Measures to strengthen the functionality of the counters

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating Sweden's first cash legislation, which was put in place under the leadership of the Sweden Democrats and the other Tidö parties after a decade of investigations and political paralysis. Cash, that is, the right and the possibility to pay in cash with banknotes and coins, has been discussed, debated, and investigated without the politics – pardon the expression – getting its finger out and succeeding in acting.

We Sweden Democrats received an inquiry on the spot in 2024 – the Cash Inquiry – and I was given the trust to lead it. In the next step, we now get legislation that is proposed to enter into force on July 1 this year.

It is a strength that all eight parties in the Swedish Riksdag stand behind the new cash law. To the hundreds of thousands of Swedes who are dependent on cash in their daily lives, I would however like to say that I regret that it has taken such an incredibly long time for politics to act. For far too long, far too many have been ignored by previous governments. One can ask why, when it concerns half a million Swedes who live in digital exclusion. These are people who are dependent on cash in their daily lives. It concerns the elderly, certain pensioners, people with disabilities, the homeless, people who have been denied bank accounts and women who are victims of crime – marginalized groups who have been left to the mercy of responsible politicians.

So that the same cash withdrawal is not allowed to affect the very most important – the most life-essential – the Tidö parties are now putting their foot down and saying: Stop, this far but no further!

One can then ask: What is essential for life? In the Cash Inquiry, I asked myself exactly that question. I met with authorities, civil society organizations and the business community, and I examined the facts. Based on these conversations and on available statistics, a clear picture emerged. What Swedes make the most regular purchases of is food, that is, food. It is also the households' third largest expenditure category after rent and transport.

Therefore, this is not only a reasonable but also a correct starting point for Swedish legislation. But what else is life-essential? What can we not do without? For some people, especially for the elderly and pensioners, who are a group that also has a higher propensity to use cash, medicines can be completely decisive and by definition life-essential. This emerged in the conversations with representatives for this group.

That is why the new cash obligation, that is, the obligation to accept cash as a means of payment, will apply to grocery stores and pharmacies. These will now always – as long as it does not pose a threat to the staff's safety – be obliged to accept cash as a means of payment. It means that here we will not see the same phase-out of cash that has been allowed to occur in many other sectors, in restaurants and so on, which have stopped accepting cash.

Madam Speaker! In the Cash Investigation, the investigator, that is to say I, proposed that the cash obligation should also cover public law services, that is to say services performed by authorities or the actor acting as an authority where there are no elements of voluntary consumption. This could, for example, involve healthcare, dental care or vehicle inspection.

It is both right and reasonable that the public sector in this way also takes its responsibility to maintain its part of the cash chain's functionality. Therefore, the committee now follows the investigation's line and proposes a notification to the government regarding exactly this.

It is important for inclusion in our society that all people can participate on the same terms, acquire food and medicines or pay for necessary care with the means of payment that they themselves prefer. Fundamentally, it is a matter of independence for people who want or must pay with banknotes and coins.

A cash law is also important for completely different reasons. As recently as a few weeks ago, one of the large food chains was hit by an extensive IT failure, something that has been shown to occur at regular intervals. Customers could not pay with cards but only with banknotes and coins.

One could ask what it would look like if we received a coordinated attack against several food chains – at the same time as these have been allowed to stop handling cash. What would happen if people could not buy food? It would become chaos, and it is a way to weaken a society without entering militarily.

That is also why the Swedish Defence Preparedness Agency – formerly MSB – urges all Swedes to have cash at home. They remind us that cash is the only means of payment that works without apps, internet, mobile phones, or e-identification. The cash obligation is extremely important for Swedish preparedness so that we can always be able to procure life necessities.

It was also this message that the Ukrainian central bank governor gave us during his visit to Sweden. His message was very clear. During the first week of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, cash was absolutely crucial for ordinary people to manage to make their everyday purchases. Therefore, the Sweden Democrats and the government are now introducing a historic cash requirement for food, medicines, and public law services. This means that manned points of sale such as grocery stores and pharmacies shall accept cash as a means of payment.

Madam Speaker! In order for people to be able to make their everyday purchases, it is a matter of the points of sale first having the capacity to accept cash. Businesses have this only if they can, in the next step, get rid of notes and coins, that is, deposit them into their business account. Therefore, we also strengthen the existing legislation, which regulates the banks' responsibilities in the cash ecosystem, that is, the underlying cash infrastructure.

The Sweden Democrats' and the government's reform package, which will be voted through by a unanimous Riksdag, thus stands on two legs, both of which are equally important: 1) A cash obligation is introduced for essential consumption and public law services with a floor regarding the acceptance of banknotes and coins. This becomes most concrete, tangible, and visible for consumers because they will also be able to use cash in the future when they purchase food or medicines. 2) Extended requirements are introduced for the banks, which with their designated responsibility for the infrastructure are completely crucial for the flow of cash. In doing so, all companies are initially given a better opportunity to accept cash, which will improve the conditions for continued cash acceptance.

Madam Speaker! This is new, historic legislation – legislation that, just like all other legislation, will need to be evaluated and followed up on to ensure that it achieves its intended effect. I move for the proposal in the committee report to be approved.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin with a brief historical description.

I agree with Member Dennis Dioukarev that more should have happened earlier when it comes to the functioning of the cash in society. That is also what I think, and I have expressed that on previous occasions. Dennis Dioukarev knows this.

The Sweden Democrats also have a very high tone in this matter in this speech. They have pushed it hard; I must admit that. But when it only differs by a thumb's breadth from the government's proposal, that is to say that one actually only codifies in Swedish law that grocery stores and pharmacies shall accept cash – something that over 95 percent of grocery stores already do today – I wonder if that is something the Sweden Democrats are satisfied with. That is the first thing I want to ask about.

The second thing is that I believe it is good if Member Dioukarev is careful with the historical description. Today we are making decisions regarding gearbox management and the possibilities of depositing cash. We are making decisions to require in Swedish law that certain grocery stores and pharmacies shall accept cash. But we are not making decisions that this shall apply to public law services. Here, Member Dioukarev is sliding on the truth.

Does Member Dioukarev not share the committee's view that this issue should be sent as a notice to the government for an investigation?

We do not, therefore, make decisions regarding public law services today. Right must be right.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! Ingela Nylund Watz begins by criticizing the Sweden Democrats' and the government's proposal. She criticizes the bill.

She is therefore criticizing the same proposal that the opposition fully accepts. The bill will be voted through by a completely unanimous Riksdag. All opposition parties, just like all parties here, have the democratic tool to submit a follow-up motion if they think something in the bill is bad.

So, one accepts all the proposals we have put forward. One accepts the cash obligation for essential consumption, food and medicine, where we ensure that half a million Swedes who today are dependent on cash in their daily lives – the elderly, pensioners, people with disabilities, women at risk of crime, and people who have lost their bank accounts – will also be able to obtain essential medicine and essential goods and pay with banknotes and coins in the future. This is what the Social Democrats accept.

One also accepts the fact that we are strengthening the underlying cash infrastructure. We are strengthening companies' opportunities to deposit cash, that is, to get rid of cash, so that they can accept it in the first place.

Let us talk a bit about the description of history and history in general. During the Social Democrats' time in power 2014–2022, the Swedish cash amount decreased by 16 billion kronor. 20 percent of the total banknote amount was erased during the Social Democrats' time in power. One saw this, and one had the opportunity to act. What did one do? Nothing. Now it is the Sweden Democrats' and the Tidö parties' responsibility to clean up this legacy.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! I must say that I am somewhat surprised by Member Dioukarev's high tone.

I have, just like the member himself, been involved in several of the investigations that have examined the cash issue and heard what demands the Sverigedemokraterna have put forward. They have been significantly more far-reaching than this. Dennis Dioukarev, as an investigator himself, had several different proposals that the government completely rejects now when presenting the proposition.

It was, in fact, a trifle of everything that the Sweden Democrats have wanted to achieve. It is actually just a codification of implementing laws that reality already complies with in practice. 97 percent of grocery stores already accept cash.

The member's statement that we are in agreement about everything regarding the bill is also incorrect. We are in agreement on the proposals that the government has put forward. We are also in agreement on the announcement for which the opposition put forward a unanimous proposal and which the Sweden Democrats, in the eleventh hour and the last trembling minutes, agreed to because they were afraid of being beaten here in the chamber or ending up in bad light.

The historical description must be correct. It is actually reasonable for the Sweden Democrats to answer the question: Is the Sweden Democrats satisfied with the bill that is now coming, or could one imagine looking further at, for example, the proposals that we have presented in our motion, which the Sweden Democrats obviously have not read?

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! Let us then, for all parts, continue with the historical description.

Both Ingela Nylund Watz and I were members of the government's Payment Inquiry. It actually resulted in nothing constructive regarding Swedish monetary policy. It is very disappointing considering that I personally proposed exactly a cash requirement for essential consumption in the Payment Inquiry.

All other parties had the opportunity to support this proposal, but no other, nor Ingela Nylund Watz personally or the Socialdemokraterna, chose to do so. Then we could have had the legislation that we get today in place a couple of years earlier.

If one is dissatisfied – which one seems to want to give the impression of from the parliamentary rostrum – one would by all means have the opportunity to motion to go further. But that was not done, instead, one accepted everything. One only has a few points of view on a detailed level. I therefore do not give much for the high tone from Ingela Nylund Watz.

When it comes to public law fees, it is entirely correct that the announcement from the committee is based on a reservation from the opposition. But this reservation is, in turn, based on Sverigedemokratiska proposals in my investigation. I therefore thank Ingela Nylund Watz and the Socialdemokrater for so passionately and worthily defending Sverigedemokratisk policy in the Riksdag's rostrum.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! Cash is a legal means of payment in Sweden, and although digital payment solutions have very quickly become the completely dominant way to pay, cash holds a very strong position among the Swedish people.

As many as eight out of ten Swedes want to keep cash as a possible means of payment in the future, but at the same time, currently only between 5 and 7 percent of payments are made in cash. Most payments are made, as we all know here, with mobile services such as Swish, contactless bank cards, and digital wallets.

For the vast majority, digital solutions are self-evident and convenient, but that is not the case for everyone. It concerns primarily the elderly and people in digital exclusion. But there are also other groups, such as people who lack a payment account, people who live in areas with poor digital coverage, and actually also those who are particularly preparedness-conscious.

For many of these people, it becomes difficult to manage their own daily lives and handle their private financial obligations. One can end up in a position of dependency on relatives or acquaintances in an unhealthy way. It is not reasonable.

Over the years, a clear opinion has emerged that it should be possible to pay with cash, and the position of cash has been investigated in several rounds during the last decade.

When the new Riksbank Act was investigated and subsequently entered into force on 1 January 2023, the Riksbank received a clearer and expanded responsibility for cash management. The Bank shall ensure that there is access to cash throughout Sweden and monitor the cash management. The Riksbank was also required to increase the number of banknote depots for the cash supply from three to five and an explicit responsibility for us to be able to make payments even during peacetime crises and high alert.

The payment investigation, which started in 2020, received additional directives in the spring of 2022 to specifically analyze the possibilities for the elderly and others to pay with cash in an increasingly digitized society. It was here that the proposals were made that companies selling food and medicines, as well as certain authorities, should be required to accept cash. It was also proposed that the government should conduct a review of the position of cash in the payment market by 2025 at the latest.

From some of the parties in the government base, the tone was high, and so were the ambitions. Now, things were going to happen that would save the cash! But unfortunately, the Sweden Democrats and the government were sluggish for a number of years, and it took until December 2024 before a special investigator could present their proposals after having worked on the issue for a year. The government did not deliver a bill in this matter until March this year.

I understand, Madam Speaker, that there is disappointment and frustration regarding this among some of the government base; it has been quite apparent lately.

Madam Speaker! The Government's proposal regarding the possibilities for depositing cash and the developed possibilities for exchange handling and day cash deposits are good and have our support, but too many of the Government's proposals were a disappointment. It was just a thumb-suck. In practice, the bill means that requirements are set that grocery stores and pharmacies already live up to, since 97 percent of the country's grocery stores already accept cash today.

Unfortunately, the government completely rejected the Cash Investigation's proposal to extend the cash obligation to include certain public law services. It was regrettable, and therefore it is very good that the majority parties in the committee, namely the Sweden Democrats and the other right-wing parties – admittedly at the eleventh hour in connection with the final meeting in the committee for the adjustment of the report and with the risk of being outvoted in the Chamber – turned and finally agreed with us in the opposition that the government's proposal implies too narrow a delimitation of who should be covered by an obligation to accept cash.

It is good that we are now submitting a unanimous announcement to the government that an investigation should review this and also look at whether there is a need for delimitations.

In our opinion, there are two main reasons for this. The question of preparedness is naturally heavily weighted, but there is also a judgment from the Supreme Administrative Court in 2015 which implies that patients have the right to pay healthcare fees in cash, since cash is a legal means of payment. It is reasonable to clarify this in the legislation.

It is also reasonable that the state, in its role as a provider of and grantor of grants to a long series of public law services, contributes to strengthening the position of the municipalities. It is therefore not a reasonable balance to, as the government does in its proposal, in practice leave this responsibility to a limited part of the private sector. I am pleased that the right-wing parties in the committee chose to follow the opposition's line here.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats believe, and we have motioned regarding this in connection with this report, that there is a need for even more measures to maintain the function of cash as a legal means of payment.

In our motion, we have highlighted the need for a supervisory mechanism for how the new law shall be complied with.

We have also pressed for the need to investigate expanded possibilities to be able to pay bills in cash and to be able to receive payment receipts.

We have proposed that we should introduce a limit on cash payments in order to counter money laundering and terrorism.

We also consider that there is reason to investigate the responsibility of the state and the private actors respectively to maintain a robust transport infrastructure for cash.

We have also in our motion proposed that a development project shall be initiated to find new digital solutions that ensure we achieve greater inclusion in the payment market.

In our opinion, it is simply natural to follow up a clear statutory requirement to accept cash with a supervision mechanism. This should be investigated.

For those who lack a payment account or live in digital exclusion, it must be possible to manage their private economic obligations, such as paying bills and receiving payment advices. Since the kassagiro was discontinued, the possibility of paying bills in cash has been severely limited in our country. According to the Riksbank's latest payment report, it is only possible at 32 locations in the country if one is not a customer of a specific bank.

We mean that the government's position in this is far too complacent. On the one hand, one notes what everyone already knows: that the banks do not want to deal with cash at all. On the other hand, one says that it is important that everyone should be able to pay. This is a far too passive position. It is not sufficient, and therefore we have a proposal on this in our motion.

Our proposal to investigate a limit on cash payments to counter money laundering and terrorism is something that the Riksbank is requesting. The committee majority dismisses this by stating that in the current bill, there are amount limits for grocery stores and pharmacies. Yes, there are, but that only applies to those. Our investigation proposal aims at all cash payments. Introducing such a limit would be a much sharper measure to counter economic crime.

Madam Speaker! We have a very vulnerable infrastructure for cash transports in Sweden. The Riksbank and the Payments Council have stated that there are risks with, as is today, relying on one actor for the cash supply to ATMs and trade in our country. Technical problems can arise, such as the ATM failure last spring and summer, or unforeseen events that can stop the flow of cash in society, which becomes particularly serious during crises and high alert, when even national security can be threatened. Since the cash market is privatized and the banks have the primary responsibility for us to be able to make withdrawals and deposits, there are strong reasons to investigate the distribution of responsibility between the state and private actors so that we can have a robust transport infrastructure for our cash, both under normal conditions and during crises.

Finally: With this legislation, the functionality of cash in the payment market is strengthened somewhat. We think that is very good, but it is not enough. Therefore, our joint announcement to the government is to proceed with reviewing the public law services as necessary. At the same time, we must do more so that more people can be included in the digital payment market. Therefore, we have proposed that the government initiates such development work.

I naturally support both of our reservations, but I move here for approval of reservation 1.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! I have now listened to Ingela Nylund Watz's speech. The undersigned and Ingela Nylund Watz also had a brief exchange earlier. It sounds like the Social Democrats think that the duty to contact should be expanded. My simple question is: Why was that not proposed then?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! If one proposes such a major development of a piece of legislation, it is reasonable to investigate it thoroughly, and it appears both in the basis from the Council on Legislation and in the government's bill that it needs to be investigated much more carefully. Therefore, the proposal is a notice of a commission of inquiry.

I believe the government formulated it as that one should look at this sector by sector. There may be something to that, and it is something that an investigation has the opportunity to do. But the question can be rolled back to the Sweden Democrats. Why did the Sweden Democrats, who wanted an expanded cash obligation also for public law services, not get it through with their right-wing majority in the Government Offices?

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! To answer Ingela Nylund Watz's last question, it is simply the case in a negotiation that one can never get through 100 percent of the demands one sets. But I and my party naturally stand behind my investigation 100 percent.

It was a Sverigedemokratiskt proposal to have a cash obligation for public law consumption. We naturally stand behind the announcement directed at the government regarding specifically the proposal for an investigation into public law services. There is therefore no proposal to investigate the expansion of the cash obligation to any other sectors.

If one now thinks that the cash obligation should cover more sectors and that it needs to be investigated, why was it not explicitly suggested that an investigation should look at just that?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! In the committee proceedings, we have landed on the view that it is a good additional step to take up what the Cash Investigation and Dennis Dioukarev himself proposed, namely to further look into the public law services. If it then turns out that in the years ahead there is a need to further expand the cash requirement, as for example the Riksbank suggests when it comes to fuel, then one can well return to that.

The most interesting thing about this debate is that we can now conclude that the Sverigedemokraterna's high-toned approach in the discussions about the possibility of introducing a cash obligation in Sweden has resulted in a thumbed-down and actually just a codification of the reality that already exists, namely that 97 percent of grocery stores already accept cash today. I believe that Sverigedemokraterna are fundamentally deeply disappointed by the resistance they have met in the rest of the government support.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ida Drougge (M)

Madam Speaker! A functioning system for processing payments is a fundamental prerequisite for our economy and for everyday life to function. The payment area has undergone major structural changes over a fairly long period. The structural transformation and digitalization mean that much positive has happened, but it has also had some negative consequences and also involves new challenges.

The handling of cash has become more expensive, and fewer people accept cash as a means of payment. Today, 500,000–1,000,000 people in Sweden live without good opportunities to use cash to pay. People are dependent on cash to make their daily lives function but still cannot fully use a completely legitimate means of payment – Swedish kronor and öre – for example, to make everyday purchases.

From a preparedness perspective, this also poses a major problem, because it is important not to have all eggs in one basket. Being able to pay digitally in different ways has its advantages, but it also has its vulnerabilities. Transporting cash across Sweden is, of course, also not entirely simple, frictionless, and free from vulnerabilities. But it is precisely that all of this functions that builds our preparedness.

We should not have all our eggs in one basket. Therefore, cash must function even when there is no crisis and war in Sweden. Trust in the financial system and that cash can be withdrawn is also fundamental. If people cannot withdraw the money that is their own, there is a risk that suspicion will increase and trust in the financial system and the banks will be eroded.

The proposal today takes us a bit further. It gives us the possibility to always be able to pay for necessary groceries and at the pharmacy. We also strengthen the possibility for ordinary people to deposit money in the bank and for companies to manage their petty cash and daily cash deposits. These are areas that, not least in recent years, have been difficult.

Today, there are between 500,000 and one million people who are dependent on cash. These are crime-vulnerable women, persons with disabilities, and persons who cannot use or are denied access to digital payment services.

I will also say a few words about public law services. We Moderates believe that one should be able to use cash for most public law services in Sweden. Therefore, we have stood behind this announcement to the government. We do not usually do that – not even when it concerns proposals that we might fundamentally think are good – but we have chosen to do it this time, firstly because we think the proposal is good and that we have adopted it at the party congress. We have stood behind this for a long time and consider it to be right and proper.

Secondly, we think it is important to move forward with these concrete changes and legislative proposals to the Riksdag today. We did not want to wait for the additional investigations that would have been required in order to also be able to move forward with a proposal on public law services.

The background to why we move for approval of this announcement is that we want to be clear that this is something we stand behind. The main reason why it is not already included in the proposal is that further investigations in the area were needed. This primarily concerns reviewing how such a proposal relates to Chapter 4 of the Riksbank Act, which deals with legal tender, and to case law. This is also stated in the bill, and some of this has been presented by colleagues of mine earlier in this debate.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Madam Speaker! The role of cash in society continues to decrease. This occurs despite the fact that it is important to preserve cash as a means of payment, partly from readiness aspects, partly from the fact that certain groups in society have difficulty using or have limited access to digital payment solutions. For cash to be a functioning means of payment, it must be possible to pay with cash for basic goods and services.

Cash is simultaneously common in certain activities, especially those run by associations. Nevertheless, banks no longer accept cash or they charge a high fee, and ATMs are disappearing. This creates problems, among other things for those who run an association and handle larger amounts of cash.

It also creates problems for many of those who, for various reasons, cannot or do not want to use electronic means of payment. This can be people who, due to functional impairments, need to use cash, people in special housing, and people who live under threats.

The cash investigation presented several proposals for improvements to cash handling, but the government chose to adopt only a few of them. The reason in most cases is that the government considers that the investigation does not go far enough regarding how the proposals should be implemented.

Here, we in the opposition are giving the government a little help along the way and propose an inquiry into how certain activities of a public law character should receive cash. From the Left Party's side, we would have gladly seen the Riksdag make a decision on this directly, but we chose to align ourselves with the rest of the opposition to investigate how it should be done. Pleasantly enough, the parties in government also agreed with us and said yes to our motions on the issue.

Perhaps we can all agree that the legislative proposals in the bill do not change much. Pharmacies and grocery stores in general already accept cash, and that they become obliged to do so is actually just changing practice into law, even though it is good that it now becomes clear in law. But what is needed is that the person who is referred to cash should be able to live a normal life, and that requires more than just food and medicine.

Madam Speaker! Part of the violence against women is economic violence. He has power over the money and accounts. A woman who has fled cannot use her card because he can directly see where she is. A woman who plans to flee can also not use digital payments but must ensure she gets cash so that he cannot see what she is doing and what she is planning.

It is good that her opportunity to shop in a store is now secured, but she still cannot buy a ticket on a train or bus or be sure that the car can be fueled with cash. And someone who mismanages their finances, for example due to substance abuse, can be denied a bank account and thus the opportunity to pay in any way other than with cash.

The Swedish Association for Children and Young People with Intellectual Disabilities stated in its referral opinion that people with intellectual disabilities need to be able to use cash as a means of payment. They can be denied cards and BankID by their bank based on a security aspect. Even if they have a card and BankID, it can be difficult to use digital solutions. Many apps, websites, and digital payment platforms are not sufficiently adapted for people with this form of disability.

The national association also notes that social isolation is much more common among persons with intellectual disabilities than in the rest of the population. Visits to Fika and participation in leisure activities and events are therefore often a decisive factor in breaking social isolation. Many of them lack a driver's license and are dependent on public transport. Lack of opportunities to pay with cash in public transport thus limits this group's freedom of movement. The same applies to many others.

Vänsterpartiet considers that the cash requirement needs to include the points of sale required for more people to be able to have a good life. We are thinking of, for example, cafes, restaurants, fuel, clothing stores, public transport travel, as well as different types of leisure activities.

Madam Speaker! The Left Party has long championed issues linked to cash and access to basic payment services. We support the proposals in the government bill but believe they need to be improved on a number of points. In our motion, we have presented several proposals, one of which has partially resulted in a referral.

In the proposition, the Government notes that cash payment mediation, that is, manual service for paying bills with cash, can play an important role for those people who, for various reasons, cannot handle electronic means of payment. There is currently no obligation for credit institutions to provide cash payment mediation. The possibility of paying bills in cash over the counter has decreased significantly during recent years as the banks have phased out their bank branches. Where it is possible, a high fee is charged per bill.

The Government states in the bill that it will carefully follow the issue. That is not sufficient. Vänsterpartiet considers that there should be an obligation for credit institutions to provide cash payment mediation to a reasonable extent throughout the country.

In the proposition, the government also chooses not to proceed with the investigation's proposal to expand the Riksbank's responsibility for the cash chain. Vänsterpartiet shares the Cash Investigation's position that the Riksbank should be given an expanded responsibility so that cash can be used throughout Sweden.

We also share the Riksbank's view that if the Riksbank is to be given new statutory tasks, these must be clearly defined. Therefore, the government should return to the Riksdag with proposals on how an expanded responsibility for the Riksbank regarding guaranteeing that cash can be used throughout the country shall be clarified and formulated.

Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of reservation 5, which among other things contains proposals on an expanded cash requirement, proposals on an obligation for credit institutions to provide manual payment mediation to a reasonable extent, as well as proposals on an expanded responsibility for the Riksbank to guarantee that cash can be used throughout the country.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Camilla Rinaldo Miller (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the Committee on Finance's report 39 on measures to strengthen the functionality of the counters.

In the previous debate, a member said that it was his last debate. This is my first debate in the Finance Committee. We in the chamber have slightly different starting points.

This is an important consideration, not only for the payment market but for people's freedom, security, and participation in society. For the Christian Democrats, human dignity is the starting point for politics. Society must function for all people regardless of age, functional ability, economy, or digital habits. Therefore, the possibility to use cash is not a nostalgic issue, but it is actually a question of inclusion, equality, and dignity.

We see today how the cashless society risks creating new forms of exclusion. Elderly people, persons with certain disabilities, and people who lack digital competence or simply do not have access to digital payment services risk being shut out from everyday situations. It can involve being unable to buy food, purchase medicine, or pay for public transport.

Madam Speaker! It is not reasonable that people are practically discriminated against because they cannot or do not want to use digital payment solutions. A society that only works for those who have the latest technology or have full digital competence is not a society built on community and responsibility.

Cash is also a matter of freedom. It gives people the opportunity to choose for themselves how they want to manage their finances. For many, cash also means better control over their own everyday finances. This applies in particular to families and individuals with small margins.

We must, however, be clear that cash handling also involves challenges. The shops and companies that accept cash must be able to do so in a safe manner. No merchant or employee should have to feel anxiety about robberies or threats. Therefore, the work on secure solutions for cash handling must continue to be developed. It concerns both technical solutions and access to service, and there must, of course, be close cooperation between banks, trade, and authorities.

The Christian Democrats argue that a society must take responsibility to ensure that the infrastructure surrounding cash functions throughout the entire country.

Madam Speaker! There is also a very important preparedness perspective in this issue. We live in Sweden in a time when we must strengthen our resilience against crises, cyberattacks, and disruptions in infrastructure. If digital systems are knocked out, people must still be able to buy food, medicine, and other necessities.

Therefore, from a preparedness perspective, it is crucial that we have a society where the use of cash is still accepted and functions in practice. Cash is a part of our civil preparedness. A robust payment system must contain several functioning alternatives.

Madam Speaker! For the Christian Democrats, this is ultimately about what kind of society we want – a society where people are not left behind and where security, responsibility, and community take precedence over exclusionary systems and one-sided solutions.

Technological development is fundamentally positive. But it must never become an end in itself. When society changes, we must always ask ourselves: Does this work for people in their everyday lives? Does it work for the elderly woman who wants to pay with banknotes in the grocery store, for the person with cognitive difficulties, for the small trader in the countryside, and for the family who wants to have control over their finances?

The Christian Democrats' answer is clear: Sweden shall be a country where no one is shut out from the community and where cash continues to have an obvious place.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! Camilla Rinaldo Miller said many very fine things in the speaker's chair, which I as a Social Democrat can sign off on 24/7 – beautiful words about participation in society. I have now for a number of years had the opportunity to follow KD's positions regarding the cash issue, and that prompts me to ask the member a question: Are the Christian Democrats satisfied that it became a thumb-sucking?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Camilla Rinaldo Miller (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Watz, for the question!

I want to agree with previous speakers in this debate. I am glad that we are in total agreement, all eight Riksdag parties, on this report and that we move for approval of the committee's proposal. There is always more to be desired – we know that. But I am satisfied with what we have concluded that we want to decide on today, and so are the Christian Democrats.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! It is exciting to hear the answer to the question, because if a united opposition had not demanded a motion to review public law services, this government would only have succeeded in codifying what already applies in practice today, namely that 97 percent of grocery stores accept cash.

What I have heard from the Christian Democrats over the years on this issue does not align at all with what the government proposed. Therefore, I am somewhat surprised that the Christian Democrats nevertheless say they are satisfied. If one is to live up to the beautiful words the member said from the rostrum, there is much more to do than to codify in law a reality that already applies. Therefore, the joint announcement is good.

I do, however, know that the Christian Democrats have a long series of other views regarding cash as a legal means of payment. Therefore, I find it unfortunate to hear that the Christian Democrats are satisfied with this proposal. It feels very doubtful whether the Christian Democrats would have had the energy to proceed with pushing forward the development in this issue if the opposition had not taken the initiative for a joint announcement.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Camilla Rinaldo Miller (KD)

Madam Speaker! I nevertheless want to emphasize that just because one is satisfied with a report and with that which we are deciding on today, it does not mean that one is finished in this area. The Christian Democrats will, of course, continue to monitor that cash shall be an accepted means of payment in society.

It may have been beautiful words I said in my speech, but the most important thing is that it becomes a reality – that those who do not want to or cannot use digital means of payment shall be able to pay for their food and their medicine with cash and be able to make a visit to the dentist and also be able to use cash there. That we now, by making this decision today, strengthen the law on providing the possibility to pay with cash does not mean that we are dropping the issue entirely.

We will continue to monitor. The Christian Democrats will also in the future be careful that cash functions in society. As we heard earlier in some speech, Ukraine is an example of the importance of this. They managed to transition and have managed since then. But it is about having the preparedness when a crisis occurs, and then it must continue to be possible to use cash.

We are pleased that it is a unanimous Riksdag that is making the decision on this report, but we will continue to monitor the issue of whether the use of cash should be accepted in society.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Madam Speaker! Today we stand here and debate the handling of cash, again. No one could have believed that it would change so quickly and in such a far-reaching way as has occurred. There have been four government inquiries over 20 years, three of which during the last 10 years, which in one way or another have addressed the position of cash. It shows how complex the issue is. After many seminars, not least here in the Riksdag building, conferences, Almedalen events, networking, meetings and workshops, we stand here again and discuss the issue, for the fifth time in 20 years.

Previous investigations have often documented how cash handling was dismantled, which, in addition to individuals, hit rural residents, rural entrepreneurs, and small business owners hardest. In the late 2000s, decisions were made that led to Svensk Kassaservice being dismantled. The assessment may have been reasonable then, but as the Centerpartiet already suspected at the time, it led to the market failure that today's investigations are trying to rectify.

The 2014 investigation and the Riksbank Committee's partial report in 2018 led in 2021 to a law that forced the largest banks to provide cash services at a certain level. We see today that that law is insufficient. Those measures are not enough today because the banks meet the requirements in a highly minimalist way that does not correspond to the actual needs of companies and citizens: too few deposit machines, which do not handle coins or larger sums, or inaccessible times for cash handling at banks. However, there are exceptions among individual banks – that should be said.

Then came the Kinberg-Batras payment investigation, which also stated that the function of cash was threatened but did not propose any law on cash obligation. The investigation established that the closure of Kassagirot had created significant inconveniences, as it stood. The Center Party argued that the investigation, when such a market failure had actually been established, perhaps should have proposed measures and not just stated the problem.

Instead, it recommended that a new separate investigation should be appointed to review exactly this, which is also what happened. And here we are today. It was undeniably an unnecessary delay of necessary measures.

The payment investigation also well described the problems for 5–10 percent of the population, almost 1 million people, who have difficulty managing digital payments. It was perhaps the first time that this was put on paper and that this problem was truly acknowledged and described – that people are not able, are not allowed, to settle their accounts. They are not trusted.

It is about elderly people who do not quite manage the digital payment systems. It is about elderly people who, when they are going to handle cards, encounter infinitely many different types of card machines. They all look different. They are small keys. It is small text. They stand there and fumble, and the queues grow behind them. It is not dignified.

It is about women who live in hiding. We have talked about women exposed to crime. It is also a number of men who cannot use digital means of payment. It can constitute a threat, a life-threatening danger, if one leaves digital traces behind.

The payment investigation also mentioned no measure to handle this problem. On the contrary, it was written that those who are outside the digital payment world would be helped into the digital one. Still, there was not quite an understanding of what it could actually mean. It was not there.

It has been a pattern. Where the investigation identifies problems, the political measures are missing, and watered-down bills have been submitted by governments and of various colors.

Centerpartiets focus has constantly been that Sweden must function, and small business owners and community organizations must have payment possibilities and bank accounts with reasonable terms without being drowned by costs and administration. It must be possible to combine this with the money laundering legislation, and society must have a robust preparedness.

But now we stand here, Madam Speaker, and there is actually a concrete proposal. It is admittedly too thin – I agree with that – but it is a signal that we are legislating on the possibility of paying with cash. The bill is a step in the right direction. It is also good that the requirements for banks to provide cash services are expanded, even though we would like to see more.

Centerpartiet is not against digital development. On the contrary, we push for the possibilities of digitalization. But we see the serious consequences that arise when a statutory means of payment risks disappearing. We see how tourists and visitors are met with signs saying "card only," which hinders the tourism industry. We see how associations that sell coffee and snacks on sports days or home-baked goods at the local market face major problems with handling payments and any cash.

Madam Speaker! We also see the decisive readiness aspect. In a time of increased anxiety with the risk of cyberattacks and disruptions in the electricity supply, cash is our last outpost, and a system that must function in times of unrest and war must also function in times of peace.

As said: This is a welcome but insufficient step. It is narrowly defined. The responsibility to maintain cash as a means of payment was from the beginning placed almost entirely on private trade. But what happens when one needs to pay for a new passport, a new fishing license, or a patient fee at the health center? The majority of the committee is now on the same line and proposes a motion to the government to investigate an obligation even when it concerns publicly funded services. That is good, of course, and we are happy about it. But it should have been included from the beginning.

The public must also take its responsibility. To hear representatives for the largest government party stand here and explain why is almost a bit comical. I would still like to know what it is that has caused one to change their mind during the weeks that have passed between the government decision and the parliamentary committee decision. It is a bit interesting. But I am glad it happened.

The County Administrative Boards in the country, which have a partially operational function, are clear. They emphasize the importance of cash for preparedness and social inclusion. They propose that the cash requirement should be extended to include more goods, services, and manned gas stations. The County Administrative Boards want banks to be forced to accept cash for payments and redemption of checks and that public law activities should also accept cash. It is therefore the County Administrative Boards, the government's extended arm in the country, that have these strong views. That is something to take into account.

Better opportunities are needed than those proposed in the investigation and the report when it comes to the possibility for entrepreneurs and associations to deposit cash. To force a shop to accept cash but not ensure that the shop can easily and effectively deposit the cash at the bank is almost doing them a disservice.

Today, entrepreneurs are sometimes forced to drive for hours to find a bank branch or a service point that accepts their cash. It is unsustainable. It creates security risks and an enormous administrative burden. The banks' obligation to accept daily cash must be clarified and expanded.

Thirdly, a functioning oversight mechanism is missing in the proposal. The Government argues that it is not needed and that the companies will manage it themselves. I have absolute confidence in the market, but the question now is – after 20 years and five inquiries where we have actually placed our trust in the market – will this really be manageable? I do not believe so.

A law without supervision risks becoming toothless, a paper tiger. What happens the day the health center or the larger construction merchant decides to ignore the law? Who should an individual citizen turn to then? We mean that a clearly designated supervisory body is needed that can ensure the law is complied with; otherwise, there is a great risk that we will soon be back at square one.

Madam Speaker! If we include public actors in the obligation to accept cash, if we clarify and tighten the requirements that banks shall offer cost-effective and accessible services for depositing the daily cash for companies and associations throughout the country, and if we establish a supervisory body with a mandate to ensure that the legislation is complied with – then we have taken a fairly good step forward in cash management in Sweden.

With this, I move for approval of reservation 6.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! I have only a few clarifications regarding a couple of things that were said from the rostrum just now.

When it comes to the supervision, the following is stated on page 30 of the bill: "The Swedish Post and Telecom Authority's supervision shall also include that the credit institutions fulfill their obligation to provide needs-based and other appropriate services for currency handling and day cash deposits." There is thus a supervision mechanism, namely the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority, regarding deposits for private individuals and regarding day cash deposits for companies.

The committee members also describe perfectly correctly the reality that many companies have in Sweden. It is difficult today to get rid of cash with banknotes and coins and deposit them into their company account. It is among other things this that has driven the cash withdrawal that we have seen in Sweden over the last 20 years. It is also therefore why both the investigation and the bill target just this.

A solution is being proposed. This bill rests on two pillars. One is the cash obligation, and the other targets the underlying cash infrastructure for the banks. We say that they shall offer appropriate and needs-based services for day-to-day cash deposits and currency handling for companies, as well as cash deposits for private individuals. This is what has been a bottleneck.

And with this decision, we enable a better flow of cash in society. It will become easier for companies to accept cash because it will also – all other things being equal – become easier to get rid of them.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Madam Speaker! In that regard, there were questions that perhaps I can return to.

Without going into details, I can say that regarding the supervision, there has been a fundamental criticism from many referral bodies, especially from the consumer organizations, that this does not quite hold up. With the new mandates imposed on the market, it is thought that the new supervision is not sufficient, and I agree with that. We are therefore not alone in thinking this.

But it is good that we note that there is, after all, such a mandate. Then we can try together to ensure that it turns out well.

This is based on expanding the cash obligation. But I agree with the previous debaters who have said that 95 percent of grocery stores and pharmacies already accept cash. It is therefore not such a large change. But I think it is good. The legislation is also normative and significant. Therefore, the proposal is good, even though it may not fulfill any major needs when it comes to specifically food and pharmacy products.

The question, therefore, is what are the appropriate and needs-based opportunities to implement. This is what the criticism is about.

Who shall decide that? And what do you do if consumers do not agree that the banks provide suitable and needs-adapted opportunities for deposits – for consumers or companies? Here, the bill and the report are somewhat unclear.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Madam Speaker! I have now heard in several exchanges of remarks and speeches that the cash obligation is to begin applying to grocery stores and pharmacies, where 95 percent already accept cash. That is entirely correct. But it is precisely the lack of crisis awareness and the mentality that has led us to the situation we are in today. Had one introduced a cash obligation for, for example, restaurants, clothing stores, and other companies ten to fifteen years ago, we would not be where we are today. That is precisely why we are doing this. We say: Stop! This far, but no further!

Swedes should be secure in the knowledge that one can always procure life-essential goods, food, and medicine with banknotes and coins. Indeed, half a million Swedes live in digital exclusion today. But there are also reasons of preparedness, which I and several others have presented in this debate. It is, therefore, future-proof legislation. The entire purpose is that grocery stores and pharmacies should not meet the same fate as other companies and businesses have done due to the lack of decisions in this chamber.

We will simply have to return to supervision and certain other points of detail in the future. We must evaluate this legislation – and I am happy to do so together with Helena Vilhelmsson and other members in this chamber – to ensure that it achieves its intended effect.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Madam Speaker! I agree with the last point. The member and all parties have, in the autumn, after the election, a great responsibility to bring this to fruition. This applies particularly to the issue of public law services. We must, in fact, remember that we are not making a decision on it today, but we are making a decision on an investigation. Unfortunately, this did not come from Dennis Dioukarev's investigation from the beginning, which would have been the most sympathetic. So it is. I am very glad that we are doing this now, but it is not settled. A great responsibility therefore rests on those who remain in this chamber until the autumn to bring it to fruition.

Regarding the issue of the cash obligation, I share the member's analysis. I also think it is unfortunate that the Payment Inquiry was not handled, as it arrived during this mandate period. We could have been a few years earlier with this issue. At that time, the issue of the cash obligation could have been handled to curb this earlier. There has been an unnecessary delay of this important legislation. But now we are one step, albeit a small one, on the way. I think it is good, and I look forward to us all taking responsibility after the election to make it even better.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anders Ekegren (L)

Madam Speaker! Today we are going to debate an important issue for very many people, especially those people in our country who live in digital exclusion. They may do so because of age, illness, disability or other circumstances. It is estimated that approximately 1 million people in Sweden suffer from digital exclusion.

Lacking internet or digital competence leads to poorer access to public services, to digital healthcare services, or to performing banking transactions. It means that one can have difficulty paying bills, buying food, or using BankID.

It is certainly convenient to pay bills digitally, lunch with a card, and split the evening bill at the restaurant via Swish. But, Madam Speaker, there are several reasons why we should keep cash in Sweden as a means of payment.

Many people have difficulty using digital means of payment. And there are reasons of preparedness for us to have cash – I think that is an important issue that is constantly growing stronger. There must be many different ways to be able to pay. If one does not work, one should be able to use the other.

The government appointed an inquiry, the Cash Inquiry, whose proposals form the basis for the now present bill. But not all proposals were included. The bill proposes that grocery stores and pharmacies should always be able to accept cash. It is a step in the right direction but not sufficient. Important referral authorities such as the defense, the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency and the Riksbank consider it important to maintain the cash infrastructure. The Riksbank considers that we must have at least 1,000 kronor in cash.

Madam Speaker! Many times when the opposition comes with proposals for committee initiatives and about us making announcements, I feel that it is like knocking on open doors. But here, I actually think it is reasonable to make an announcement because the investigation provided more than what the government proposes. Then one must expect that the Riksdag may adopt a different position.

It was good that the Finance Committee agreed on a proposal for an announcement which means that the government must proceed with the question of how we can maintain the cash chain, including by ensuring that public services can also be paid for with cash. This is perfectly reasonable, and the Liberals naturally stand behind the proposal for the announcement to the government.

Liberalerna assess that we should conduct a review of the law within one to two years. Is it sufficient? Should other services also be able to be paid for with cash?

Another deficiency in the proposal is that the supervision is meager and that, in practice, effective opportunities for sanctions against those who violate the legislation are lacking. This is not satisfactory if one wants the legislation to also be enforced. But as I have previously stated: Changes will need to be made, and the law must be evaluated if not after too long a time.

I thought it was a very interesting historical exposé that Helena Vilhelmsson made. It is fun when one learns new things in this chamber. Now we have investigated this for 20 years. There have been five different inquiries and several different governments. Then I think, just like Helena, that it is very good that we today actually take the first step towards legislation.

With this, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! There are many children in Sweden today who believe that cash is something you receive in an envelope from your grandmother on your birthday, which you then exchange with your parents for a Swish into the account. Sometimes it feels as if Swedish banknotes are being transformed from a means of payment into museum objects.

We have built a society where you can buy coffee with your phone, your watch, or perhaps soon just by nodding at a terminal. But often, it is simply not possible to pay with cash in Sweden. It is actually quite strange when you think about it. This is not about nostalgia or about longing to go back to wallets with coin compartments. This is a question of security, of freedom, of inclusion, and of preparedness.

For a long time, the development towards digital payments has been seen as something obviously positive, and much is, of course, good. It should be easy to pay. Technology often facilitates people's everyday lives enormously.

But sometimes we have been so preoccupied with running fastest into the future that we have forgotten to ask ourselves if everyone can actually keep up. Who is it, really, who ends up left behind when cash disappears? Yes, it is older people who do not feel secure with apps and digital services or do not know how they work. It is people with disabilities. It is people who live in economic vulnerability and do not get access to bank cards or digital identification. It is newcomers. It is people who live protected from violence and control and who need to be able to make purchases without leaving digital traces everywhere. And it is actually also all of us others the day the systems do not work.

In recent years, we have received several reminders of how vulnerable our society is: cyberattacks, operational disruptions, power outages, unrest in the world, and a deteriorating security situation. In such a situation, it is somewhat strange that we have simultaneously made ourselves so totally dependent on every terminal, every server, and every network functioning exactly all the time. Cash works even when the mobile is dead and when the network is down. And sometimes it is actually quite nice that something in society works without first having to update an app on the phone.

Sweden stands out internationally. We are one of the world's most cashless countries. Many actors have long warned about that development. It may sound modern and efficient, but it also involves risks. Once the cash has disappeared, it is very difficult to build up the systems again. Infrastructure disappears. Bank branches are closed. ATMs are removed. Knowledge disappears. And then we stand there – very digital, very modern and very vulnerable.

Madam Speaker! I believe that many Swedes feel concern about this – absolutely not because they would want to abolish Swish or card payments, but because they understand that a robust society needs several solutions simultaneously. It is a bit like the spare tire in the car. You perhaps use it rarely, but you are incredibly grateful that it is there when you need it.

Today we take a step forward. Slightly under the gallows and with the risk of otherwise perhaps losing a vote, the Tidö parties turned. We now have a unanimous committee that states that we must continue to work with the issue and that there must continue to be the possibility to pay for necessary goods and bills with cash for people who, for various reasons, have difficulty using electronic means of payment.

It is positive that we are now in agreement so far, but there are also deficiencies in the proposal. There is no clear oversight structure for, for example, shops and pharmacies. In practice, the companies themselves shall decide how the obligation is to be fulfilled. There is a problem there. If the Riksdag is serious about people being able to use cash, the obligation must also be controllable and enforceable. Otherwise, we risk obtaining legislation that looks good on paper but does not work in reality.

It is not enough to say that cash should be accepted if no one follows up on what actually happens out in the country. Therefore, the government needs to return with a clearer plan for supervision and sanctions. Obligations that cannot be followed up on risk otherwise becoming more symbolic than real.

The Green Party wants to see a society that works for more, not fewer, that is robust in a crisis and where people are not shut out because technology is running ahead. In that case, the position of cash must be protected. It must be possible to withdraw cash, and it must be possible to use it in everyday life. The state, the banks, and the retail trade all have a responsibility.

It is ultimately about something greater than just payments. It is about security when systems falter, about freedom for people in everyday life, about accessibility and inclusion, and about building a society that does not become so efficient that it ceases to be resilient. Sometimes it is actually the case that the most modern thing one can do is to ensure that there is a functioning backup plan.

With that, I move for approval of reservation number 3.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 14.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)