therefore, not finished yet. The company refers to the fact that the reductions are primarily due to a weak industrial development with weak order intake from the industry. It is also large corporate bankruptcies, a weak construction market, and a shift of transport from rail to road.
The latter also affects Sweden's ability to reach the set climate goals, not least for transport. This might have worked a bit better if the electrification of heavy vehicles and the transition to fossil-free fuels had been carried out to a greater extent. But during this mandate period, we have seen exactly the opposite. The electrification that the Tidö parties promised when they presented their Tidö Agreement has not been carried out. Furthermore, these issues are addressed in only a few lines in the Tidö Agreement.
One of my questions was how the Tidö Agreement affects Green Cargo's ability to fulfill its mission and its financial goal. When we see the result and the announced cuts, the Finance Minister's answer that the company is expected to turn a profit is not particularly credible. It is easy to say when the Tidö parties' entire rest of their policy points in the opposite direction.
I have also asked whether the Minister for Finance has taken the initiative for an analysis of how the increase in Sweden's emissions affects the company's opportunities to develop its operations. I have not received any answer to this.
Furthermore, I have asked whether the Minister for Finance has taken the initiative for an analysis of how the state ownership policy affects the company's opportunities to act in a value-creating and long-term manner. It is possible that the company manages this despite large cuts and layoffs, but then another question arises. When the industry hopefully comes back to life again in the future, will railway transport then remain as an option?
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Isak From for having asked the question, and I thank the Minister for Finance for the answer.
This gives us an opportunity to talk about an important issue for Sweden. It is about tackling the climate challenges and about achieving growth. For that, a strong climate policy and a strong industrial policy are needed, and Sweden does not have that right now. We know that Sweden can become a winner in the green transition, but then the policies must hang together. The Climate Policy Council states that the government's current policy is not sufficient to reach Sweden's climate goals or EU commitments. It is also the case that the countries that invest offensively in green energy, industry, and infrastructure get the jobs and growth of the future. We know that the green transition is not a threat to jobs but an opportunity to create tens of thousands of new jobs.
It is not only about emission reductions and climate goals. It is also about Sweden's place in the world and our ability to stand strong when geopolitics change. It is about our economic independence and about something that is sometimes forgotten in the debate: that the green transition is not just about jobs, growth, and politics, but also about being able to finance what we consider to be good in the future, that is, the Swedish welfare model.
Sweden has taken great steps before. We have electrified, we have expanded the railway, we have developed the folkhemmet, and we have created world-class companies. We can do it again, but the future does not wait for those who hesitate.
That is why Isak From's question is so important: What does the government intend to do when it comes to investments in infrastructure but also to manage and lead the state-owned companies? It has effects for the industry. When the climate policy and the growth policy have no clear vision or are leaderless, it has effects for the industry.
For example, the CEO of one of our larger companies recently said – I believe it was last week – as follows: "We need a major shift. If we don't get that, we are left with investments that we won't get back. The industry cannot afford timid climate politicians."
It is therefore worrying when the answers become so bland. What we need is not just an investment in climate policy, which many long for, but also an investment in growth. That is why Isak From's questions here are so important.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Madam Speaker! I would like to once again thank Isak From for the interpellation. It concerns first and foremost Green Cargo, for which I am the responsible minister and which is part of the state corporate portfolio.
I will first admit that I do not understand the first question, which concerns a writing that we apparently have had previously and which concerns precisely Green Cargo. Isak From is welcome to clarify that question later.
In other respects, I can only state that it is a very tough time for both Green Cargo and many other freight train companies right now. Five out of seven are struggling with profitability. It concerns several different things. As the interpellor pointed out, there is an economic downturn and a recession now, and then it is natural that there are fewer transports. However, already next year, Swedish growth is expected to increase quite significantly, and we will see an even greater need for transports on the railway.
There is some kind of undertone here that the economic situation for Green Cargo would have been created by the government. That is incorrect. The company has had economic challenges and difficulties for over a decade now, i.e., long before we took office. I definitely take responsibility for the present, but it may be important to point out that previous governments have on repeated occasions been forced to inject capital to keep the company afloat. The problems are therefore not new, but it is clear that they are worsening in a time when we have a long and protracted recession.
The government's investments in infrastructure are also an important issue here. We take the railway's competitiveness very seriously. It is a crucial issue for Sweden's growth but also for climate-smart transport.
In our budget and in our infrastructure proposition, we are making major investments. During the next period, from 2026 to 2037, we are allocating 1,171 billion kronor, which is an increase of 200 billion compared to the previous planning period. For the most part, it is about paying off a maintenance debt, for which many previous governments of different colors are responsible. It is an important prerequisite.
We will perform as much maintenance of the railway as is practically possible. We do not want the network to be closed for two years so that everything can be renovated, but it can be done stage by stage. It is not the government that decides exactly in what order this shall take place, but there are great resources to do it.
When it comes to climate work, Green Cargo is important. Green Cargo is an important company for us to have climate-smart transports. We can state, Madam Speaker, that Sweden is at the forefront in that regard in many ways.
From a European perspective, we have a fantastically good and strong climate policy. We have had some tough years. Many households previously had to pay very high fuel prices, but we have changed that. The railway will continue to be, and shall be, an important part of Swedish competitiveness moving forward and contribute to us lowering our emissions – that is not to be doubted.
In summary, Green Cargo faces major challenges, but they are not alone in that.
Finally, we are focusing on and investing in infrastructure and electrification. It is completely obvious that it is so. That is why we are now investing in nuclear power, for example – to enable the transition and electrification.
Isak From (S)
Madam Speaker! The Communications Manager for Green Cargo says: We have a strained financial situation and are adjusting costs according to the reduced revenues. We run fewer trains, and then less staff is required.
This has led to the fact that it has now been announced that reductions and changes shall be made in Nässjö, Hallsberg, Göteborg, Boden, Vännäs, Skelleftehamn, Långsele, Ånge, Sundsvall, Borlänge, Eskilstuna, Helsingborg and Tomteboda. It is still not known exactly how many jobs may disappear.
What has already been done is to reduce large parts of the piece goods that have been transported by rail in Dalarna. Among other things, both Ludvika, Borlänge, Mora, and Malungsfors have lost all opportunities to send goods with Green Cargo because the entire operation has been removed. It is clear that this affects other companies' opportunities to develop, grow, and send goods by rail.
The Minister for Finance is welcome to answer how a construction start for the nuclear power industry in, say, ten years can save Green Cargo here and now. The Minister for Finance says that the company should act long-term and value-creating, but right now it looks like the company is doing everything in its power to save what remains. In the long run, it will be difficult for the state to have a company that repeatedly shows negative results, but it will be even more difficult for Sweden and Swedish industry to increase production and utilize climate-smart transport.
The Minister for Finance asked if I would like to account for my first question linked to the Tidö Agreement. Green Cargo is not mentioned at all in the Tidö Agreement, as far as I can see. Not even Swedish Railways is mentioned. On the other hand, there are four lines in the document that deal with industrial policy, an industrial policy that is to give birth to all other policies, generate value creation and ensure welfare – all those parts.
It is written that Sweden needs to be a welfare state with good growth based on high productivity and that companies should have competitive conditions. That, of course, includes having transport and opportunities for transport. Now, it is actually the case that the government's policy on one side makes the policy on the other side impossible or difficult.
It may be that the Minister for Finance should answer here on what is intended to be done with the company. I suspect that the company is not so easy to sell, if one were to want that as a Moderate Finance Minister. It could be that one wants to privatize the freight transport, but there are actually no other companies in line to take over the transport.
This threatens industrial development, it threatens jobs across Sweden and it threatens Swedish competitiveness.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Let us establish a few things. Green Cargo has an incredibly important role, because what we need is to get more transport on the railway, not to increase transport on the road.
What can also be observed is that, conversely, more transports are now being moved from rail to road. This does not only affect Green Cargo but also Sweden's future and Sweden's climate, because when emissions increase within transport and energy and when more transports switch to road, it becomes harder for Swedish companies to profile themselves as climate-leading suppliers. When other countries simultaneously strengthen their green industrial policy and their green transition policy, this naturally risks drawing investments away from Sweden. It is good that other countries are doing it, but then Sweden must keep up and be part of that development, not in the development downwards.
Now that Sweden finds itself in a time of global competition over the future of the green industry, Sweden needs to be part of it. We need to invest in climate technology, in clean energy and in new industrial value chains. We need to invest in green transport.
That is why it is important to get this right, because we are seriously concerned that, for example, foreign investments in Sweden are decreasing and that industry and companies can no longer say: We are running on Swedish railways; it is green. That would also be something positive and good for Sweden.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Madam Speaker! What is this really about? Yes, it is about responsibility. It is about responsibility for the climate. It is about responsibility for the state's finances. It is about responsibility for the state-owned companies. I can only say, Madam Speaker, that I take responsibility for all those parts together with my colleagues in the government and with the Sverigedemokraterna.
I will just briefly answer the question concerning Green Cargo and investments from other countries. Just so we have it clear: Sweden is one of the countries that many investors want to come to – and more will become so, I have decided. We have a stable political situation and a stable economic situation. We thus have world-class public finances. In one of the larger newspapers, a reporter just wrote about this the other day about Sweden as a safe haven, as it is usually said, for those who want to invest.
One also knows that Sweden is a green country. No matter how much the Social Democrats complain about us making it easier for people by making it cheaper to refuel – the Social Democrats thought it was a bad idea – it is good for people to know that we are doing it while simultaneously strengthening electrification in the long term. That is the point with nuclear power. Electrification requires that one does things here and now but also in the long run, and dares to make decisions today that facilitate the transition even during the years to come, when we are no longer in this chamber. God forbid, perhaps someone thinks. Isak wants to stay for a few more years, and we probably will. But my point is that we take responsibility. We take responsibility for the climate, and we take responsibility for the infrastructure. And the bill that we have now submitted therefore strengthens the Swedish railway more than in a very long time.
Finally, Madam Speaker, it is about the company. That is why I have received this question. Green Cargo is having a hard time. It is a large and important company that, just now, like almost all, is having a very hard time and struggling with profitability. That is due to several things, but primarily, of course, on a long and protracted recession that was extended by Trump's entry into the arena with a trade war. It is a tough time.
Next year, however, Swedish growth is expected to be significantly higher than this year. This will, of course, affect this entire industry. But this industry has struggled for a long time with everything from profitability to capacity shortages, neglected maintenance, high track fees, delays and disruptions – sometimes due to the weather, which neither Isak From nor I can do anything about. That is where the responsibility ends. But one can rely on and know that this is a company that is important.
It is tough now. We have an ownership policy that clarifies for Green Cargo and all other companies what we expect from them. It is a legacy that I am glad I am leaving behind when it comes to precisely the companies and the governance. Clarity is what is being demanded – and furthermore, that we get the economy moving so that the transports achieve better profitability and we get down the emissions.
Isak From (S)
Madam Speaker! Minister for Finance! We Social Democrats base our entire welfare policy on the fact that we have an industry that delivers, that delivers the foundation and the tax revenues.
For that industry, we need to have a supply of competence. We need to have transport. But the rest of the world also needs to have confidence that investments in Sweden are profitable, long-term, and good.
During the Tidö parties' and the Finance Minister's time, this has worsened. We have gone from being a country where everyone wanted to invest, where we were at the forefront, to people now asking: Why is the state backing out of large industrial projects? Why does the state not stick to its commitments? Why does Sweden as a country not want to participate in financing future investments?
I also believe that the vast majority of passenger car drivers out on our roads see that it would be much better if the freight transport went by rail instead of being in the way on the road.
I see that the Minister for Finance has good ambitions. But it is undoubtedly the case that the Minister for Finance must go back to the Ministry of Finance and address many important issues in order to remove this deadlock.
It is not just new industry that is retreating. It is traditional forestry industry that is retreating. It is traditional manufacturing industry that is retreating. In area after area, Sweden is retreating. We need to have an ambitious climate and industrial policy.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for this debate.
I can state that when I took office, inflation was at 10 percent. It is now fought. I can state that Sweden was in 22nd place in the growth league. Next year we will be in 5th place if the forecasts come true, which I believe they will.
I can also state that in all my meetings with both foreign investors and finance ministers, many are green with envy because Sweden is such a stable country. I do not take all the credit for that, Isak From. It is many governments that have taken responsibility over decades. We are a fantastic country. We have it tough when global demand falters, but we will emerge from this strongly.
We are a pioneer country when it comes to climate and environment. Here, one can invest in the climate and now also in the defense industry, in correctional services, and in many other areas. We have a fantastic life science sector. We have so many parts of Swedish industry to be proud of. I am in contact with it on a daily basis and intend to continue to do everything I can so that Swedish industries and companies and Swedish jobs will increase.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.