Dadgostar runs over the parliamentary group on Cementa

- When it is questions that are of crucial importance, it is VU that makes decisions.

We had a discussion and we thought differently, says Ulla Andersson, member of the party's executive committee (VU) and economic-political spokesperson, to TT.

This week, the Left Leader makes the first stops on his journey to industries around the country.

She wants to emphasize during her speech and proposal that Sweden should be, and step forward further, as the Industry.

At the same time, the Riksdag will finalize the Government's proposal for an exemption law for Cementa's lime mining on Gotland.

The proposal allows for continued mining and access to cement for some time after the end of October.

The Council on Legislation rejected the proposal because councils consider it contrary to the Constitution.

But the government, with S and MP in it, went ahead with it because it believes that "for Sweden's sake" it is worth breaking the constitution.

Cementa must stop mining and cement production this autumn threatens hundreds of thousands of warnings and cement shortages, according to the industry and the government.

Reload the course

TT experiences that the Left Party, as perhaps the only parliamentary party, was in the process of voting no until the other day.

The line had the support of at least a majority in the Riksdag group and V's member of the Riksdag's Environment and Agriculture Committee.

The reasons were the Law Council's sharp criticism, unexamined environmental effects and the government's forced handling.

Then the party's executive committee, that is, party leader Nooshi Dadgostar and the rest of the party leadership, stepped in and changed course.

It is exactly as it should be in extra difficult questions, according to Ulla Andersson.

V and the people

When asked if a no from V to the exception for Cementa had been negative for Nooshi Dadgostar's speech about strengthening Sweden as an industrial nation, Ulla Andersson answers with a reasoning.

This means that V wants to drive climate change, build climate-smart homes, infrastructure and such things as wind power.

The subtext is that cement is needed for that.

And it would not be good if many people became unemployed due to cement shortages.

Criticizes the government

At the same time, V, she says, is very critical of the government's handling and non-existent preparedness for the situation that arose when the Supreme Land and Environmental Court rejected Cementa's application in July.