Response to interpellation 2025/26:351 on the government's bill in light of the Environmental Goals Commission's report
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
L argues that the climate policy framework serves Sweden well and that the goal of net-zero emissions by 2045 provides long-term conditions for the business sector 1. L believes that it is in Sweden's interest that the climate goals are well aligned with EU commitments 2. L argues that there are reasons to replace the transport goal with an electrification goal to reduce the transition pressure on other sectors 2. L emphasizes that electrification based on fossil-free energy, for example nuclear power, is the key to the climate transition 3. L argues that the government has made major investments in charging infrastructure and support for electric heavy vehicles 3. S believes that it is surprising and irritating to follow the former climate minister's statement on the transport goal since it went against the Environmental Objectives Council 4. L informs that the ambition is for a bill to be submitted during the spring of 2026 5. L argues that there may be reasons to replace the previous transport goal with an electrification goal for the transport sector and that the issue is being prepared in the Government Offices 5. L argues that one has no climate policy without fossil-free electricity in large quantities and without nuclear power 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.
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! Jytte Guteland has asked the Minister for Climate and the Environment when the government's bill, in light of the Environmental Goals Commission's report, will be submitted to the Riksdag.
Thank you very much for the interpellation, Jytte Guteland! The work within the government is so distributed that it is I who shall answer it.
The climate policy framework serves Sweden well, and the goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045 at the latest and negative emissions thereafter provides long-term conditions for the business sector and society to carry out the transition that is required. The national interim targets are important as checkpoints on the way towards net-zero.
Sweden has pushed to make the EU the globally leading force in the climate transition. With the EU's stringent climate legislation, the difference between the Swedish national milestone targets and our EU commitments has decreased. This was an important reason why the Environmental Objectives Council was tasked, among other things, with submitting proposals for updated Swedish climate targets for 2030 in order to, while maintaining the level of ambition, better align with Sweden's climate commitments within the EU.
The report was submitted on 30 October 2025 and sent out for consultation on 25 November of the same year. The consulting bodies are largely positive towards the committee's proposal to update the Swedish climate goals for 2030 so that they better align with Sweden's commitments within the EU.
The report is now being prepared in the Government Offices. The ambition is to return to the Riksdag on this issue during the spring of 2026.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you to the Acting Minister for the Environment and Climate, whom I would like to welcome to the debate here in the chamber regarding precisely the environment and climate policy!
It is true that the Environmental Goals Commission submitted its report with proposals on the Swedish climate goals on October 30 last year. I was myself a member of the commission, and when four months had passed, I thought it was time to hear whether the government intends to return with a government bill in the matter.
It was a show of strength that we succeeded in uniting the eight Riksdag parties around the main features of the Swedish climate goals for 2030. The Government also wanted us, in accordance with the directive, to look at increased harmonization with the EU goals but maintain the ambition for Swedish climate policy and also ensure that it became clearer how we should handle complementary measures in the climate policy.
We submitted proposals that fossil fuels should be phased out more clearly and that an increased electrification of the vehicle fleet should be achieved. Recently, however, it has become painfully clear how poorly we actually stand when it comes to precisely the electrification of the vehicle fleet. We also submitted a number of proposals regarding how to handle complementary measures so that it becomes clearer in accounting terms – there should be no ambiguity about what can be done and when, specifically regarding supplementation to the reduction.
When it comes to climate policy, we are not always in agreement on the content and which instruments should be used, and therefore it was still a message of strength that we managed to reach an agreement on what we should achieve by 2030 and also the content and the harmonization in comparison with the EU. I am proud of our work and that we managed to get so far together and show that unity.
It was therefore all the more surprising to see Minister for Climate and Environment Romina Pourmokhtari comment on parts of the report with an opinion that went directly against what the Environmental Goals Commission proposed. We received a statement that one should abandon the transport goal and the ambitious objective regarding this. There was nothing in the Environmental Goals Commission that proposed it; on the contrary, in our discussions, we agreed that the goal should remain. Therefore, it was very surprising that Minister for Climate Romina Pourmokhtari expressed herself in that way after we had worked for eight months to reach an agreement.
I therefore want the acting Minister for Environment and Climate to describe how the country stands regarding that issue as well. In addition to wishing that we receive a bill before the change of government that we hope for in September, I also want to know a little more about the content and whether the current Minister for Environment wants to respect the Environmental Goals Commission's work.
Åsa Westlund (S)
Mr. Speaker! Welcome, Johan Britz, to the climate debate in the Swedish Riksdag!
Sweden has, in a long line of political areas, had cross-bloc agreements that have served Sweden very well. Unfortunately, the current government has not really nurtured these agreements, nor has it concluded any new ones.
I thought I would start by repeating what the Minister for Climate herself said at the press conference when the Environmental Goals Commission submitted its report: Since the government took office, false claims and headlines have been spreading wildly about allegedly abolished climate goals. This has created great concern, not least in the business sector. But now all parties stand behind the climate goals, and I hope that we are finished with the nonsense about abolished climate goals or lowered ambitions, because it is not worthy of Sweden.
So, that is what the Minister for Climate said when the Environmental Goals Commission submitted its final report, and she then captured the concern that arises when one does not stand up for our common climate goals. She also meant that it was nonsense to talk about breaking the goals. A couple of weeks ago, however, a time after this, the Minister for Climate said that she and her party, which her deputy here in the chamber also represents, believe that it is time to abandon one of the goals that it was very important to hold fast to just recently.
I therefore wonder if the Minister can answer what it is that has changed so drastically in reality between these two points in time. First, it was incredibly important for Swedish business that the politics stood united behind these climate goals, and it was nonsense to talk about tearing them up. Then the Minister for Climate said that this goal should be torn up.
Is there any factor that the Minister can point to that has changed between these statements, or should the change in the Liberals' and the government's rhetoric be seen as another step in adapting to the Sweden Democrats' climate policy?
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the welcome, Jytte Guteland and Åsa Westlund!
I want to take a step back and remind what it is we are talking about here. The Swedish climate goals and the interim goal for 2030 were set when the climate policy framework was adopted in 2017.
It has now been almost ten years, and the world has changed significantly. One of the most important changes is that the EU's climate goals have been tightened. Since the Swedish interim targets for 2030 differ from the EU's 2030 goals, a need has arisen to harmonize the goals. This is the primary reason why the Environmental Goals Commission was tasked with proposing updated interim targets for 2030. I believe we are in complete agreement that it is in Sweden's interest that our goals are well aligned with our EU commitments.
I also note that the Environmental Goals Commission has assessed that a review of Sweden's goal structure for 2040 may be needed once the EU framework for the period after 2030 is in place. The goal for domestic transport by 2030 is designed in a way that means other sectors in practice hardly need to reduce their emissions by 2030. This reduces the transition pressure for these sectors, which risks leading to sub-optimization where transport buyers and travelers are affected by higher prices than would otherwise have been necessary. There may therefore be reason to replace the previous transport goal with an electrification goal for the transport sector. This is currently being prepared in the Government Offices.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you to the Acting Minister for the Environment and Climate for the answer!
I want to start by again asking both when we will see a government bill, and whether that bill will respect the Environmental Goals Council's proposal and common views regarding the Swedish climate goals. I understood both from this entry and from what the previous Minister for Climate and Environment said that is not the case regarding one of the goals, namely the transport goal.
I perceive that the government is going against what the Environmental Goals Commission has said and is turning 180 degrees from what was agreed upon, but I am glad if I get a clarification. I perceived the answer from the acting Minister for Climate and Environment as that we can expect the transport goal to be scrapped. Was that how I should perceive the answer? I must then also speak about the issue at hand and about democracy.
The situation has been very difficult regarding preparations and reaching agreements across block boundaries in Swedish politics in recent years. Several preparations have failed. This time, the eight parties in the Riksdag exerted themselves to reach an agreement. We worked constructively and had a good dialogue between all the parties in the Riksdag. It is therefore very surprising that the Minister for Climate and Environment and now also the acting Minister for Environment and Climate choose to go against what the eight parties agreed upon. It shows a staggering arrogance – moreover from a party with little support among the Swedish people.
What is it that lies behind this U-turn? It cannot be the politics. It is quite bad politics that is being presented. Something that is governing for the transport sector, which needs to reduce its emissions, is presented in a way that makes it unclear. One day they are to reduce emissions – the next day they are not to do so. It is precisely that type of vacillation that the various industries in Sweden complain about. They want clarity. It is, therefore, bad politics that the minister proposes.
Furthermore, it is undemocratic to first appoint a commission, have the parties work hard together and let all eight do their jobs, and then – despite the fact that everyone in the commission agreed for once – do the opposite. It is incredibly arrogant and disrespectful towards democracy.
I move on to the substantive issues. The Swedish government has received criticism in recent years, rightly so, for being wavering in climate policy. One day you are to lower the reduction obligation – the next day you are to raise it again, when you realize that it didn't work. One day you think the climate goals are important – the next day you want to scrap them. It is "oops" every day.
Swedish industries repeat that they no longer understand what Swedish climate policy is about. I want us to be clearly informed today as to whether the acting Minister for Climate intends to break with the Environmental Goals Council's proposal regarding the Swedish climate goals.
Åsa Westlund (S)
Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Climate has himself said that the consensus around the climate goals is very important for our business sector and for companies to dare to invest in our country. I asked what has happened since the Liberals reached an agreement with six other parties in the Environmental Goals Commission that leads to the undermining of the security and safety the business sector needs by saying that this goal shall be torn up and changed. I received no clear answer as to what has actually changed.
I can say what has changed politically. In the Environmental Goals Commission, it was one party that proposed what the government now says it is preparing in the Government Offices, and it was the Sweden Democrats. The Christian Democrats have also said that they are backing away from this. Then the Liberals came out and said the same.
It is clear to everyone outside what is happening, namely that the Sweden Democrats are dictating even Sweden's climate policy. It is, therefore, a party that here in our chamber has often questioned the need to even have climate policy in Sweden. It is they who are setting the pace.
I would gladly give the Minister a chance to explain what else has changed from when the Minister for Climate and Planning said it was important to stick to the consensus around the climate goals to the government now preparing to tear them up. Do not say that the goals have become unrealistic without acknowledging that, if so, it is due to the government's policy, for it has deliberately moved Sweden further away from the goals!
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you for this important discussion. I believe we are in complete agreement that the Swedish climate goals are and shall be ambitious, but also that they will not be reached easily. Many of the low-hanging fruits have already been picked. Sweden already has a largely fossil-free electricity system – something that many other countries can only dream of.
The government is, of course, working continuously to analyze and improve instruments that can reduce emissions in a way that strengthens competitiveness and social acceptance. We can also remind ourselves that we have the lowest emissions per capita in the EU. We can remind ourselves that we have half the emissions per capita compared to China. It is a country that can be said, somewhat understatedly, to be somewhat larger than our country. We have a third of the emissions per capita compared to the USA, between the thumb and the index finger.
During this parliamentary term, we have made several efforts that facilitate the transition and electrification, for that is where the key lies. There is only one way to achieve the climate transition both in our country, on our continent, and in our union as well as globally, and that is electrification – electrification based on fossil-free energy, for example nuclear power. It would be appropriate if Jytte Guteland could describe how the Social Democrats view nuclear power moving forward.
The government has made investments in charging infrastructure like never before. The expansion rate per year has more than doubled compared to the previous mandate period. Furthermore, we are investing heavily so that heavy traffic can transition at a faster pace, with among other things record-breaking support for electric trucks, buses, and work machines. We solve the climate challenge through electrification here and elsewhere with fossil-free energy and electricity. It would be interesting to hear Jytte Guteland lay out the text, at least a little bit, regarding the Social Democrats' view on nuclear power.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Mr. Speaker! To begin with, I had expected and hoped for an answer from the Acting Minister for Environment and Climate regarding the question I have posed. I would have liked to receive an answer to the question about the exact time when we can expect a government bill, but also regarding the content. To follow the former Minister for Climate's statement regarding the transport goal has made me both surprised and irritated, as it went against the Environmental Goals Secretariat.
Åsa Westlund pointed out that a party reserved itself on this point, and it is true that the Sverigedemokraterna did so. The Minister for Climate and the Environment was very clear at that time that the goals would apply. She is otherwise on parental leave now; she has not resigned. At the press conference when we handed over the report, the climate minister even said that she was proud of the broad support behind the Swedish climate goals.
I want to repeat what Åsa Westlund put forward in the debate: What is it that has changed? I ask the question openly now in my closing remarks to let the acting Minister for Climate take it with her. The only thing we from the opposition side can see is that the Liberals have sat in the lap of the Sweden Democrats and chosen to do as the Sweden Democrats say.
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! Let me be brief. I have today announced that the ambition is for a government bill to be submitted during the spring of 2026. I have also been clear as to why there may be reasons to replace the previous transport target with an electrification target for the transport sector and that the matter is being prepared in the Government Offices. And just as always otherwise when we engage in legislation, the government will, in due course, return to the matter to the Chamber.
I also noted that I did not receive any answer to my question regarding the Social Democrats' view on nuclear power. Without fossil-free electricity in large quantities and without nuclear power, one has no climate policy.
We will stop there and continue the discussion at a later time, which I look forward to.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.