Beatrice Timgren (SD): EU ska inte styra över svenskt skogsbruk

The EU has criticized Swedish agriculture a lot in recent years and Finnish agriculture should be added as well How do you view this criticism We have a problem with the EU trying to interfere especially regarding agriculture and forestry We do not see this as an issue for the EU Forestry is not a cross-border issue We have different conditions in various climates throughout the EU even within Sweden So these one-size-fits-all proposals don't quite work when it comes to forestry There are several aspects to the criticism of Swedish agriculture One is that too much is being cut down and that the goals for climate change will not be met The other one is about the car industry and the fact that Sweden cannot preserve biodiversity in the way that one would like How do you see it It's this idea that we won't meet the climate goals We're actually doing quite well compared to other countries yet we still have a very hard time Then they shift the responsibility to the forest owners to handle the entire emission reduction which is obviously unreasonable Many other countries can easily reduce emissions by not heating their homes with coal and oil We in Sweden do not do that So they try to place the entire burden on transport and forestry which mainly affects private forest owners They also harm Sweden's economy because we have fewer forest products to export to other countries The EU has been involved in Sweden regarding forestry for a long time There was a press conference with Ursula von der Leyen Ulf Kristersson and Alexander Stubb It was partly about forestry How are the negotiations going now regarding Swedish and Finnish forestry in Brussels This proposal regarding the calf's horn is being postponed now by a year and it's good that it is being postponed We would have preferred to see this proposal worked on from the beginning For this is something that mainly affects Sweden's and Finland's economies So we would very much like to see a reversal But it's a good first step to move forward But it's also important to remember that one must have predictability The only thing left to do is to move forward which is a challenge This means uncertainty forest owners It is risky for companies to want to invest in companies working with forestry in Sweden Sweden has a very large amount of forest compared to many other EU countries As you said it's different circumstances How can one best balance commercial interests one hand and the preservation of natural values on the other In Sweden we already have developed methods that take nature conservation and preservation into great consideration I have visited forestry areas several times and there they have shown that leaving certain stumps helps promote biodiversity People do not cut down everything at once but take certain parts at a time and sometimes save certain trees to preserve biodiversity So in Sweden great care is taken of the environment and climate yet the forest can still be cut down I think one could look at Sweden's example which has a lot of forest One could take the parts that are good and also work in other countries But I don't want people from the EU side to come with finger pointers Because it very rarely works throughout the entire EU Because we have different climates we have different ways of using the forest So it must also be adapted to the area where the forestry work will take place It is very many people who are critical of the calyx What would this ban on calico cats mean for Sweden I think above all it is Sweden that should decide how we should manage our forestry Nothing should be done from the EU There one should look at what works for Sweden What is called the calving season they still take very great care They do not take a huge area People are looking to preserve they plant new plants Often you plant more forest than you cut down So that we look at the whole instead of imposing a total ban We must ensure that we have both economy and also preserve the environment I think we are doing a very good job at that What is considered a cold is not agreed upon by everyone A part of the EU's forest policy is forest monitoring What is it This is a report that I was the surveyor for We had a vote in the committee where we rejected the proposal forest monitoring It would mean that the EU would dictate how different countries would handle and report data about the forest This can sound good but taking care of data is important Remember that the one who holds the measuring stick also sets the rules This contained an incredible number of delegated acts So that from the EU's side the framework is set but the EU Commission would set the detailed rules Therefore the commission is given the right to decide how we should handle our data We have seen from other sides that once you start taking in data the rules come next We can take the labor market for example There they wanted to look at the gender distribution and wage levels Follow all the rules regarding quotas and working hours This is what we have now blocked That the EU would decide how data is collected Because we believe this is a national issue It should be decided in Sweden How tough were these negotiations and what does this mean for the Sweden Democrats and Sweden For Sweden this means that we ourselves decide over our data Oh but in the future we will reduce the risk of the EU coming in and regulating how we measure Also more regulations from the EU on how we should manage our forests It's the biggest win So this was very important for us And there have been long discussions But there have been arguments when we have discussed that there is crime in Romania But then they have answered that it is better to regulate their forest data in Romania There is no one-size-fits-all solution across the entire EU to solve this problem With over a hundred years of experience in collecting data and managing forest data Och Drabba Sweden Karlhygge's directive regarding Karlhyggen has been postponed to the future What does this mean What does it mean that you voted down this now Can this come up again in the future Absolutely Now we have rejected the committee and we have received a clear signal that this is something the parliament does not like I mean Emma Wiesner the rapporteur She couldn't even get her own group to vote with her So this shows that this was not something the parliament thought was a good idea I hope this will be withdrawn by the commissioner I think that if it now goes to the chamber I see that there is a good chance we will pass it there as well Because it was such a large majority I hope we have sent a clear enough signal that the parliament does not want forest monitoring