Barriers against crime - a social preventive strategy against criminal networks and other crime

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! Honored colleagues and listeners! Today we are discussing one of the absolutely most important issues in Swedish society. This is one of the absolutely biggest problems in society and one of the most prioritized political issues, which must be handled by both the political system and society as a whole. I am speaking about the recruitment of children and young people into crime.

The government has presented a strategy against criminal networks and other crime. It is a strategy that covers the various processes we see at different levels in our country to combat and prevent crime and which aims to stop the new recruitment of children and young people into the criminal gangs.

There has been too little focus on this area in Swedish politics. This has not really been a prioritized issue that has united the entire political system. A holistic approach to stop the new recruitment to the criminal gangs has been lacking.

The previous government, which I myself sat in, took many measures to increase the state's repressive capacity. The number of police officers increased, two new police academies were built, 80 penalties were toughened, and the police's powers were increased. All this was done because the state needed - and needs - to have a stronger repressive capacity to combat organized crime and the growing gang crime in our society.

However, this will not help if we do not stop the new recruitment to the criminal gangs. We can have however harsh punishments as we want and however many police as we want, but we will fail in the mission if we do not stop the new recruitment to the gangs.

Therefore, the issues addressed in this strategy are completely central not only in the fight against gang crime but also for us to be able to maintain the high degree of trust in our society, for us to be able to maintain the Swedish social model and for us to be able to defend our way of life and, ultimately, the entire democratic system.

There are several commendable dimensions highlighted in this strategy. From the Social Democrats' side, we welcome that these different aspects of crime prevention work are described in this way. However, there is a part that we miss.

There is a lot of talk about research and proven experience in this strategy. The policy to prevent crime and stop the new recruitment of children and young people into the gangs shall be based on knowledge and not on political opinions or ideological conflicts. It shall be based on experience, research, and the studies that have been conducted, which show what is effective when it comes to the work of stopping new recruitment.

Then it is a bit strange that one of the few actors in Swedish society that has the task of spreading knowledge and enabling research, namely Brå, receives reduced appropriations from this right-wing government. It surprises me that in the strategy – rightly so – the need to focus on knowledge and research is highlighted, but then, when it comes to deciding on what resources and conditions research and evidence-based policy should have in this area, the authority that is one of the few actors with the conditions to present studies and compilations of research that enable policy development in this area is cut. We are critical of this.

A considerable number of commendable initiatives in various areas are taken in this strategy, but most are to be implemented by municipalities and regions. The Social Democrats are also critical of this. We have just enacted legislation regarding the municipalities' crime prevention responsibility, and this is affected in a quite pervasive way in this strategy. But the municipalities and regions in our country, which are to implement these good ideas to stop new recruitment to the gangs, are going through really tough times right now.

When traveling around and meeting representatives for municipalities and regions, one meets politicians of different colors who testify that they must cut back on social services, reduce the staffing density in schools, and reduce the number of support staff in schools. They implement savings on healthy leisure activities for young people, not least when it comes to the accessibility of sports activities. Then one realizes that the laudable words and initiatives in the strategy are not worth much if these ambitions are not met with necessary resources.

Therefore, we urge the government to rethink and provide the municipal sector with the resources required so that the municipalities can manage to do what is necessary for Swedish society in a very efficient way, namely to stop the new recruitment to the gangs.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! It is very pleasing to hear the member praise the government's strategy to be correct in all essential aspects. In the strategy, a causal analysis of crime is emphasized, which is very significant. An effective policy with the right measures requires, first and foremost, a correct causal analysis. This applies to all policy areas, not least crime policy. It may sound obvious, but it has long been lacking in Swedish politics.

The previous government, Ardalan Shekarabis government, attempted to achieve a national crime prevention program in a document called Tillsammans mot brott. It was a potpourri of various measures, but causal analysis was completely lacking.

Ardalan Shekarabi speaks with great self-confidence about which measures are needed and which measures can be developed in different ways. I would therefore like to hear him describe his and the Social Democrats' analysis of the root causes of crime.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the honorable member for the question.

What is interesting in Swedish politics is that the previous government began to emphasize the need for a policy based on knowledge, experience, and not least research. Against this background, several initiatives were taken concerning increasing society's capacity to conduct and make research on this available.

Here, we received an excellent compilation from the Swedish Crime Prevention Council regarding the causes of crime and, not least, gang crime. Swedish researchers have, in several research studies and anthologies, presented theories on why Swedish gang crime has developed as it has over the last decades. From a Social Democratic perspective, it is important to base our position on the research, and therefore we have also landed on the analysis that it is not possible to explain gang crime with a single cause.

There has been a deadlock between the Swedish right and left, where the left has traditionally emphasized the socioeconomic causes while the right in recent years has only emphasized the effects of migration. Our assessment is that all causes must be included in a comprehensive analysis that gives us the tools to do the right things.

What I think is good about the government's strategy is that it begins with the need for general measures. Here, it goes a bit against certain right-wing forces that question the need for a general welfare. After describing the importance of the general measures, it goes through several stages of targeted interventions towards the groups that are in the risk zone for crime. However, it becomes empty words if the municipalities do not have the right resources, it becomes empty words if psychiatry must carry out record-breaking savings on BUP, and it becomes empty words if civil society does not have the right conditions.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! I believe that those watching the debate on TV or sitting in the gallery did not become any wiser from this answer. The honorable member Ardalan Shekarabi says that all factors need to be included in a comprehensive analysis - a rambling that provides no straight answer at all to the question. But it follows a Social Democratic tradition where one often and gladly begins proposals and reports on crime prevention policy by stating that crime is complex. Yes, crime is complex. But one can still try to explain what it depends on.

I welcome that there was at least a minimum of concretization in the answer and that Ardalan Shekarabi mentioned migration, which is one of several factors that have had a major impact. Migration has indeed caused an exclusion and a reduced social stability, which has worsened parents' ability to fulfill their parental responsibility and thus the school's conditions to maintain order and instill healthy values in the students.

I will try to help the member give a slightly more direct answer to the question. A concise answer of 30 seconds could have been: Yes, the question is complex, and there are very many factors. But socioeconomic factors, which the debate of recent years has focused on, are not sufficient as an explanation; ultimately, crime is explained by the individual's morality. But we are not born evil or good, rather our morality and our values are shaped during upbringing. Here, parents, peers, school, and so on have an influence.

It was an attempt at a somewhat more concrete answer, and you are welcome to elaborate.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I wish that we could use the insights that the honorable member describes to ensure that schools from Ystad to Kiruna do not need to make record-breaking cuts. I also wish that we then would not have to meet moderate, Sweden Democrat, and Social Democratic municipal councilors who are on their knees because they, due to the government's policy, are forced to make record-breaking savings on support staff in schools. But unfortunately, Sweden's municipalities face even larger savings in 2025. What use are analyses then? It is the government that has the responsibility for the cuts.

Let us expand the debate to an area that is rarely discussed, namely how mental ill-health creates conditions for new recruitment into crime. It is something that is often discussed in the United Kingdom and Germany, but how is it in Sweden? What do the waiting times for child and adolescent psychiatry look like when parents want to take responsibility and help their children who suffer from mental ill-health? Is it common to have up to two years of waiting time? Yes, it is. Society is failing these parents. In a situation with enormous problems with gang crime and great needs in these social institutions, is it then right to prioritize tax cuts instead of fulfilling the public's tasks, such as ensuring that school, healthcare, social services, and the police function?

It is these types of insights that the honorable member needs to take back to their party, because one cannot manage to admit that the welfare state is on its knees and that the government's budget is the reason for it.

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

Pontus Andersson Garpvall (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Justice's report Barriers to Crime - a social preventive strategy against criminal networks and other crime.

In the government's communication, the direction for crime prevention work within various areas is presented in order to meet the extensive challenges with crime and insecurity that exist in our country. The communication is divided into five parts, but let me first begin with a quote.

"Sweden's great progress is the work of the Swedish people. The Sweden that has developed and over which we feel pride and gratitude is a result of our ancestors' efforts, of their diligence and reasonable willingness to cooperate, and naturally of the great Swedes who have emerged from the depths of the people. However, we shall not boast of national self-sufficiency but constantly keep in mind the great gratitude we owe to our surrounding world, from which we have received many valuable loans and gathered many invaluable ideas and impulses. Naturally, Sweden has also had immigrants early on, who have contributed professional skill and competence to our country and also stimulated our culture. One must, however, remember that this immigration has been limited, cost-free, and well-motivated."

I believe that many who are listening to this debate can agree with this, and in fact, this, somewhat shortened, quote comes from the Sverigedemokraternas first party program from 1989.

Why do I highlight this? Yes, because measures in the migration area are one of the five parts the consideration addresses that need to be handled to counter crime and other criminality in Sweden.

I truly believe it is the first time that Sweden, at the government level, in this type of document, highlights migration policy as one of the causes of the increased crime and insecurity in Sweden.

For our party, it has been a long journey. It is a journey that has actually only just begun but which is now truly leaving its mark both in Swedish legislation and in the strategies Sweden adopts to, as in this case, counter crime in Sweden. The situation is created by political decisions but also by the lack of political decisions.

The other four parts concern a strong work line, increased participation and security in so-called vulnerable areas, measures for strengthened public health, as well as preventive work in schools. Here too, the government has reached balanced positions.

Madam Speaker! I often point out in debates on preventive work against crime that the greatest responsibility for choosing a criminal lifestyle lies with the individual. Of all the people in Sweden who grow up under tough conditions, such as for example overcrowding, an absent father, or parents who lack work, it is still few who choose the criminal path. Most take advantage of the opportunities that Sweden offers. We have an extensive leisure activity, the association life is strongly established, and we offer free education up to the university level. There are simply no reasons or excuses to choose the criminal path.

Madam Speaker! I would like to continue talking about immigration policy and its consequences for the increased crime in Sweden and actually all of Western Europe. The trend is not only present in Sweden but affects all Western European countries that have had a high immigration from the Middle East and Africa. The serious crime, the constantly present terror threat, and that persons from rival gangs shoot each other on the open street are directly linked to migration. That is why we do not see this in the same way in countries like Poland, Czechia, or Finland. That is why we time and again see in all of Europe how immigration-critical parties reap great successes. The Europeans are tired of the policy that has been conducted and want change.

When the fatal shootings reached their peak in Sweden in 2022, after eight years of Social Democratic rule, 63 people were shot to death in Sweden. It was the highest per capita in the EU and more in Södertälje than in London. It was an increase of 232 percent in just eight years. We did not end up there because we spend less money on schools than other EU countries, because we do not. We did not end up there because we have fewer youth centers than other EU countries, because we do not. We did not end up there because children are poorer in Sweden than in other EU countries, because they are not. The problem is spelled migration from countries with a completely different culture and with completely different values than we have in Sweden.

We did not have to have it this way, but naive politicians have, with bold courage, allowed it to happen. Now it is up to the Sweden Democrats and the new government to take responsibility and clean up what the others have caused. Together with the government, we have already implemented a number of sentence increases, not least linked to the serious weapons crimes where those who carry weapons in public now have to spend four years in prison. It will be at least eight years when double sentences for gang criminals are in place. That is a big difference compared to one year, which was the case a couple of years ago.

We have given the law enforcement authorities new tools to fight crime. Not least, it is now possible to wiretap gang criminals for preventive purposes. One can issue stay-away orders, and the police can establish search zones to seize both weapons and narcotics from criminals. The police will soon have the opportunity to seize even more belongings from criminals.

The asylum migration to Sweden is the lowest in the entire 2000s. Not in a quarter of a century has it been as low as it is now. If one compares the years 2022 and 2023, one sees that more people from Somalia, Afghanistan, and Syria leave Sweden than move here. We thus have a net out-migration from these countries whose population in Sweden is highly overrepresented regarding participation in serious crime. When the Social Democrats ruled Sweden, people from these countries were the largest immigrant group. Now, people from India are the largest. Not least people who work within Sweden's growing IT sector. Two and three on the list are people from Poland and Germany. It matters who rules Sweden.

Madam Speaker! Crime prevention work is important to ensure that young people do not choose a criminal lifestyle. The greatest responsibility lies with the family and the individual themselves. But all parts of society need to do what they can to provide children with the best possible upbringing conditions, where not least the formation of good values is fundamental.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! On one point, we are all in agreement here. Our common endeavor is that people in Sweden should be able to live in safety and security without fear of being subjected to crime, regardless of who they are and where they live. Aside from providing redress to crime victims and ensuring that justice is served, this is also what the government's crime policy aims for. It has a clear crime-prevention ambition.

One of many important crime-preventing measures is to lock up high-activity offenders. It bears repeating that the one who is locked up cannot commit crimes and also cannot recruit young people into organized crime. However, imprisoning criminals can be likened to putting out fires. We must, of course, also ensure that new fires do not arise.

Alongside investments in the justice system and criminal justice measures, an effective social crime prevention was therefore needed. What the government is successfully achieving in this area is described in the strategy we are debating here today, Barriers to Crime.

An effective policy with the right measures requires, first and foremost, a correct cause analysis. It may sound obvious, but it has long been missing in Swedish politics. Over the years, an enormous flora of strategies, reports, and proposals to counter crime has been written, but vanishingly few of these provide any concrete cause analysis. Both party-political and public documents often begin with vague explanations that the causes of crime are "complex," without further explanation. The previous government's communication *Tillsammans mot brott* is an example of this. It completely lacked cause analysis. It is a consistent pattern—and a problem.

When the cause analyses are unclear or non-existent, the measures are rarely purposeful or effective. This is one partial explanation for why several of the crime problems we have in Sweden have escalated and until now have not been countered successfully.

It is very positive that the strategy of the Moderate-led government that has now been presented is clear on what the causes of crime are. It takes its starting point in why individuals commit crimes. Of course, the answer is multifaceted. Several factors influence it. There is also no exact consensus in the research world, and the views on which factors weigh most heavily vary.

The strategy clarifies that the alleged connection between socioeconomic background and crime, which has long been regarded as self-evident, is not at all so self-evident. Studies show that this connection is weak. It is stated in the strategy that other circumstances have greater explanatory value, for example, the parents' capacity for care, association with criminal peers, and the individual's lack of self-control. The norms, values, and attitudes of the individual and the surroundings are emphasized.

Socialists and Social Democrats would like to let it appear that what is primarily required to reduce crime is a higher tax burden, a larger state, and economic redistribution. We just heard examples of this in the exchange that Member Ardalan Shekarabi concluded by emphasizing the welfare state. But if economic redistribution and publicly funded welfare services had been the most effective way to prevent crime, Sweden would have the world's lowest crime rate today.

Madam Speaker! Let me deepen this causal analysis somewhat and at the same time clear up a common misunderstanding. It is often claimed that different circumstances cause crime when they in fact only co-vary with crime.

Overcrowding, foreign background, low socioeconomic status are examples of such things that are often claimed to actually cause crime, but which in reality only correlate, that is, co-vary, with crime and do not constitute the actual causes. Correlation is not causation.

Most of those who live in cramped conditions, are born abroad, have parents who were born abroad, have low income or low education do not commit any serious crimes. People commit crimes because they choose to perform a certain action.

It is fortunately rarely the case that a person is directly forced to commit a crime, and in our modern Sweden it practically never happens that anyone finds themselves in such a difficult situation that crime is strictly life-necessary.

A person normally chooses crime as an option of action among others due to a specific motivation, for example a temptation, peer pressure or provocation. Most who are tempted or pressured to commit a criminal act refrain, however, due to their own morality and their own values.

Let me take a pedagogical example. If we find a wallet with money in it and a business card, we can either take the money or return the money. The only thing that determines whether we do right or wrong is our own values.

Some will commit the crime, and others will do the right thing. This applies regardless of income, housing situation, education, or whether one has crossed a national border or not. What is decisive is our morality. It is therefore not the opportunity that makes the thieves, as it is often said, but the thieves who make the opportunity. Crime is ultimately an immoral act.

But we are not born evil or good, but rather we are shaped during our upbringing. Insufficient upbringing in the home and a criminal peer group are examples of such circumstances that affect our law-relevant morality and ability to exercise self-control. These are types of factors that have a more causal influence.

We need a policy and a society that allows children to grow up safely and lovingly, to develop an inherent, clear sense of right and wrong, and an internal resilience against gang crime. It is about a capacity for self-control, empathy, and genuine respect for one's fellow human beings. It makes theft as well as sexual offenses something unthinkable.

It is not, as the socialists and the Socialdemokrater emphasize, just about resources. Swedish schools have more money per pupil than the average in the OECD. In our most crime-affected areas, the school funding is even higher. It is about how we conduct the operations and not primarily about how much money we put into them. It is about emphasizing parental responsibility. It is about consequences.

Madam Speaker! In line with this cause analysis, social crime prevention is now being strengthened and developed. The government's strategy, the reforms, and the measures are very well summarized in the title of the document, Barriers to Crime.

There are three barriers, so-called prevention levels. The first is a broad preventive work. The second is to break a negative development early. The third is that criminal paths that have begun must be stopped.

Madam Speaker! The serious crime problems that Sweden suffers from are not caused by some curse that randomly struck Sweden. They are a consequence of a series of political failures. With the right politics, we can rectify these mistakes. It will take time, but it can be done. This strategy paves the way forward.

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

Gudrun Nordborg (V)

Madam Speaker! For me and the Left Party, it is obvious that the crime prevention work needs to be strengthened so that we can address crime and insecurity in society. I am therefore in principle positive that the government has now presented a social preventive strategy against criminal networks and other crime. But I can still state that my and the government's views differ in several decisive ways.

The strategy is based on the Tidö Agreement and once again shows the Sweden Democrats' great influence on the government. The strategy does, however, involve a certain complement to the recent years' one-sided prioritization of repressive measures with increased penalties and increased use of secret coercive measures. According to research, it is not what really works against crime.

There must, of course, be punishment. If we are to follow the research, the possibilities for rehabilitation and reintegration of those who have been imprisoned are extremely important. But it is even more important that we truly invest in preventive work in a broad sense.

The government works from three strategies when it lays out its pattern for how this could occur. I can think that there are points in seeing it so broadly structurally to begin with and then focusing more on the problem area itself.

To truly reduce crime and serious crime, we need to strengthen the common political will to reduce class inequalities. They have increased dramatically in recent years. It is also shown by research that there is less crime in more equal societies.

It is also about the fact that the gaps have increased in recent years under the current regime. It becomes a gap. Increased gaps increase the risks that we will create opportunities for crime. These are not automatic correlations. Probably no one claims that just because you are underprivileged, you commit crimes. But the risks increase.

It is here that we need to limit the risks and prevent the recruitment of children and young people into crime and, ultimately, into gang crime. The crime prevention work must begin with a well-developed welfare for all, not least in politically neglected areas.

It is truly a matter of combining the ambitions that the government also seems to have with sufficient resources, instead of making recurring savings on the public sector. School, including preschool, and leisure activities need to be strengthened, and with force.

Young people must be given opportunities to develop skills, engage in sports activities, do cultural things, and so on. Here, a broad cooperation with civil society and very much with the business sector is needed. It is starting to emerge and say: We can offer interventions. We can help during the summer holidays. We can offer summer jobs. This has, among other things, happened from Nordea as a bank that they want to act that way. More should follow such examples.

I have flagged that I am not entirely satisfied with what the government is presenting. I am partly concerned that some of the measures do not involve solutions but perhaps even risk increasing insecurity and segregation and limiting trust.

Certain positive things are being highlighted. That is what I want to point out first and foremost. It is about knowledge and building on research. But is it really being done that way?

We are marking the urban planning, which is incredibly important. We can do as some municipalities do and constantly think integration. One does not build only rental apartments or villas in an area, but one ensures that there are rental apartments, condominiums, terraced houses, and villas. Then we create opportunities for automatic integration. It becomes a positive mix.

The government also highlights leisure time, school, and open preschool in a good way. But then come questions that one can wonder about whether it must be so. In school, disciplinary measures are highlighted. Then the repressive comes back. The work line is marked by a mistrust towards an attitude that I do not recognize among any of the immigrants I know. There are many who, on the contrary, express an immense joy at being able to get an internship or, of course, even better, a job. I hear something in this group that I very rarely hear a Swede say: Imagine that I get to start paying tax! They want to contribute.

When it comes to other aspects discussed in this report, home visits. Is it on the visited person's terms, or is it about increased control? I suspect that the element of control will partly be perceived as threatening.

People are talking about family centers - yes, very much so! There, it is about having to attract people to come and about creating trust. Many who work with crime prevention, or social work in general, point out that this cannot be created quickly. We must continuously be close to these people and environments and show compassion and create trust.

Parental responsibility - yes, if it is possible. But if it fails, we must also create support and not do as the government now proposes, with the risk of withdrawn benefits and other repressive measures.

I also perhaps miss some parts regarding defection activities that could have been further developed in this. Vänsterpartiet has several times called for national programs where we could coordinate this and enter at different stages.

Something that I also find strange, which is neither present in the government's texts nor even mentioned with a word in the debate so far, is that the male dominance among those who commit crimes is so immense. There is a risk here that we let praises of aggressive masculinity take hold and become normative for many young people. It is truly necessary that we focus on this and do not create new norms for masculinity and machismo.

Here, school and preschool in particular have an enormous significance, but the family is also important. Children and boys who see a father use violence against a mother learn violence as a means of power. We focus on crime, and we must also address crime when it occurs within families. If we can do that, we can also contribute to ensuring that violence no longer breeds new violence. The violence must not echo onward. We must curb it, and we must see several aspects that cause violence and crime to varying degrees.

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

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Madam Speaker! We have today a situation in Sweden where it happens that children are recruited by children of serious organized crime and then, on the orders of children, murder other children. It is grotesque on so many levels, and it is a great failure for us as a country.

That is why a social-preventive strategy against criminal networks and other crime is welcome, with a major focus specifically on preventing children and young people from being involved in crime.

Centerpartiet shares the government's and the committee's overall view on this and has no other motion or specific statement. We welcome the communication. However, that does not mean we do not consider that more needs to be done. Sometimes there are more dimensions and aspects to this than what is raised in the strategy.

It cannot, for example, be that the goal is solely for young people to avoid crime. Should we not have a vision to provide children and young people with good living conditions and the prerequisites to create fine, developing lives on their own? It cannot just be about them not becoming criminals.

With that said, we believe that the three barriers presented are good and highlight much of what is necessary to bring down the levels of crime.

Centerpartiet views very positively that a strong work line is raised in one of the first barriers. It is, however, somewhat naive to mention salary or benefits as the only sources of income, when we know that there is a large black illegal economy. We lack ambitions to make it easier for young people to earn 100 kronor white than 100 kronor black. The government has raised the employer contribution for youth, while we instead believe that it can currently be temporarily even removed. We must lower the thresholds for young people to enter the legal white labor market.

We continue to view positively that the work being done in preschools, schools, and social services in the country's 290 municipalities every day, all year round, is being highlighted. We stand up for the municipalities' self-determination and right to taxation, but in a time when Sweden's GDP, for example, retreated in April this year and when we have gone through an inflation and cost crisis that affects the municipalities' pension debts enormously, it has hit the municipal economy. Here, the state must take its responsibility in an extraordinary time.

Much of what is mentioned in the strategy is statutory, but a considerable amount consists of voluntary activities aimed at children and young people - the kind of things we know are the first to be cut in economically difficult times. This can mean lost cohorts, and if it is something we cannot afford, it is this.

The Centre Party therefore shares the government's focus in the first two barriers when it comes to prevention and proactive work. We also agree on the third barrier regarding stopping criminal trajectories. But in line with other parties, we unfortunately see that the defector work that exists is underfunded. It needs to be strengthened, and more resources need to be added to both the police and other authorities. There are state funds, but they ran out during 2023. The government did not add any further resources for 2024, while the Centre Party proposed a doubling of the police budget for defector work - 75 million kronor.

Madam Speaker! I would like to conclude by raising two issues. The first is the housing issue and the non-functioning housing market which is not mentioned at all in the strategy. Vulnerable areas and housing segregation are mentioned, as if they are something forever given. We know that the home, the area, the locality, and the social environment affect us all both positively and negatively, and we need major reforms to increase supply, accessibility, mobility, and the possibility of life journeys.

The housing issue is raised somewhat unexpectedly, primarily by international companies operating in several different countries. They are surprised by and troubled by the housing situation in Sweden.

If we take action on the housing market, it would benefit both those seeking to move away from crime or from the risk of being subjected to crime in their area and those who come here to work in our advanced export companies. There are largely only winners in us taking action on the housing market.

Finally, I want to highlight the skate parks. In several different debates within the jurisdiction of the Justice Committee, the government parties have raised these as something negative and something that municipalities should not be involved in. I have searched for words in the strategy, and it says nothing about skate parks in it.

As former chairman of the municipal executive board in Leksand, I am proud of the skatepark that sits beautifully by the Dalälven between the Japanese park and the municipality's sports facilities. The skatepark is run by a local association called Leif. When it was built, it was financed by the state through the General Inheritance Fund, by the local business community - a local bank and small businesses - by the municipality with an initial financial support and some operation plus a large amount of voluntary work.

This skatepark, which is usually full of children, young people and adults, is the epitome of how we as a society educate one another, help one another and show good alternatives. It is there without thresholds, without cost and without fees.

Finally: It is good to have a unified strategy as such. We stand behind it. But we hope that the specific proposals that will soon land on the Riksdag's table and which shall be based on the strategy, will be characterized by a higher ambition. The strategy is, however, necessary but not sufficient.

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

Martin Melin (L)

Madam Speaker! I stood here in the chamber a couple of weeks ago and said that the solution to the wave of violence that we are currently in, and which we perhaps do not quite see the end of yet, is the crime prevention work. I stand by that. But the crime that we see today – the thousands of network criminals who smuggle and sell drugs, who engage in extortion, who rob and murder and who engage in welfare crime and fraud – is a result of the fact that society has not allocated enough resources to the crime prevention work. By that, I do not mean last year, but I mean 10-20 years back.

Many of us saw this development coming. We saw how young men began to organize themselves more and more, how criminals began to take over areas, districts, neighborhoods and squares, how mafia-like structures were built up, how the violence became increasingly crude and how residents and business owners who complained or spoke out were threatened and silenced. We saw that parallel societies emerged. We were, above all, many within social services and the police who saw this coming.

Unfortunately, there were not many in this house who saw it coming. The windows in the parliamentary buildings were closed, the doors were locked, and the walls were thick. The warning cries from the outside did not reach all the way in. It is surprising. There were, after all, reports to be reviewed.

There were, above all, good books to read on the subject, such as *Svensk maffia* by Lasse Wierup and Matti Larsson, *Familjen* by Johanna Bäckström Lerneby, and *Tills alla dör* by Diamant Salihu. These are books written by skilled and driven journalists, who practically served the issues to the politicians on a silver platter. But it is obvious that no one in this house read the books. The crime prevention work was conspicuously absent.

Now we have a government that finally stands its ground and does something. Then the same politicians in many cases - those who have turned a very blind eye - sit here and argue that bad politics is being conducted. Then one can ask what kind of politics should be conducted instead. Is it the politics that has been, which has not been adapted to how society has changed and how crime has developed and changed?

To the opposition, I want to say: Learn instead from the passivity that permeated Swedish politics for many years, especially when it comes to crime fighting and crime prevention work. Learn, and do right!

Madam Speaker! The crime we see occurring today requires that we have new laws, and it requires new reforms and new thinking within criminal policy. Crime has become more cross-border and more brutal. And much of the communication between criminals takes place digitally today. Then the legislation must keep up, so that the law enforcement authorities do not fall behind.

But it is one thing to combat the ongoing crime. The police are doing that with fairly great success today. More than ever before, people are arrested and prosecuted for serious crimes, and many serious crimes are prevented. The clearance rate when it comes to, among other things, gun violence is also rising. I heard the other day that it has gone from 15 percent to 85 percent in Uppsala.

But when it comes to stopping crime, it is about ensuring that we stop or at least limit young people being drawn into crime. We all agree on that. But we have a problem. It is that as long as young people want to be part of criminal networks, are lured into criminal networks, or are threatened into criminal networks, the type of crime we see today will not decrease and definitely will not disappear.

Society must be able to explain to these young people why a life in crime is not an alternative. That very sentence is important: A life in crime is not an alternative. We must get these children not to be lured into crime or not to want to become criminals. We must ensure that an inmate in a facility is given opportunities to find, create, or educate themselves for other alternatives than continuing with crime. Just the word alternative is something we must work much more on.

How does one do that? That is actually a bit of what the white paper we are debating today is about. Hopefully, the measures described in the white paper will lead to exactly those alternatives. The government's white paper Barriers to Crime - a social preventive strategy against criminal networks and other crime addresses how the government wants the crime prevention work to be conducted, not least out in the municipalities.

The document points out how important it is that the whole society is involved. It concerns social services, the school, the sports movement, healthcare, and not least the parents. I hope that we will talk much more about parental responsibility here in the chamber going forward.

One thing mentioned in the letter is that the crime prevention work must be long-term. That is important, and it is completely correct. It has been shown that when authorities are allowed to work long-term, results often follow. Short, quick projects rarely work as well. There are no quick, easy solutions, especially not when it comes to the crime we see today.

Madam Speaker! I do not intend to speak much more about the report in detail. I only note that it covers important matters. And it is feasible measures that are highlighted. In other words, the crime prevention work could move from words to action in the coming years, at least if this government and the Liberals are allowed to continue to decide.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 16.)

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