Member Info for Juicy

It appears that the Government will not be forced to any decision except by Court action.

“We had wanted to wait and let the court decide this. What the government has done is to use both the Environmental Code and the Climate Act. Neither we nor the legal experts in the Law Council knew that the Climate Act could be used in this way, ”says Moderates Louise Meijer.

Have you been fooled?
"Neither we nor the legal experts saw this coming, so it comes as a great surprise that the law is used this way."

Even in the Social Democrats, the handling of Preem has provoked anger.

IF Metall Summit Marie Nilsson, with a chair on the Social Democrats party board, said in an interview with Di at the end of October last year that the government's actions are problematic.

"It's very questionable. This makes this kind of decision is correct unsafe, to suddenly be exposed to this risk, "said Marie Nilsson then."

Https://www.di.se/nyheter/nytt-brak-om-preems-jattesatsning-regeringen -gor-triple error /

Worth briefing the people in this article from DI about Kallakproblematiken?

Posted by Sssmajl yesterday on Avanza.

"New quarrel about Preem's huge investment -" Government makes triple error "

Preem's investment in Lysekil's refinery will soon be tried in court and then decided by the government. Now the Moderates are going into the debate hard and accusing the government of abusing the law to achieve political goals.

"That is how we should not use the legal processes," says Moderates' economic policy spokeswoman Elisabeth Svantesson. The fuel group Preem is stuck in the political spider web. The company's plans to vigorously expand the refinery in Lysekil have been on the government's table since August last year. The government claims that it is entitled to do so under the new Climate Act.

This has led the Moderates to go to the ceiling.

At the end of last week, the party notified Prime Minister Stefan Löfven (S) and Environment and Climate Minister Isabella Lövin (MP) to the Constitutional Committee.

“This is a political decision. Probably it is the Environment Party and parts of the Social Democrats who do not want this investment to be made. So we should not use the legal processes, ”says Moderates' economic policy spokeswoman Elisabeth Svantesson, who on Monday visited Preem's refinery in Lysekil together with party colleague as well environmental and climate policy spokesperson Louise Meijer.

“The government is making triple mistakes. You make mistakes when you review the court's decision, you make mistakes when you doubt an investment that leads to significantly more jobs and you make mistakes when you think about tight climate policy. If this investment is not made here in Lysekil but elsewhere, it will lead to increased emissions, ”Elisabeth Svantesson says.

In Preem's original application for expansion, the company estimated that emissions would double, from 1.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide to 3.4 million tonnes.

In October, Preem launched the charm offensive, promising a reduction in emissions increase to 2.7 million tonnes. This will be done, among other things, by making the expansion less than planned.

In addition, Preem sugared the offer by adopting new zero emission targets by 2040. In addition, the company promises to gradually increase biofuel production. The investment is between SEK 10 and 15 billion and there are 250 new jobs.

The government has a great interest in more biofuels in the tank, both for Swedish motorists and in aviation. But the question is where to make the soup if Preem was denied the extension.

Although the government has the final say in the Preem case, the application should go through regular court proceedings, starting in mid-March. It results in a statement, a kind of recommendation, which the government can then choose to follow or not.

Failing an imminent issuance of the long awaited licence, KB should be expecting Baylan's response to the company's recent letter any day now, in which case, we can only hope it contains more than his last.

Reading through recent posts on Avanza , some comments relating to our long-awaited decision stood out, these copied as follows,

1/ When I spoke to lawyers at the Government Office in October, I was told that it was legally ready and that they believed the message would come October/November
2/ that the government’s own representatives have confirmed to the company that it is so after pressure… The last letter is supposed to be answered now in January or alternatively that the decision will dimish shortly
3/ all parties in Government must agree a decision
4/ that MP’s spokeswoman thinks that the Ministry of Industry knows the MP’s attitude on the issue but it must be tested in accordance with applicable law and there are two different bags
5/ Talked to a parliamentarian from the Social Democrats a couple of weeks ago and had to confirm that if it wasn’t for a certain other party in the government we would have had more mines in the country by this time

The content of these would tend to confirm that there is no legal complexity, the legal decision, in accordance with the applicable law, can, and has, been made, so the delay is political, because of MP’s attitude and the need for all parties to agree. However, logically, if MP have accepted the decision must be made under the law, it is difficult to see how they could then continue to stand in the way of that decision, not least because their doing so would, presumably, be unlawful.

Let's hope we won't have too much longer to wait.

FF23 - That's much how I read it. Everything will be assessed against the new Action Plan, when it has been implemented, and that could clearly take some time.

Make what you will of it....

Press release from the Ministry of the Environment
A comprehensive policy for the climate
published December 17, 2019

The Government is presenting for the first time a climate policy action plan for the Riksdag. The climate must be integrated into all relevant policy areas. With 132 measures, the bill takes a holistic approach to how emissions should be reduced throughout Swedish society.

The development for the world's climate is worrying. Right now the world's land ice is melting, the temperature in the seas is rising and huge forest fires are becoming more and more common. The Earth's ecosystem and human welfare require a stable climate.

Sweden is now taking an important step by integrating the climate issue into all relevant policy areas. The first climate policy action plan contains over a hundred measures that the government will take during the term of office, which span the whole of society.

- The climate crisis is a serious threat to prosperity and security in the world if we do not get out of fossil dependency and build environmentally sustainable societies. Ignoring the researchers' persistent warnings would be totally irresponsible. Sweden can go ahead and show that a fossil-free world is not only possible but also benefits our prosperity and our companies. It is unique that Sweden now comes up with an action plan the basic concept that climate considerations should be included in everything we do in society, says Environment and Climate Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Isabella Lövin.

The Government's overall proposal in the bill is that increased efforts should be made to integrate climate policy into all relevant policy areas. All sectors of society need to contribute to achieving the goal that by 2045, Sweden will not have any net greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere. The work of integrating climate policy will include reviewing all relevant legislation so that the climate policy framework will have an impact, that in connection with the next review of the respective social goals, the government will, if necessary, reformulate the goals so that they are compatible with the climate goals, and to make impact assessments for climate for the proposals in the areas where it is relevant.

The Action Plan contains 132 measures that the Government intends to implement during the term of office, both in specific sectors and at a general level. The plan covers sectors such as industry, transport, consumption, public procurement, agriculture, forestry, financial markets and international climate work.

New member? Who were you previously?

For a normal person, yes, but these are politicians. Perhaps, Baylan thinks he can get to a decision before KU, or that before them something will come up to delay the need, such as election. Or, perhaps, KU finding against him would not be a major issue for him.
A member from the Environment Party recently said that the Social Democrats, their partners in Government, were aware of their position, namely, that they don't want a mine/there should not be a mine, but that the decision should follow the law. Given this, surely a decision could have been made. Perhaps, KU is less of a concern to the Social Democrats than their Coalition partners.

Suzy2.
What I write is intended to convey only where I think things are/are going. Personally, I would prefer an RNS tomorrow confirming a yes decision.
In the link from Avanza that you posted, all items were 'tabled'. I think this refers only to an agreement to the action outlined. The item above ours (also requiring a controversial decision) required similar questions.
My understanding of this referral to questions, or investigation, is that the matter will be passed to a person/or persons to review, and who will report back following this, and nothing will happen until then.
Whilst KU are considering a complaint, they will not conclude their report until Spring, so, essentially, I see nothing to push the government until then, unless the company changes from it's current strategy.

2 points.
The letter with questions relates to the 'investigation' that the government now considers is needed. Essentially an internal government investigation to consider why they have been unable to reach a decision. The case is 'tabled' until this is done, so nothing will happen until then.
The reindeer map has been changed to now place areas essential to reindeer herding within the area of the mine. In simple terms, mining can't be allowed in these areas because they are essential to reindeer herding.

EricD.
From White Lady on Avanza.
https://www.expressen.se/news/jonas-sjostedt-lamnar-

The Left Party wants Labor Minister Eva Nordmark (S) to step down.
M, KD and SD support the Declaration of Unbelief - unless the government meets their demands for the Employment Service.
After the announcement, group leader Annelie Karlsson (S) said that the government will have to decide whether to resign, and in the afternoon, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven commented on the message:
- It is noteworthy that the Left Party, together with the Moderates, Christian Democrats and Sweden Democrats, is prepared to topple a Social Democratic minister who took office almost three months ago, he says.

So the Government might resign. A further election would be a good excuse for not making a decision.

Constitutional Committee meeting. Is that the same as KU?

On 19th September KB wrote to Baylan, who responded at the beginning of October of a 'forthcoming decision'. However, nothing is then forthcoming, so, annoyed by the dither and delay, on 11th November, KB submits a final statement, essentially a legal opinion stating that the company has satisfied the law, and were this subject to a legal review, that would conclude the same. Again nothing.
So, to paraphrase from the RNS, the outcome of these efforts is that the company has made their case, and can now only wait for the government decision.
The only positive that might be drawn in all this, is that the Swedish government appears to now accept that they should, when considering their decision on the company's mining application, follow their own laws. Staggering.

So, should we expect to hear the same from KB? Perhaps an RNS this coming Monday saying he has told Baylan he wants a decision by Christmas or he will sue.

Who should I be more disappointed in?
Baylan is a politician, therefore, he is, by nature, self-serving and mendacious. He is, arguably, doing exactly what might be expected.
There are no complex legal issues, as Baylan has previously stated. If the application were deficient, this would have been identified long before now, and the application denied.
There are clear issues for Baylan, but these are not around the suitability of the application (which fully satisfies the various requirements of the process). These are entirely political issues, around the Sami and his government’s coalition partners.
If Baylan were considering the application solely within the law, then it would have been approved months ago. He is not. He is wanting to look after his friends, and to not create an issue for what is, clearly, a fragile coalition. He cannot say no, but he can delay.
If there are any complex legal issues for Baylan to consider, it is those that might arise if the government unfairly rejects the application and has then to face up to the legal appeal that would certainly follow.

Ibrahim Baylan, Minister for Trade and Industry is up first, and his topic..

'A competitive Swedish mineral industry - decisive for the green transition'

Can't wait. Decisive. Not sure what he knows about decisiveness. Perhaps it means something different in Swedish.

In essence Kurt has sent a letter before action but without directly involving a solicitor or threatening legal action. He can now only wait to see whether this achieves the required result but, if not, he will then need to push this, and quickly. End of this month, latest.

Ridiculous. How can Lovfen expect to bring two opposing interests together and find a solution that suits both when one side won't engage with the other.

His reference to reviewing legislation is a political red herring. The legislation is not the issue here. It is whether Government policy is to follow their own mining application process or simply give primacy to Sami rights (or, to call them what they really are, complaints). And if he were honest enough to make this decision, it would allow the argument to move forward.

Eric. Doesn't say when it was agreed or at what discount. SP was a touch above 6p just 3 weeks ago.