2025-05-152024/25:MJU16 · p.5MJUEnvironment & agriculture
A differentiated shoreline protection framework with increased municipal and local influence
Greater municipal influence over shoreline protection
What's at stake: The decision affects how much power municipalities get over where building near water should be allowed, concerning both rural landowners and businesses wanting to develop their operations, as well as local nature conservation.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether shoreline protection should be fundamentally overhauled with greatly increased municipal decision-making power over protected areas, or whether the government's current relaxations together with a forthcoming inquiry are sufficient.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee considers that the government has already taken clear steps to make shoreline protection more purposeful and locally adapted, both through the bill the committee endorses and through an announced inquiry into further relaxations, and therefore rejects the motions calling for a more differentiated framework and increased municipal influence.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 8 (C)
The reservation (C) wants to abolish general shoreline protection entirely and replace it with strengthened local power for municipalities to designate especially valuable areas themselves, arguing that municipalities know local conditions best and that this would ease building and business activity while strengthening residents' local influence.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 8 by C.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
The decision would have gone the other way
Explicit commitments that contradicted the vote: KDKristdemokraterna, MModeraterna, SDSverigedemokraterna
Ja 168–20Nej 31–157
Counterfactual: the parties above are moved to the position their own documents explicitly point at, carrying their whole contingent present. Every other party keeps its real figures, including dissenters and absentees.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | Yes | Abstain 3/0/16/5 | departs from the plan | confidence: high | explicit |
| S | Yes | Abstain 0/0/92/14 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| MP | Yes | Yes 15/0/0/3 | follows the plan | confidence: high | explicit |
| C | No | No 0/20/0/4 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | explicit |
| L | Yes | Yes 12/0/0/4 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | explicit |
| KD | No | Yes 16/0/0/3 | departs from the planagainst own programme | confidence: high | explicit |
| M | No | Yes 59/0/0/9 | departs from the planagainst own programme | confidence: high | explicit |
| SD | No | Yes 62/0/0/10 | departs from the planagainst own programme | confidence: high | explicit |
Broke with the party line
| VAndreas Lennkvist Manriquez (V, Stockholms kommun) | Yes — party line: Abstain |
| VKarin Rågsjö (V, Stockholms kommun) | Yes — party line: Abstain |
| VLorena Delgado Varas (V, Stockholms kommun) | Yes — party line: Abstain |
MPs whose vote differs from their party's majority position in this division. Marked with a dark ring in the chamber view.
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2024/25:46 by Martina Johansson (C) demand 1, 2024/25:200 by Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD), 2024/25:615 by Gudrun Brunegård (KD), 2024/25:1018 by Kerstin Lundgren (C), 2024/25:1061 by Christofer Bergenblock and Anders Karlsson (both C), 2024/25:1454 by Tobias Andersson et al. (SD) demand 11, 2024/25:1675 by Ludvig Ceimertz (M) demands 1 and 2, 2024/25:2039 by Kjell Jansson (M), 2024/25:2207 by Lars Isacsson et al. (S), 2024/25:2397 by Viktor Wärnick (M), 2024/25:2415 by Oliver Rosengren et al. (M), 2024/25:2674 by Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M), 2024/25:2831 by Sten Bergheden (M) demands 1 and 2, 2024/25:2858 by Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M), 2024/25:2950 by Alireza Akhondi et al. (C) demands 4 and 8 in this part, 2024/25:2955 by Muharrem Demirok et al. (C) demand 20, 2024/25:2978 by Markus Wiechel et al. (SD) demand 7, 2024/25:2986 by Markus Wiechel and Victoria Tiblom (both SD), 2024/25:3109 by Anna-Caren Sätherberg et al. (S) demand 73, 2024/25:3122 by Eric Westroth (SD) and 2024/25:3143 by Josefin Malmqvist (M).
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2024/25:46 av Martina Johansson (C) yrkande 1, 2024/25:200 av Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD), 2024/25:615 av Gudrun Brunegård (KD), 2024/25:1018 av Kerstin Lundgren (C), 2024/25:1061 av Christofer Bergenblock och Anders Karlsson (båda C), 2024/25:1454 av Tobias Andersson m.fl. (SD) yrkande 11, 2024/25:1675 av Ludvig Ceimertz (M) yrkandena 1 och 2, 2024/25:2039 av Kjell Jansson (M), 2024/25:2207 av Lars Isacsson m.fl. (S), 2024/25:2397 av Viktor Wärnick (M), 2024/25:2415 av Oliver Rosengren m.fl. (M), 2024/25:2674 av Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M), 2024/25:2831 av Sten Bergheden (M) yrkandena 1 och 2, 2024/25:2858 av Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M), 2024/25:2950 av Alireza Akhondi m.fl. (C) yrkandena 4 och 8 i denna del, 2024/25:2955 av Muharrem Demirok m.fl. (C) yrkande 20, 2024/25:2978 av Markus Wiechel m.fl. (SD) yrkande 7, 2024/25:2986 av Markus Wiechel och Victoria Tiblom (båda SD), 2024/25:3109 av Anna-Caren Sätherberg m.fl. (S) yrkande 73, 2024/25:3122 av Eric Westroth (SD) och 2024/25:3143 av Josefin Malmqvist (M).
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag approved the Government's proposal which entails several reductions in shoreline protection regulations. According to the proposal, small bodies of water and bodies of water constructed in modern times shall no longer be covered by the general shoreline protection. The proposal also means that opportunities to build or take measures in shoreline-adjacent locations increase. Shoreline protection shall, in individual cases, be able to be introduced for small bodies of water with special significance for the purposes of shoreline protection, which are to in the long term protect the public's access to shoreline areas and preserve good living conditions for animal and plant life on land and in water. The exception for enterprises that use natural resources on land and in water, primary industries, becomes according to the Government's proposal more generous. The provisions for primary industries shall also be supplemented so that aquaculture, that is, activity that conducts cultivation in water, for example fish and shellfish farming, is also covered by the reductions. Furthermore, municipalities shall more easily be able to decide that shoreline protection does not reapply when they adopt a new detailed plan, that is, the regulations that control construction within a certain area. The proposals enter into force on 1 July 2025. The Riksdag simultaneously rejected approximately 40 proposals in motions, among other things with reference to the Government's proposal and ongoing work. The proposals were submitted during the general motion period of 2024.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants to clarify that existing exemptions from beach protection and fully beach-protection-free areas shall continue to apply. (C) — Reservation 8
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan establishes that protection of coastal areas is an important part of the right of public access and biodiversity, and that coastal protection gives the public access to coasts and lakes and strengthens resilience to the consequences of climate change.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan establishes that protection of coastal areas is an important part of the right of public access and biodiversity, and that coastal protection gives the public access to coasts and lakes and strengthens resilience to the consequences of climate change. Abolishing general coastal protection and replacing it with local designation of protected areas undermines precisely that protection. The plan therefore speaks against the counter-proposal's demand.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att skyddet av strandområden är en viktig del av allemansrätten och den biologiska mångfalden, och att strandskyddet ger allmänheten tillträde till kuster och sjöar samt stärker motståndskraften mot klimatförändringarnas konsekvenser. Att avskaffa det generella strandskyddet och ersätta det med lokal utpekning av skyddsvärda områden river upp just det skyddet. Planen talar därför emot motförslagets krav.
- coastal protection gives the public accessdecisive»Samma sak gäller strandskyddet, som ger allmänheten« (party programme ↗)“The same applies to coastal protection, which gives the public”
- protection of coastal areas»Skyddet av skogs- och strandområden är en viktig del för att värna den svenska allemansrätten och den biologiska mångfalden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Protection of forest and coastal areas is an important part of preserving the Swedish right of public access and biodiversity.”
- climate adaptation through coastal protection»stärker motståndskraften mot klimatförändringarnas konsekvenser.« (party programme ↗)“strengthens resilience to the consequences of climate change.”
- ambitious environmental goals in law»miljömål som följs upp med skarp lagstiftning och praktiskt arbete.« (party programme ↗)“environmental goals that are monitored with strict legislation and practical work.”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
The party programme states that biological diversity must be protected and that natural resources and ecosystems are today being used beyond the limit of long-term sustainability.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme states that biological diversity must be protected and that natural resources and ecosystems are today being used beyond the limit of long-term sustainability. Completely abolishing general coastal protection and letting local decisions determine exploitation goes straight against that stance. The election manifesto moreover highlights species extinction and the need for local climate adaptation, where shores and wetlands have a protective role.
Original (Swedish)
Partiprogrammet slår fast att den biologiska mångfalden måste skyddas och att naturtillgångar och ekosystem redan utnyttjas över gränsen för det långsiktigt hållbara. Att helt avskaffa det generella strandskyddet och låta lokala beslut avgöra exploateringen går rakt emot den hållningen. Valmanifestet lyfter dessutom artdöden och behovet av lokal klimatanpassning, där stränder och våtmarker har en skyddande roll.
- protection of biological diversitydecisive»biologiska mångfalden måste skyddas.« (party programme ↗)“biological diversity must be protected.”
- limit to sustainable use»naturtillgångar och ekosystem utnyttjas i dag över gränsen för det långsiktigt hållbara, och« (party programme ↗)“natural resources and ecosystems are today being used beyond the limit of long-term sustainability, and”
- species extinction must be stopped»Samtidigt accelererar artdöden och den biologiska mångfalden hotas.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“At the same time, species extinction accelerates and biological diversity is threatened.”
- climate adaptation»Vi vill fortsätta de stora investeringarna så att kommunerna kan klimatanpassa lokalt.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We want to continue major investments so that municipalities can adapt locally to climate.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan commits to defending public access to nature and strengthening shore protection, and demands that protection of beaches and other biotopes is expanded and tightened.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan commits to defending public access to nature and strengthening shore protection, and demands that protection of beaches and other biotopes is expanded and tightened. The counter-proposal wants to abolish general shore protection entirely and replace it with local designation, which is the opposite of strengthened protection. The plan's decentralist worldview does not outweigh such an explicit protection commitment.
Original (Swedish)
Planen åtar sig att försvara allemansrätten och stärka strandskyddet, och kräver att skyddet av stränder och andra biotoper utvidgas och skärps. Motförslaget vill avskaffa det generella strandskyddet helt och ersätta det med lokal utpekning, vilket är motsatsen till ett stärkt skydd. Planens decentralistiska grundsyn väger inte upp ett så uttryckligt skyddsåtagande.
- strengthened shore protectiondecisive»försvara allemansrätten och stärka strandskyddet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“defend public access to nature and strengthen shore protection.”
- expanded beach protection»våtmarker, stränder och flera andra biotoper måste« (party programme ↗)“wetlands, beaches and several other biotopes must”
- more protected nature»skydda 30 procent av Sveriges natur, bland annat våra unika sammanhängande fjällskogar och skyddsvärda skogar i hela landet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“protect 30 percent of Sweden's nature, among other things our unique continuous mountain forests and protected forests throughout the country.”
- protection of coastal ecosystem»rädda kustens ekosystem — återskapa förstörda miljöer .« (2022 manifesto ↗)“save the coast's ecosystem — restore destroyed environments.”
flags: citat_migrerat
The plan requires that shoreline protection be reformed to make it easier to build and live in the countryside and that rural residents get more say over their own land.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that shoreline protection be reformed to make it easier to build and live in the countryside and that rural residents get more say over their own land. The counter-proposal's demand to replace the general protection with strengthened local power to designate protected areas aligns with the plan's decentralisation principle and its demand for growth-friendly shoreline protection. Completely abolishing the general protection goes further than the plan's wording.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att strandskyddet reformeras så att det blir lättare att bygga och bo på landsbygden och att landsbygdsborna får mer självbestämmande över sin egen mark. Motförslagets krav på att ersätta det generella skyddet med stärkt lokal makt att peka ut skyddsvärda områden ligger i samma riktning som planens decentraliseringsprincip och kravet på ett mer tillväxtvänligt strandskydd. Att helt avskaffa det generella skyddet går dock längre än planens formulering.
- reformed shoreline protectiondecisive»Strandskyddet ska reformeras så att det blir lättare att bygga och bo på landsbygden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Shoreline protection shall be reformed to make it easier to build and live in the countryside.”
- self-determination over own land»Det är dags att ge landsbygdsborna mer självbestämmande över sin egen mark, och genom regelförenklingar göra det enklare att bygga och bo på landsbygden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It is time to give rural residents more say over their own land, and through regulatory simplification make it easier to build and live in the countryside.”
- growth-friendly shoreline protection»Regelförenklingar, skattesänkningar, gårdsförsäljning av alkohol och ett mer tillväxtvänligt strandskydd är bara några av de reformer som måste komma på plats för att stärka landsbygdens konkurrenskraft och öka människors frihet och självbestämmande.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Regulatory simplifications, tax cuts, farm sales of alcohol and growth-friendly shoreline protection are just some of the reforms that must be in place to strengthen the countryside's competitiveness and increase people's freedom and self-determination.”
- decisions close to people»Decentralisera mera. Människor ska få bestämma mer själva, och politiska beslut ska fattas nära dem som berörs.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Decentralise more. People should get to decide more themselves, and political decisions should be made close to those affected.”
The plan wishes to reform and decentralise shoreline protection, but maintains it as the main rule: municipalities shall be able to apply to revoke the protection, and where development pressure is very high or exceptional circumstances exist shall strict shoreline protection still be applied.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wishes to reform and decentralise shoreline protection, but maintains it as the main rule: municipalities shall be able to apply to revoke the protection, and where development pressure is very high or exceptional circumstances exist shall strict shoreline protection still be applied. The counter-proposal's requirement to completely abolish the general shoreline protection reverses that order and thus goes further than the plan. The plan also establishes that public access to beaches shall be valued.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill reformera och decentralisera strandskyddet, men behåller det som huvudregel: kommuner ska kunna ansöka om att upphäva skyddet, och där exploateringstrycket är mycket högt eller synnerliga skäl finns ska ett strikt strandskydd fortfarande tillämpas. Motförslagets krav att helt avskaffa det generella strandskyddet vänder på den ordningen och går därmed längre än planen. Planen slår också fast att allmänhetens tillgång till stränder ska värnas.
- reformed but maintained shoreline protectiondecisive»samtidigt som strandskyddet reformeras så att det blir enklare att bygga strandnära på landsbygden medan skyddet upprätthålls där det finns känsliga ekosystem och högt tryck på byggande« (2022 manifesto ↗)“at the same time as shoreline protection is reformed so that it becomes easier to build near the shore in rural areas while the protection is upheld where there are sensitive ecosystems and high pressure to build”
- strict protection under high pressure»exploateringstryck, eller där det finns andra synnerliga skäl, ska det fortfarande tillämpas ett strikt« (party programme ↗)“development pressure, or where there are other exceptional circumstances, strict protection shall still be applied”
- decentralised shoreline protection»Strandskyddet bör decentraliseras genom att kommuner ska kunna ansöka om att upphäva« (party programme ↗)“Shoreline protection should be decentralised by municipalities being able to apply to revoke”
- public access to beaches»Allmänhetens tillgång till skog, mark och stränder ska värnas.« (party programme ↗)“Public access to forest, land and beaches shall be valued.”
The party programme explicitly states that a shoreline protection zone should not be applied generally but used in areas where there is reason for it, and that shoreline protection zone rules must not create unnecessary obstacles to housing construction.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme explicitly states that a shoreline protection zone should not be applied generally but used in areas where there is reason for it, and that shoreline protection zone rules must not create unnecessary obstacles to housing construction. The counter-proposal's demand to abolish general protection and instead let local decision-makers identify areas worthy of protection responds to this and to the subsidiarity principle. The plan simultaneously holds fast to the fact that shoreline and habitat protection is needed where there is reason.
Original (Swedish)
Partiprogrammet slår uttryckligen fast att ett strandskydd inte bör tillämpas generellt utan användas i områden där det finns skäl för det, och att strandskyddsregler inte får skapa onödiga hinder för bostadsbyggande. Motförslagets krav på att avskaffa det generella skyddet och i stället låta lokala beslutsfattare peka ut skyddsvärda områden svarar mot detta och mot subsidiaritetsprincipen. Planen håller samtidigt fast vid att strand- och biotopskydd behövs där skäl finns.
- no general shoreline protectiondecisive»Ett strandskydd bör inte tillämpas generellt utan användas i områden där det finns skäl för det.« (party programme ↗)“A shoreline protection zone should not be applied generally but used in areas where there is reason for it.”
- shoreline protection must not hinder construction»ett riksintressesystem och strandskyddsregler får inte skapa onödiga hinder för bostadsbyggande« (party programme ↗)“a system of national interests and shoreline protection zone rules must not create unnecessary obstacles to housing construction”
- decisions at the lowest appropriate level»Subsidiaritetsprincipen innebär att det som en liten gemenskap själv klarar av att hantera ska den också själv ansvara för och besluta om.« (party programme ↗)“The subsidiarity principle means that what a small community can handle itself should also be its own responsibility and decision.”
- protection where reason exists»Det behövs ett strand- och biotopskydd samt särskilda skyddsregler för den fjällnära skogen.« (party programme ↗)“Shoreline and habitat protection as well as special protection rules for mountain forests near the tree line are needed.”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
The plan explicitly commits to abolishing today's shoreline protection to enable increased building, including near the shore.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan explicitly commits to abolishing today's shoreline protection to enable increased building, including near the shore. The counter-proposal's demand that the general shoreline protection is removed and replaced with locally designated protected areas is the same thing, and it also fits the plan's principle that decisions should be made at the lowest effective level. The plan thus supports the demand.
Original (Swedish)
Planen åtar sig uttryckligen att avskaffa dagens strandskydd för att möjliggöra ökat byggande, även strandnära. Motförslagets krav på att det generella strandskyddet tas bort och ersätts med lokalt utpekande av skyddsvärda områden är samma sak, och det stämmer också med planens princip att beslut ska fattas på lägsta effektiva nivå. Planen stöder därför kravet.
- abolished shoreline protectiondecisive»Avskaffa dagens strandskydd för att möjliggöra ökat byggande« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Abolish today's shoreline protection to enable increased building”
- shore-near building»Vi ska se till att det byggs fler bostäder – även strandnära« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We shall ensure that more homes are built—also near the shore”
- decisions at lowest level»Det politiska systemet ska bygga på att beslut fattas på lägsta« (party programme ↗)“The political system shall be based on decisions being made at the lowest”
- owner's right to decide»rätt att använda sitt ägande efter eget huvud ska vara vägledande« (party programme ↗)“the right to use one's ownership according to one's own judgment shall be guiding”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
The plan wants to reform the shoreline protection and establishes that the rules need to be relaxed so that building near water is allowed to a greater extent, which is described as an important rural issue.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants to reform the shoreline protection and establishes that the rules need to be relaxed so that building near water is allowed to a greater extent, which is described as an important rural issue. The party programme also establishes that decisions should be made at the lowest appropriate level. Replacing the general shoreline protection with local power to designate protected areas directly answers these commitments.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill reformera strandskyddet och slår fast att reglerna behöver mildras så att byggande nära vatten i högre grad tillåts, vilket beskrivs som en viktig landsbygdsfråga. Partiprogrammet slår dessutom fast att beslut bör fattas på lägsta ändamålsenliga nivå. Att ersätta det generella strandskyddet med lokal makt att peka ut skyddsvärda områden svarar direkt mot dessa åtaganden.
- relaxed shoreline protectiondecisive»Det är attraktivt att få bo och att få bygga nära vatten, därför är ett rimligt strandskydd som i högre grad tillåter byggande, en viktig landsbygdsfråga.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It is attractive to live and build near water, so reasonable shoreline protection that allows building to a greater extent is an important rural issue.”
- milder shoreline protection rules»För att det ska bli verklighet behöver strandskyddsreglerna mildras.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“For that to happen, the shoreline protection rules need to be relaxed.”
- reformed shoreline protection»Reformera strandskyddet« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Reform shoreline protection”
- decisions close to citizens»fattas på lägsta ändamålsenliga nivå« (party programme ↗)“made at the lowest appropriate level”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2024/25:MJU16)
- Committee report full text (HC01MJU16)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2024/25:1018 — Strandskyddet och utvecklingen i skärgården och på landsbygden av Kerstin Lundgren (C)
- Motion 2024/25:1061 — Ett reformerat strandskydd för en levande landsbygd med bostäder och verksamheter av Christofer Bergenblock och Anders Karlsson (båda C)
- Motion 2024/25:1371 — Politik för stärkt äganderätt av Martin Kinnunen m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1383 — Planering och byggande av Mikael Eskilandersson m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1454 — Regional utveckling - för ett levande Sverige av Tobias Andersson m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1675 — En flexiblare strandskyddslag av Ludvig Ceimertz (M)
- Motion 2024/25:200 — Ett moderniserat strandskydd av Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD)
- Motion 2024/25:2039 — Strandskyddet och äganderätten av Kjell Jansson (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2207 — Reformering av strandskyddet för att främja landsbygdsutveckling av Lars Isacsson m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2024/25:2397 — Strandskyddet av Viktor Wärnick (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2415 — Bygga en brygga, bod eller bastu - avskaffande av strandskyddet av Oliver Rosengren m.fl. (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2486 — Vatten, hav och fiske av Stina Larsson m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2024/25:2674 — Regelverk för att ersätta befintlig byggnad inom strandskydd av Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2831 — Minskat strandskydd och borttagande av länsstyrelserna i strandskyddsärenden av Sten Bergheden (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2858 — Minskat strandskydd för bostadsbyggnation av Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M)
- Motion 2024/25:2950 — Bostäder och samhällsbyggnad av Alireza Akhondi m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2024/25:2955 — Livskraft och framtidstro på Sveriges landsbygder av Muharrem Demirok m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2024/25:2978 — Satsningar på Stockholms skärgård av Markus Wiechel m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:2986 — Förändrad strandskyddslagstiftning av Markus Wiechel och Victoria Tiblom (båda SD)
- Motion 2024/25:3037 — Kraftsamling för levande hav och vatten av Daniel Helldén m.fl. (MP)
Source: The Swedish Parliament