Allocation of responsibility and compensation requirements in environmental pollution

The plan turns against owners being able to take large risks and letting others pay the bill when activities destroy natural resources, and wants to lay back the socio-economic costs on those who cause the damage. Clearer legislation on responsibility when people are exposed to health-damaging chemicals is just such regulation. The plan also sees environmental destruction from activities as a serious societal issue requiring sharp legislation.

• the polluter paysdecisive»hur ägare kan ta stora risker och låta andra stå för notan när ett bolag« (party programme ↗)“how owners can take large risks and let others pay the bill when a company”
• legislation against exploitation»Vi har kunnat bygga upp lagstiftning som begränsar« (party programme ↗)“We have been able to build legislation that limits”
• environmental destruction as serious harm»bland annat i form av farlig arbetsmiljö och miljöförstöring.« (party programme ↗)“including in the form of hazardous working conditions and environmental destruction.”
• sharp environmental legislation»Vi vill se ambitiösa« (party programme ↗)“We want to see ambitious”

The plan's core commitment is that the principle that the polluter pays must be applied in full and that Sweden must have a non-toxic environment with clean water throughout the country. When the affected party is forced to claim compensation from someone other than the one who caused the pollution, the principle is not applied in full. Clearer rules of responsibility are therefore supported in substance, in line with the requirement for equality of all before the law.

• the polluter paysdecisive»Principen om att förorenaren betalar tillämpas fullt ut.« (party programme ↗)“The principle that the polluter pays is applied in full.”
• non-toxic environment»Giftfri miljö med ren luft och rent vatten i hela Sverige.« (party programme ↗)“A non-toxic environment with clean air and clean water throughout Sweden.”
• polluter's responsibility»Vi ska verka för att ett globalt koldioxidpris införs med principen att förorenaren betalar.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We must strive for a global carbon price based on the principle that the polluter pays.”
• equality before the law»En rättsordning som bygger på allas likhet inför lagen.« (party programme ↗)“A legal system built on the equality of all before the law.”

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 demands stricter legislation against the spread of pollutants and stricter legal consequences for environmental destruction with long-lasting consequences for nature and people. It views clean drinking water as a human right and wants to ban the entire PFAS group. Clearer responsibility rules when people are exposed to high levels of health-damaging chemicals follow directly from this.

• stricter liability for environmental damagedecisive»De rättsliga påföljderna behöver skärpas för miljöförstöring som får långvariga och utbredda konsekvenser för natur och människor.« (party programme ↗)“The legal consequences need to be stricter for environmental destruction that has long-lasting and widespread consequences for nature and people.”
• stricter pollution legislation»Lagstiftningen mot spridning av föroreningar i miljön måste skärpas.« (party programme ↗)“Legislation against the spread of pollutants in the environment must be strengthened.”
• ban on PFAS»Miljöpartiet anser att hela gruppen bör förbjudas.« (party programme ↗)“The Greens believe that the entire group should be banned.”
• clean drinking water as a right»Tillgång till rent dricksvatten är en mänsklig rättighet – och det är allas ansvar att skydda den för kommande generationer.« (party programme ↗)“Access to clean drinking water is a human right – and it is everyone's responsibility to protect it for future generations.”

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 party programme makes access to clean water and a poison-free environment a fundamental right for all people, and the election manifesto establishes that the possibility to take legal action against state or municipality must not be reserved for those with high income. When the person affected by PFAS pollution from a state operation is forced to take detours to get their case heard, both these commitments are at stake. Clearer responsibility rules therefore follow from the plan.

• poison-free environment as a rightdecisive»Tillgång till rent vatten, ren luft och giftfri miljö är en fundamental rätt för alla människor och en förutsättning för frihet i en vidare bemärkelse.« (party programme ↗)“Access to clean water, clean air and a poison-free environment is a fundamental right for all people and a condition for freedom in a broader sense.”
• right to take legal action against the state»Möjligheten att processa mot stat eller kommun, då man har goda skäl att få sin sak prövad, ska i en liberal demokrati inte vara en rätt förbehållen de med hög inkomst.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The possibility of taking legal action against state or municipality, when one has good reason to get their case heard, must in a liberal democracy not be a right reserved for those with high income.”
• access to legal proceedings»Alla som bor i Sverige ska kunna få sin sak prövad. Ledtiderna för handläggning och myndighetsutövning i domstolar och myndigheter måste kortas och tillgången till ombud förbättras.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Everyone living in Sweden shall be able to get their case heard. Processing times for handling and official action in courts and authorities must be shortened and access to representation improved.”
• protection against poisons in water»Våra barn ska kunna bada utan att utsättas för gifter, nedskräpning eller algblomning.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Our children shall be able to bathe without being exposed to poisons, litter or algal blooms.”

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 says explicitly that the one who pollutes – no one else – shall pay, and that the principle shall be upheld. When the known source is a state activity but those affected are for legal reasons referred to a local water company, the plan's principle does not apply at all. The plan also wants to improve the right to compensation when authorities make mistakes and to ensure clean drinking water, which bears the requirement for clearer liability rules.

• the polluter paysdecisive»Det är den som förorenar – ingen annan – som ska betala.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It is the one who pollutes – no one else – who shall pay.”
• upheld liability principle»Principen att förorenaren betalar ska upprätthållas.« (party programme ↗)“The principle that the polluter pays shall be upheld.”
• compensation for authority mistakes»Rätten till kompensation eller skadestånd vid myndigheters misstag eller övergrepp behöver förbättras.« (party programme ↗)“The right to compensation or damages when authorities make mistakes or act improperly needs to be improved.”
• clean drinking water»Alla har rätt till rent vatten. Dricksvattenförsörjningen måste säkras och fler yt- och grundvattentäkter ges skydd.« (party programme ↗)“Everyone has the right to clean water. Drinking water supply must be secured and more surface and groundwater sources given protection.”

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 makes the polluter pays a guiding principle for environmental policy. When those exposed to high PFAS levels are for legal reasons forced to direct compensation claims against a local water company instead of against the known polluter, that principle does not take effect. The plan's concept of justice also requires balance between people's rights and responsibilities and the right to experience a clean environment. Clearer liability legislation is therefore supported.

• the polluter paysdecisive»Miljöpolitiken ska bygga på principen att förorenaren ska betala för de miljökostnader som uppstår.« (party programme ↗)“Environmental policy shall be based on the principle that the polluter shall pay for the environmental costs that arise.”
• justice balance between individuals»Rättvisa är ett grundvärde, som i en samhällsgemenskap förutsätter en balans mellan alla människors intressen, rättigheter och skyldigheter.« (party programme ↗)“Justice is a fundamental value that in a community presupposes a balance between all people's interests, rights and responsibilities.”
• protection against dangerous chemicals»Substitutionsprincipen, som innebär att mindre farliga ämnen så långt möjligt ska ersätta farliga, är också ett viktigt verktyg.« (party programme ↗)“The substitution principle, which means that less dangerous substances shall as far as possible replace dangerous ones, is also an important tool.”
• the right to a clean environment»att få uppleva en ren miljö« (party programme ↗)“the right to experience a clean environment”

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 establishes that polluters should pay for themselves and wants to reduce emissions of dangerous substances and expand advanced water treatment. Making the legislation clearer about who bears responsibility when people have been exposed to high levels of harmful chemicals is an application of precisely that principle. The party programme's requirement for predictability in the exercise of public authority points in the same direction.

• polluter paysdecisive»Där miljöbovar betalar för sig, men du kan unna dig en plastpåse när du veckohandlar.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Where polluters pay for themselves, but you can afford yourself a plastic bag when you do your weekly shopping.”
• clean drinking water»Satsa på forskning om vattenrening samt utbyggnad av avancerad vattenrening« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Invest in water purification research and expansion of advanced water treatment”
• reduced emissions of dangerous substances»Vi ska slå vakt om allemansrätten och minska övergödning, försurning, utsläpp av farliga ämnen och nedskräpning, inte minst i Östersjön.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We shall protect the right of public access to nature and reduce eutrophication, acidification, emissions of dangerous substances and littering, not least in the Baltic Sea.”
• predictable legal application»principer om likabehandling och förutsebarhet.« (party programme ↗)“principles of equal treatment and predictability.”

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 believes it is natural that the one who earns money on environmentally destructive activities is forced to compensate for the damage, and wants to increase focus and financing for remediation when the polluter cannot bear it. The counter-proposal's requirement for clearer legislation on responsibility when individuals are exposed to high levels of health-hazardous chemicals follows from that responsibility principle. The plan does not, however, particularly address PFAS or compensation pathways.

• polluter paysdecisive»miljöförstörande verksamhet också tvingas kompensera för den skada de åsamkar.« (party programme ↗)“environmentally destructive activities are also forced to compensate for the damage they cause.”
• remediation when responsibility lacks»Här vill Sverigedemokraterna se ökat fokus i arbetet med att sanera förorenande områden i de fall där förorenaren på grund av exempelvis konkurs inte kan stå för saneringen.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Here Sweden Democrats want to see increased focus in work to remediate polluting areas in cases where the polluter due to e.g. bankruptcy cannot bear the remediation.”
• resources for restoration»Ökad finansiering krävs i arbetet med att återställa de tusentals förorenade områdena i vårt land.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Increased financing is required in work to restore the thousands of polluted areas in our country.”
• prioritized aftertreatment»Ökad prioritet i arbetet med att återställa förorenade områden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Increased priority in work to restore polluted areas.”

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.