Response to interpellation 2025/26:83 on air pollution and vehicle inspection
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD welcomes the EU Commission's proposal to improve air quality and traffic safety through vehicle inspections 1 2. KD believes it is more effective to establish a common regulatory framework at the EU level for particle count measurement rather than Sweden leading the process, as implementation in other countries has been associated with problems 1 3 2 4. KD emphasizes that emissions of small particles from domestic transport have decreased significantly since the 90s 3 2. S argues that Sweden should be a pioneer and introduce systems similar to Germany, Belgium, and Holland to save lives here and now 5 6. S criticizes that the government is waiting for the EU process when local emissions from damaged cars cause premature deaths 5 6 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.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! Jytte Guteland has asked me why my statements on environmental controls differ from the proposal submitted by the Transport Agency, what I think about particle counting and whether the method should be included in the vehicle inspection even in Sweden, and whether Sweden should support the European Commission's proposal to increase ambitions for air quality through the vehicle inspection.
In a previous interpellation debate with Jytte Guteland, I have accounted for the regulatory work in the inspection area that Transportstyrelsen is working on. The purpose of the changed rules is partly to make the environmental control more purposeful. For example, stricter requirements on error indicators are proposed for more vehicle types compared to today.
Both the authority and I have been clear that the current amendment to the regulation does not include the introduction of so-called particle number measurement. The reason for this is that the implementation of this method in some countries has been associated with certain problems, why the authority judged it more appropriate to wait with new Swedish rules until the revision of the so-called inspection package that is currently ongoing within the EU is finished.
My perception is that particle count measurement is an interesting new method to better be able to measure a vehicle's emission of particles. It is, however, reasonable that a new method for measuring particle emissions is regulated jointly within the EU.
Regarding the European Commission's proposal for new inspection rules as a whole, the government welcomes the proposal for amendments that can effectively improve road safety, air quality, and the conditions for healthy competition. It is at the same time important that the costs of the rules are in proportion to the social benefit. That is also the position that is anchored with the Riksdag.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
In Sweden, particles are estimated to cause 6,700 premature deaths every year, and 1,400 of them can be traced to traffic. In line with technological developments, car emissions have become less visible. The particles have become smaller and more dangerous, and it is the very smallest particles that are absolutely most dangerous. They enter the body and affect the heart, lungs, and brain.
Research has shown that there is a connection between PM2.5, i.e., small particles that are released, and an increased risk of diabetes, dementia, and several forms of cancer. Children in particular are sensitive to these particles. They result, among other things, in asthma, delayed lung development, and weaker lung function.
The particles from diesel cars have become smaller and more dangerous. Children, the elderly, and people with cardiovascular diseases are most severely affected. Still, only 0.05 percent of the inspected diesel cars in Sweden are rejected. It is clear that the Swedish system does not catch the sick cars, that is to say the cars that are damaged, and the cars that are manipulated. Our system is 30 years old.
Other countries in the EU, for example Germany, Belgium and Holland, are now leading the way and showing that it is possible to measure particles and remove those few cars that are so enormously harmful and that cause so many premature deaths. Why does the government not want to introduce a system for exhaust inspections in Sweden that, similar to the systems in Germany, Belgium and Holland, saves lives? Why does the government want to wait for an EU regulation? It could take many years before it is even decided, and it takes even longer before it is in place.
It is completely incomprehensible to me as a Social Democrat that Sweden does not want to be a pioneer when it comes to the environment, health, and how we handle our particles regarding exhaust emissions. My question to the Minister is therefore: Why does the Minister want to wait for the EU and for its slow machinery to get moving and start saving lives?
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! I thank Jytte Guteland for the commitment and the questions.
Right now, negotiations are underway on how particle measurement could be carried out and implemented across the entire EU. I believe everyone understands that it will have an even greater effect if we achieve a common approach at the EU level that allows us to handle this jointly.
The government is acting constructively to reach a good compromise where we balance both the important benefits for life, environment, and health as well as costs. It would be unwise to precede the EU process and thereby risk having to redo the work once that process has been completed. For our part, it is more important to achieve reasonable conditions at the EU level, with clear and distinct guidelines for the implementation of the regulatory framework, than to rush the issue. This applies especially since the change risks becoming a cost issue for individual vehicle owners.
With that said, it is important to improve air quality. Emissions of small particles from domestic transport have decreased by 60 percent since the 90s. From heavy trucks' exhaust, emissions have decreased by as much as 96 percent up to 2023, according to Naturvårdsverket. We need to take that into account, of course, given that Sweden is and shall be a country that leads the way, but it is also important that the EU collectively addresses – and acts on – this issue.
Sweden has welcomed the European Commission's proposal to improve environmental controls in vehicle inspections. It is clear that we have views on how the proposal can be improved. I also perceive that the Transport Agency supports most of the proposals from the European Commission, and we will contribute constructively and actively in the continued work to achieve even more impact behind it. At the same time, it is of course important that the consequences are reasonable.
What Jytte Guteland highlights regarding the actions of different countries demonstrates the complexity of this. Germany, which has already introduced particle number measurement with a limit value of 250,000, only applies the measurement to vehicles approved according to Euro 6 and newer. In Holland, particle number measurement has been introduced for vehicles approved according to Euro 5 and newer, but then with the limit value of 1 million. Belgium has also introduced particle number measurement but has encountered problems with the application.
That is why it is important that we get a common regulatory framework. It needs, of course, to be put in place as quickly as possible, but it also needs to be put in place in an orderly and consolidated way so that we can achieve the greatest possible effect.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
Absolutely no one questions the importance of acting at the EU level. It is absolutely true that at the EU level, rules can be set that cover the large emissions on our continent. But that being said, we all know that the processes take a long time when it comes to reaching negotiations and jointly setting limit values on an EU market. It will take time, and this is about people who are affected by these particles and air pollutants today.
It is about children who risk cancer in the future, children who risk asthma and children who risk problems with lung development and other things that lead to great suffering among the Swedish people. We are talking here about one of the absolutely most dangerous environmental consequences, that is to say air pollution. We know that they kill many, not least through cardiovascular diseases and cancer. For every month that we prolong the process, more people are affected. We know that in this city there are streets where the residents are asked by doctors if they have been heavy smokers even though they have, in fact, only made the mistake of living near a very busy street.
The government can, however, put a stop to many of the problems by removing the most dangerous cars. It is not about all cars, but about a few cars. Bilprovningen speaks of it being the sick, i.e., damaged, cars and the manipulated cars that need to be found. Regarding the limit values that the minister mentions, it is about 1 million or hundreds of thousands of particles, so it is not an order of magnitude that is problematic. The important thing is that Bilprovningen gets to the damaged cars that emit millions of dangerous particles. Then one has an answer through particle measurement.
Bilprovningen has started voluntary projects because they want consumers who want to measure their cars' particle emissions to be able to do so. Bilprovningen is ready, so why does Sweden not want to meet them halfway and introduce a system similar to Germany, Belgium, Holland, among others? I also do not understand the government's argument that it would be problematic in these countries. They have shown that they catch exactly those cars that are manipulated and damaged and which are life-threatening for the citizens.
Furthermore, the EU Commission says that it wishes for countries to take the lead and show the way. Many times in history, Sweden has been a pioneering country in environmental policy and shown the way so that legislation could then be put in place at the EU level that protects and saves people's lives and health.
I wish that the Minister would reconsider, be an example and lead the way by both introducing a more ambitious environmental check during vehicle testing, and by tasking the Transport Agency to do it over and do it right and come back with a proper inspection regulation that protects people's lives. I want that answer here and now.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! I will give the same answer again because we have anchored the position with the Riksdag regarding inspection rules and inspection packages. The Government welcomes proposals that can improve road safety, air quality, and conditions for healthy competition.
The government also has the view that it is more effective to establish a common regulatory framework at the EU level. The countries the member points to have implemented this in different ways, which indicates that it is complex. Therefore, it would be valuable to have a common position at the EU level to achieve better air quality throughout the union. Sweden would, of course, also benefit from this. We contribute constructively to reaching a good compromise in this regard, where both environmental benefits and quality of life, as well as costs and effects for car owners and others, are weighed and balanced.
Swedish air is among the best in Europe. I mentioned the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency's figures, and they speak for themselves. Emissions of small particles from domestic transport have decreased by 60 percent since the 90s, and in exhaust from heavy trucks, they decreased by a full 96 percent up to 2023.
With this said, we of course continue to work towards establishing a regulatory framework across the entire EU that strengthens competition in the internal market and strengthens work on air quality, road safety, and conditions for healthy competition. Therefore, we contribute actively to the work on the inspection package.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! I and Infrastructure Minister Carlson have stood here many times and discussed this issue. Previously, I have perceived the answers as that the Minister intends to accelerate the development. But now I am disappointed, for I perceive a new clarity that Sweden does not intend to lead the way and be an example when it comes to tightened inspection regulations and tightened environmental control. Instead, the intention is to wait for the EU – a process that can take many years.
It is about particle measurement in local pollutants, i.e., local problems where people are affected by life-threatening particles that enter the blood, heart, and lungs, which leads to public health diseases and is one of our biggest causes of premature death. Those affected by air pollution constitute a large proportion of traffic's fatalities. In Sweden, 1,400 people die prematurely because of this. It has nothing to do with whether there are air pollutants in Belgium or Italy, but it is about air pollutants and particles that come from, for example, manipulated, damaged cars in Sweden here and now. These local emissions we need to handle domestically.
I do not need a description of why it is important to act at the EU level. I have been a Member of the European Parliament myself and I believe in it. But when it comes to Swedish local emissions, Sweden must be a role model, and I am very disappointed after today's debate.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! Jytte Guteland refers to previous debates, and it has been and is important for me to emphasize that the government wants to see a process as fast as possible. But it is also important to act jointly at the EU level, and we contribute constructively to that work and to ensuring that this is in place as soon as possible within the framework of the work on the revision of the inspection package.
This is an important issue for the government. But it is also important that it becomes good and equal and that the EU has a value. The countries that have introduced it have done so in different ways, and there have been implementation problems in some countries, especially in Belgium, which we of course take into account in our points when we discuss this. But it is of course about it becoming as good as possible as quickly as possible.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.