The Environmental Goals Committee’s proposal on how the climate benefits of forests should increase and biodiversity should be enhanced has been presented. The inquiry’s mission was to propose how Sweden should comply with the goals of the UN Global Agreement on Nature and the EU’s binding legislation. The Swedish Green Party unfortunately thinks that the proposals presented today will not only seriously undermine climate and environmental goals. They will also worsen the situation of forests and forest owners who want to manage the forest with natural methods.
“The proposal from the Committee on Environmental Objectives is a throwaway. It will do nothing to protect the forest and is a mockery of forest owners who bear great responsibility for the climate and the environment. The Tidö parties are deliberately submitting proposals that are both completely inadequate and in violation of the law,” says Emma Nohrén, chairwoman of the Riksdag Committee on the Environment and Agriculture (MP).
For two years, representatives from all parties in the Riksdag have sat on the Committee on Environmental Objectives and have been trying to reach an agreement. But the agreement fell through when members of the Tidö parties deleted a number of key proposals at the last minute that not only contradicted the inquiry guidelines, but also ran counter to European legislation and international agreements signed by the Tidö government.
A low point for the government too
The result is a watered-down proposal in which neither the objectives for protecting biodiversity in forests are met, nor the legal requirements for increased absorption of carbon dioxide in forests. The remains of Sweden’s most valuable forests, natural forests and mountain forests, also do not receive the protection required by European law.
“Instead of implementing measures that slow down climate change and at the same time protect our most valuable forests, the Tidö parties are choosing the status quo. This is the wrong path. We are now in a situation where the conditions for increasing biodiversity and storing greenhouse gases in forests are worse than at the beginning of the commission’s mission. This is a low point, also for this government,” said an article on the Swedish Green Party’s website.
According to the EU’s biodiversity strategy, all remaining primary and natural forests must be strictly protected. The Environmental Objectives Committee was tasked with reporting on how this should be done, not whether it should be done.
