The handling of the Riksdag's communications

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I shall begin by moving that the government's communication and the Riksdag Administration's report be submitted to the records. We are now to debate the Committee on the Constitution's report KU21 The handling of the Riksdag's communications.

Just like last year, this matter comes directly after the review debate. At that time, I believe this was the only matter remaining, but now KU has booked the chamber for an additional period ahead. Which one is the main item among our debates, we will have to argue about afterwards.

This is also about the relationship between the Riksdag and the Government. The Government's report 75 fulfills an important function as an account of measures taken in connection with the Riksdag's decisions, particularly announcements.

In line with previous years, KU emphasizes in its position the importance of the government's account providing a correct picture and a detailed report of how the government works based on the decisions of the Riksdag. The committee notes that the government's account of the handling of the Riksdag's letters to the government on an overall level provides a correct picture.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the committee does not object to the government's reporting of the final processed parliamentary referrals within the Committee on the Constitution's area. However, the committee finds reason to again remind of some things that have been stated previously regarding the non-finalized parliamentary referrals.

The KU's position emphasizes once again that the government's handling of announcements should be prompt and that, for example, it is not acceptable that certain announcements cannot be considered finalized after eleven years. This, the committee argues, is a general reminder to the government that applies to announcements in all committees.

Regarding the announcements in the KU's area that are not considered finalized, it is worth noting that the oldest is eight years old and from the parliamentary session 2015/16. It was thus during the second year of the Social Democratic-led government.

Madam Speaker! This leads me to briefly comment on the Social Democrats' special statement in this matter. Regarding the announcement from 2015/16 on provisions for changes in regional divisions, we note that the current government makes the same assessment as the then Social Democratic-led government did during the parliamentary session 2018/19. We further note that several of the parties that stood behind that announcement, such as the Social Democrats, the Left Party, and the Green Party, are now part of the government or the government base. This should serve as a reminder of the effect of committee initiatives and announcements. When one ends up in a government position, one may need to handle the consequences of what one has oneself been involved in and announced during previous mandates.

I do not think I will return to this rostrum before the summer break, so I wish the Speaker, the Chamber Office, my fellow committee members, and the committee's own office a pleasant and nice summer.

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

Victoria Tiblom (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating, just as at the same time last year, the Committee on the Constitution's report regarding the handling of the Riksdag's communications. This is a recurring report. I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal.

It was in the late 1990s that we began to report the processing of the Riksdag's referrals to the Riksdag Board also to the Riksdag. The reporting covers all Riksdag referrals from the most recent calendar year that have been submitted to the Government, as well as older referrals that have not previously been reported as completed by the Government.

The report contains plenty of statistics for the interested, and it is easy to follow the development from parliamentary session to parliamentary session when it comes to the government's reports on announcements and finalized announcements. The 810 announcements during the record year 2022/23 can be compared with only 98 during the parliamentary session 2010/11. For the current parliamentary session, a total of 35 parliamentary documents are reported with reason for reports from the Committee on the Constitution.

Madam Speaker! Regarding the government's handling of the Riksdag's announcements, the Committee on the Constitution has emphasized that the starting point, in accordance with the constitutional practice that has developed, should be that the government fulfills an announcement. If the government does not share the Riksdag's opinion on an issue and does not intend to fulfill the Riksdag's request, it should inform the Riksdag of this within the time limit – when one has been specified – stated in the announcement. The reasons why the government has not fulfilled the announcement should also be presented.

The Committee on the Constitution also reminds of the importance of the government being detailed in its reporting of measures taken, ongoing, and planned. Furthermore, it should not occur that announcements are not finalized after several years without a report being provided on when they can be finalized.

The committee also comments on the importance of clarity in the Riksdag's announcements and reminds that it has been stated previously that it should appear from the relevant committee's position what is requested in an announcement. A position should therefore be formulated in such a way that the government does not have to read the motions to gain clarity on what the Riksdag requests in its announcement.

Madam Speaker! I would like to take the opportunity to wish everyone a very happy summer.

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

Lars Johnsson (M)

Madam Speaker! The Riksdag represents the citizens of Sweden. The Government is subject to the Riksdag, and one of the Riksdag's tasks is to supervise the Government. This is called the power of oversight.

The power of oversight is exercised by the Riksdag in different ways. One part of the power of oversight is the members' right to ask questions to the ministers here in the chamber, both orally and in writing. Another part of the power of oversight is the Committee on the Constitution's annual reviews of the government and the various ministers, which we have debated here earlier today.

Another way to exercise the power of oversight is the report that is now to be debated. The report is based on a provision in Chapter 9, Section 8 of the Instrument of Government. In this provision, it can be read that the government shall every year, in a communication to the Riksdag, report which measures the government has taken in connection with the parliamentary communications that have been submitted to the government.

Madam Speaker! I would like to briefly comment on a few things in the letter and in the report.

In the document, a follow-up is made on how the government has handled the Riksdag's announcements (tillkännagivanden). An announcement can best be described as a mandate that the Riksdag has given to the government. It can be stated that the number of announcements during the previous parliamentary term was very large. The number of announcements naturally reflects the previous government's weak support in the Riksdag.

At the same time, we can observe that there has been a marked decrease in the number of motions following the change of government. In the previous parliamentary session, only 15 motions were submitted, and during the current parliamentary session - up to May 16 this year - only 13 motions have been submitted. We have to go all the way back to the Reinfeldt government's first term to find a lower number. The low number of motions is, of course, a result of the fact that the current government's policy has the support of a majority in the Riksdag.

Madam Speaker! Regarding the government's report, a unanimous Constitutional Committee notes that the report, on a general level, provides a correct picture of the Riksdag's instructions to the government and contains a detailed account of the government's actions. It is a good grade. The Constitutional Committee also shares the government's assessment of the final processed announcements.

The Committee on the Constitution has sent the referral to the other committees. It can be noted that no other committee has either raised any objections to the government's assessment of the finalized matters in the respective areas.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I would like to vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! Document 75 on the government's handling of the Riksdag's documents is an important document; other speakers have also underlined this. In a particularly pressing observation, it is also part of our oversight functions.

I note, as do others, that there are a number of matters that are still being prepared after both one and two - and sometimes more - governments have had the opportunity to complete them.

I also cannot help but see that part of what may appear to be total agreement between the government and the Riksdag in reality reflects the fact that the government, with the support of its coalition partners, has a majority in all committees, while there are dissenting opinions from the opposition parties—often in agreement—in many of the committees. It concerns matters that the government and the parliamentary majority consider to be finalized, while Miljöpartiet and other opposition parties do not share that view at all.

Madam Speaker! Let me take a few examples.

In the Committee on Finance, representatives for S, V, and MP note that an announcement regarding the appointment of an inquiry to ensure that future price shocks on energy can be avoided is considered concluded. Our parties argue on the contrary that the proposals presented were not sufficient or were more of a one-off nature, and that the announcement therefore cannot at all be considered finalized.

Even in the Committee on Civil Affairs, there are announcements that the government has interpreted as "appointing an inquiry." The announcements have, however, been more extensive, and thus they cannot be considered finalized until all approved motions have been processed.

In the Committee on Foreign Affairs, we and other opposition parties have stated in a joint statement that the government has not complied with a mandate regarding the establishment of a ministerial council for transport and infrastructure issues at a Nordic level.

MP considers, together with S, V and C in the Social Affairs Committee, that an announcement regarding mental health is not finalized by the fact that two investigations have been completed, but argues that a decision is also required on what should be done with the results the investigations have presented.

In the transport committee, MP, together with S, V, and C in various combinations, have submitted three dissenting opinions. One of them concerns an announcement regarding the state's responsibility for railway maintenance, where we, together with V and S, assert that the government simply has not done enough to realize a greater responsibility for railway maintenance. Until that is done, the announcement simply cannot be considered finalized.

Perhaps most importantly is that the Committee on Industry has noted that the import of Russian energy to Europe must cease so as not to contribute in that way to financing the unjust and devastating Russian war in Ukraine. The Committee already decided in the spring of 2022 on a notification to the Government to work towards an immediate stop of the import of Russian energy. The Committee argued then that the import of Russian energy must cease as soon as possible. In document 75, the Government reports this notification as finalized despite the fact that the Russian inflow of energy to Sweden and other countries is still significant and in some cases has even increased.

Madam Speaker! Finally, I shall take up a matter mentioned in the opposition parties' dissenting opinions to the Cultural Committee's statement. It concerns the return of Sámi objects and remains to the Sámi. These are artifacts and human remains that are located at universities and museums all over Sweden. Unlike the other dissenting opinions, this concerns a strong desire for a prompt implementation. The Swedish National Heritage Board has submitted two reports to the government. It is important for several reasons that necessary decisions are made as soon as possible, not least because the issue has already been discussed for a long time, for several decades. It is a central issue for Sámi identity and cultural heritage, in the same way as for other indigenous peoples all over the world.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on June 12.)

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