Effective economic management in municipalities and regions

Victoria Tiblom (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on the Constitution's report 2 on effective economic management in municipalities and regions.

This is a well-crafted and well-considered bill intended to increase the flexibility for our municipalities and regions in their work with economic management and create better conditions for this important work. The bill contains several different parts, and I choose to highlight some of these in my speech.

In the proposition, it is proposed that the equalization reserves regulated in the Local Government Act shall be replaced with result reserves. By introducing result reserves, the state creates better conditions for municipalities and regions to plan their savings in order to achieve sound financial management.

In the Local Government Act, it is regulated how municipalities and regions shall manage their financial administration. It is described there, among other things, that municipalities and regions shall have good financial management.

Since 2013, there has been a possibility in the Local Government Act to, under certain conditions, reserve parts of a positive result in a result equalization reserve, RUR. This reserve can then be used to equalize revenues over a business cycle, provided that the year's result after balance requirement adjustments is negative. But RUR simultaneously implies limitations, and with the current economic situation, for example, certain regions have been forced to refer to special reasons to justify a use of their RUR.

Mr. Speaker! The existing arrangement with a result equalization reserve aimed at smoothing out revenues over economic cycles has had a limited impact. Not all municipalities and regions make use of the possibility. With the new proposal we are debating today, it is proposed instead that municipalities and regions shall be given the opportunity to reserve funds in a result reserve and thus be able to plan in advance and increase their savings to reserve funds for, for example, upcoming major expenditures. This will hopefully contribute to increased use in our municipalities and regions and thereby create a better balance between positive results and upcoming expenditures – simply good economic management.

Mr. Speaker! Furthermore, the proposition proposes that the audit reports shall be made available to the public on the municipality's or region's website from the time of the announcement of the meeting with the municipal council where the report is to be discussed. Municipalities and regions have a great responsibility to manage our tax funds in the best possible way, and it is important that the public is given further opportunity to access the information in this way.

In this speech, Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD) agreed.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! When schools, elderly care, and healthcare deteriorate, ordinary people are affected, and the sense of community in Sweden is eroded. The state must therefore provide good conditions for municipalities and regions to manage the welfare. It is about having sufficient resources. It is about having room for maneuver to be able to be efficient and innovative. It is about having good rules to manage the economy.

The S-led government initiated an investigation to review the regulatory framework for economic management in the Local Government Act. The purpose was to provide municipalities and regions with good conditions to meet future challenges through a coherent regulatory framework for so-called efficient economic management.

The investigation proposes, among other things, a state guarantee for the revenues of municipalities and regions in order to protect the resources for welfare during deeper economic downturns or other crises. This would mean that the state commits to injecting funds up to a certain level for the tax base in municipalities and regions. Such a system with a kind of income guarantee for the municipal sector would improve its possibilities for long-term planning to maintain the quality of welfare even in times of crisis.

Imagine that you have been informed that you have damage to the house. If you do not repair it, it will rain into the children's bedroom. Your finances are tight now. You have already done what is necessary to make the finances work. You have cut back on all unnecessary expenses. These are tough times in Sweden. You do not know whether you will receive a salary deduction or not after the turn of the year. Can you renovate? Or must you cut back on everything - the children's winter shoes, everything that is needed - in order to be able to manage this?

Some recognize this analogy. Many municipalities and regions recognize this situation. But in their case, it is about whether they will be able to develop the preventive work, whether they will be able to invest in developing better day activities for people with severe disabilities, or whether they will be able to invest in job-strengthening activities for people until the economic cycle turns. This makes the task of being a politician or a civil servant in the municipal sector difficult.

Therefore, we should introduce a guarantee model so that the funding of the welfare system is secured ahead of upcoming crises. It is a way to maintain quality even in temporarily difficult economic times or, for that matter, other crises.

Mr. Speaker! It is good that we agree on moving towards result reserves. It facilitates planning of savings for municipalities and regions. For example, funds can be set aside for upcoming major expenditures. It would strengthen the municipal sector's opportunities to plan operations and achieve long-term perspective in managing and planning their finances and their operations.

In the coming years, it will be difficult for many municipalities and regions to set aside money for the results reserve, but it is still good that we give the municipal sector the opportunity to set aside money for upcoming challenges.

The investigation also proposes that municipalities and regions should establish a ten-year program for good municipal management in order to increase long-term perspective in planning. This would provide more coherent economic governance and clearly link the municipalities' and regions' economic planning to the overarching requirement for good economic management. We believe that proposal is well-balanced. We also think it is reasonable that the municipal councils in municipalities and regions should handle and rectify a significant budget deviation in order to balance the finances.

Mr. Speaker! There is a great need, not least in smaller municipalities, to receive support and guidance in the management of the economy and economic administration. In the investigation report we are now discussing, A good municipal economy, there is a proposal for a central function that can provide guidance and support to the entire municipal sector. This could be in the form of general advice on issues concerning economic management and administration. This would be a good way to raise the quality of the work while at the same time we would get a better overview of how rules are applied and how the municipal sector works with its economic management.

Mr. Speaker! Safeguarding the welfare state is one of the most important missions we politicians have. To change and improve the economic governance rules is, even if it sounds a bit dry, to provide better conditions for a good welfare state, today but also in the future.

I therefore move for approval of reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Lars Johnsson (M)

Mr. Speaker! In my previous life, before I was entrusted to be a member of Parliament, I was the chairman of the municipal executive board back home in Hässleholm. Everyone who has ever held that responsibility has become deeply aware of the importance of good economic management and the significance of being able to plan one's finances and savings, such as being able to set aside funds for the future in good times. I can remember with pleasure the occasions when, as the chairman of the board, I could go to the municipal council with proposals to set aside funds for the result equalization reserve to save for the future.

As everyone in here knows, several of our municipalities are currently having a rather difficult time with their finances. My home municipality is no exception. I know, therefore, that those who are sitting and struggling with the budget at home in Hässleholm can be glad that they can use what has been gathered in the result equalization reserve to get through a period of inflation and high pension costs.

Mr. Speaker! The bill we are to debate today concerns precisely the economic management in our municipalities. The Government proposes several amendments to the Local Government Act. Among others, an amendment is proposed that gives municipalities and regions greater opportunities to plan their savings. The proposal means that today's result equalization reserve is replaced by a result reserve. In practice, this means that municipalities and regions get a freer use of the funds that can be set aside. Today's regulations require that a recession exists for the funds to be usable. That is now removed in the new proposal. Instead, the importance of achieving sound economic management is emphasized.

Mr. Speaker! Many municipalities and regions today conduct a large part of their activities through other legal entities, for example through municipal companies. The activities conducted in this way often have a very great significance for the entire municipal economy and economic management. Therefore, the government proposes that a requirement be introduced that the budget shall contain an account of the economy during the budget year also in the municipal group companies. No such requirement exists today.

Another piece of news in the proposal is that the audit report shall also be made available on the municipality's or region's website to increase public access. Today, corresponding requirements exist only when it concerns the budget and annual report.

Mr. Speaker! The report from the investigation that preceded the government's proposition also contains some proposals that are not included in today's report. These concern, on the one hand, the proposal for a guarantee model, which would mean that the country's municipalities and regions would be guaranteed a certain minimum level of the state grant, and on the other hand, a proposal that a state agency should be tasked with monitoring the sector's economy and providing guidance and support to municipalities and regions. These proposals are being further processed in the Government Offices, and the government will return to the issue when that processing is complete.

With these words, I, Mr. Speaker, move for the approval of the committee's proposal in its entirety and for the rejection of the accompanying motions that are pending.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet welcomes to a considerable extent the proposals that the government has submitted in and with the bill. That the country's municipalities are given the conditions to plan their economy over a long period is of the utmost importance - something that for far too long has been hindered by an all-too strict regulatory framework.

It is, however, regrettable that the government chooses not to adopt the proposal from the commission to introduce a guarantee model to secure tax revenues during economic fluctuations. Since the 90s crisis, the municipal sector has been characterized by large fluctuations, and cuts have been implemented in schools, healthcare, and other common welfare. Often, these cuts have been described in mitigating, positive terms, such as efficiencies or savings.

These cuts have not only resulted in equality being worsened in Sweden. They have also eroded the trust in our collective ability to maintain a good public service. Clear deteriorations coincide, we can see, with major economic downturns when the tax base also falls. This could have been avoided if the state had guaranteed a minimum level in the tax base that the municipalities could have relied upon.

It is precisely when bad times appear that the need for a strong and robust welfare state is greatest. It is then that the public sector has the chance to act in the opposite direction by ensuring that society stands well-equipped and is at the starting blocks when the economy eventually turns. It simply makes it so that the effects of the economic cycle do not become as noticeable and serious for society as a whole.

Unfortunately, the preference of recent decades to practice an almost dogmatic neoliberal fundamentalism in the welfare and fiscal policy area has meant that cuts have become even more commonplace. Through countless tax cuts over the years, which have benefited ordinary people to a very small extent, the trust in the common good has reached a point that can actually be claimed to be downright dangerous for societal development.

The fact that public services have deteriorated at such a rapid pace is ruthlessly exploited by dark forces driven by a hateful agenda. Hardly anyone has not heard that the decay in society is due to a certain group with a different origin or belief system, who would be the reason why the school has deteriorated or why the healthcare system does not function - this at the same time as every honest politician knows that the cause is rather an enormous transfer of wealth from the common good to the richest percent. This is shameless, deceitful, and malicious. Unfortunately, these dark forces have far too much influence over today's political agenda-setting.

It is when society fails to uphold its part of the social contract that misery is created, mistrust between neighbors spreads, and a soil prepared to nourish serious organized crime flourishes. Unfortunately, we cannot expect it to become particularly much better when this government is in power. The municipalities are already in an economic crisis, and we know that they will not receive enough resources to even be able to maintain welfare activities at today's already low levels.

The consequences of this will not only be visible in schools and healthcare. In times like these, when we are shaken daily by an almost uncontrollable violence, missing economic resources will mean that there will also be a lack of preventive work in the form of a strong social service.

It is not uncommon to hear from the right wing that there is money, provided one cuts in activities that are voluntary. Such claims are often accompanied by something flippant like that it is time to stop with unnecessary art projects or the like. But we who have been active in the municipal sector know that voluntary commitments in the municipalities usually involve ice rinks, swimming pools, or football fields. It is also about grants to women's shelters, which carry out life-saving activities to counter women's vulnerability to men's violence. If we agree that those types of things are important for our society, which one can easily believe when hearing how the right-wing nationalists talk, we should also agree that the municipalities need both more money and the conditions to be able to plan long-term.

Those who are affected by the austerity policy that we in Sweden have had as a system are not some von Stropp who lives on capital returns and flies helicopters. It is ordinary families who live in Nordanstig or Gagnef, where the children's school does not receive sufficient resources. It is the woman who wants to but does not dare to break free from her violent husband, because she does not know what it will be like for the children if she does, since social services are not allowed to place long-term for cost reasons. With the Left Party's policy, this would look different. As I have mentioned, the regulatory framework for economic management is part of the problem that society must fight against.

The proposals that we in Vänsterpartiet advocate for here today would, of course, not solve the major needs the municipalities have, but they could be strongly contributory to the municipalities being able to act powerfully in the long run when the conditions are finally there. Governing a municipality requires that there are good opportunities to plan long-term. To then know that there are actually guarantees to be able to finance the common good even when times are bad could make a big difference.

It is equally important not to have unnecessarily harsh locking effects, such as a balance requirement on a year-to-year basis like the one that exists today. Being able to act only from year to year creates a short-term thinking which results in that the residents' best interests do not always stand in the foreground.

A good economy presupposes that one has good control over economic planning over time. Therefore, it would be wise if the government adopted the proposal from Vänsterpartiet to introduce a balance requirement over a business cycle. It allows for more flexibility and gives the municipalities the opportunity to create a stable, reliable society, which in turn leads to people feeling that there is security in everyday life even when it is blowing cold everywhere else. In this way, the school can be protected, healthcare can be maintained, and childcare and elderly care can be guaranteed.

With this, I move for approval of reservation 3.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! First, I would like to move for the approval of the committee's proposal in its entirety, but I also ask the House to note the specific statement that the Center Party has added to the report.

Sweden's municipalities and regions are currently in a bleak economic situation. Inflation, interest costs, wage increases, demographic challenges and increased demands mean that the results look anything but positive. This does not mean that our municipalities and regions have been irresponsible, but rather the opposite. As a former municipal politician, I know that core activities in the form of preschool, school, elderly care and healthcare are always prioritized and that every krona is turned over.

Even when times are difficult, the absolute majority of our municipal and regional politicians take a very great responsibility by pressing costs, scaling back unnecessary expenses, and keeping tax levels as low as possible. Nevertheless, there are many who today are planning for closures of preschools, schools, and elderly care homes. Savings on the personnel side mean that it will become harder to retain student assistants, preschool teachers and teachers, nursing assistants, nurses, and doctors – this despite the fact that the needs are great.

Today we are debating the proposal for efficient economic management in municipalities and regions, but we must not forget that the Riksdag's task is not only to create good regulatory frameworks for municipalities to manage their finances from the outside, but also to create good conditions for municipalities and regions to manage their operations.

Now, there is no budget debate that we are to have here today, but I still want to point out that Centerpartiet allocates 5 billion more than the government to municipalities and regions in the budget motion for 2024, because we see the great needs that exist, especially in the area of schools. In accordance with what is desired from the municipalities' and regions' sides, we also prioritize sector grants and general state grants over targeted state grants, which we all know are often both short-term and inefficient. Thus, we provide municipalities and regions with better planning conditions for their operations during the coming years.

Good planning conditions based on what the state can contribute is an important and fundamental aspect for our municipalities and regions. Municipalities and regions know how important it is to have long-term rules of the game for real, and what we have to deal with here today is precisely about these rules of the game.

Mr. Speaker! The changes proposed in the report on efficient economic management will improve the conditions for municipalities and regions to pursue a responsible and well-considered economic policy. The proposals highlighted are good and for the most part well-considered, but it is particularly important when we debate and decide on the rules of the game for municipalities and regions that they are long-term and that there is a broad majority behind what the Riksdag decides. What municipalities and regions need most is, in fact, not a mandate-period policy, where they are given different regulatory frameworks for economic management from mandate period to mandate period.

That we are now talking about moving from a result equalization reserve to a result reserve can be understood to make even the most dedicated viewer wonder what we are doing in the Riksdag, but the truth is that the change is significantly more important than the change in wording suggests. The problem with the current result equalization reserve has namely been that it has not achieved the effect that was intended from the beginning. It has been difficult to use for many municipalities and regions. The now proposed transition to a result reserve will give municipalities and regions a significantly better opportunity for long-term planning and greater flexibility in the use of the funds that are allocated.

To ensure a long-term responsible economic policy, the balance requirement in municipalities and regions remains a constantly important fundamental prerequisite, but through the possibility of making allocations to the result reserve, one can also engage in more long-term planning where one accounts not only for economic cycles but also for planned major expenditures. The Center Party argues, however, that the limitations set on how much money may be allocated to the result reserve are somewhat narrow and that more generous rules should be considered.

That the result reserve shall be reported in the balance sheet clarifies that these funds are also part of the equity in municipalities and regions. When it comes to the use of the result reserve, it is equally self-evident that the municipality's guidelines shall state how and when funds from this may be utilized. This also means that municipalities and regions themselves own the question of when it is appropriate to use funds from the own result reserve.

Mr. Speaker! An intention behind the transition to a results reserve is to give municipalities and regions greater flexibility when it comes to financial planning and how a good economic management is achieved.

As a former local politician, I can only state that it is important to hold on to that flexibility. What our politicians at the local level need above all else are precisely long-term rules of the game. Therefore, it is also important that we from national politics have the strength to take responsibility for finding broad and long-term agreements. But it is also important that we dare to allocate the funds needed in the form of sector grants and general state grants. This is necessary, namely, to secure the staff for the preschools, schools, elderly care homes, health centers, and hospitals that sustain this society.

(Applause)

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Government's proposal for changes to the Local Government Act is in many respects well-founded and provides both municipalities and regions with clearer rules. At the same time, an implementation of the proposals entails improvements regarding citizens' insight and opportunities for participation and understanding.

But we would not be a party in opposition if we did not also have a number of views and proposals for further improvements. Let me therefore, Mr. Speaker, briefly touch upon some of the points mentioned by my colleagues in the other opposition parties.

Many municipalities' and regions' economies are strained. We have heard this, not least through the reactions that have come to the government's budget bill. In the investigation that preceded the bill we are now discussing, there is a proposal for a kind of income guarantee for municipalities and regions. It is an urgent reform that would have been good to include in the bill. It is therefore not included there, but it is being investigated in the Government Offices, according to information.

In my municipality, Kungsbacka, just south of Gothenburg but in Hallands län, the high school no longer has substitutes when teachers and mentors are absent. They can't afford it, says my daughter when I ask about constantly cancelled lessons.

I request to return to Kungsbacka in a little while.

Mr. Speaker! The investigation also contains a proposal for a ten-year program for good economic management. Furthermore, there are proposals for earlier interim reports, not least so that measures can be taken in a better timeframe if the forecasts do not match the budget. There are also proposals for a state agency for support and guidance to municipalities regarding the application of rules and follow-up.

These proposals are therefore not in the bill, primarily for the reason that they could entail a relatively extensive detailed management of the municipalities' administration.

Unlike the government, we in Miljöpartiet believe that the proposals for a ten-year program for sound economic management and for postponed interim reports to provide greater opportunities for measures are well-motivated and should be implemented.

I will briefly return to the Halland municipality I mentioned earlier. For a series of years, significantly higher results than budgeted have been reported. Kungsbacka is, as you know, a fairly wealthy municipality. What looks reasonable in the budget is surpassed by a wide margin in interim and annual accounts. It is, Mr. Speaker, as I see it, a poor order and an inadequate way of budgeting. It can, of course, also be argued that the money reported as a surplus should actually be used for the children, for tenants and users in housing, for the schools, or even for substitute teachers.

Furthermore, a large number of municipal auditors are meeting for their annual conference today, in Kungsbacka. It is my hope that the attention the conference can create leads to the auditors' work and reports being used in a better way than they are today and not, as they all too often are, filed away.

Finally, the investigation discusses the so-called balance requirement, that is, the requirement for balance or, in practice, a surplus in municipal budgets. Operating costs should naturally not be paid with borrowed money.

The Government has therefore, in the bill, chosen not to propose any changes beyond the so-called result reserve.

From our side, we share the view expressed by the Left Party, namely that a balance requirement that is to apply to a single year risks leading to unwanted effects, for example that municipalities contribute to cyclical fluctuations through savings in poorer times. We believe that the conditions for planning in regions and municipalities would be improved if the balance requirement were to apply over a sequence of years. Such a proposal should be investigated.

With this said, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of reservation 2.

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

Gudrun Brunegård (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Of my approximately 21 years as a full-time politician, or elected official full-time, I spent the first 17 in municipal and regional leadership at home in Vimmerby and Kalmar county. As we have heard, there are many in the Riksdag from different parts of the country who share that background.

Many of us have likely struggled with how to achieve good economic management when everything was going to the dogs during a crisis year. The deficits were to be restored already in the following year. That was the case during my first years as a municipal politician. It was equally frustrating when one had succeeded in achieving a surplus or saw that one was approaching a surplus. During a period, there was, in fact, the notion that the municipality was not allowed to have a surplus. Then, a pure spending spree occurred at the end of the year so that no money would be left over – one simply couldn't pile up money. This was by no means good economic management.

As an elected representative, one has a great responsibility to manage taxpayers' money in the best possible way, whether it comes from municipal or regional tax revenues or from any of the national equalization systems or state grants, which also derive from tax revenues. In the budget proposed for next year, the government is increasing support for welfare more than ever before, with the exception of the pandemic years. But that does not exempt the responsibility of municipalities and regions to review their costs for operations so that they fulfill their mission towards the inhabitants in the best possible way. In times of crisis, the necessity of prioritizing becomes obvious.

When the current law on profit equalization reserves was introduced, the volatility that I initially described was smoothed out. Surpluses from one period can be used in a profit equalization reserve to smooth out revenues over a business cycle. It is precisely in times like those we are currently in, with increased costs, that municipalities and regions have the opportunity to use such funds.

The proposal we are dealing with today involves several changes that increase the discretion of the municipalities and regions. To mark the change, the term is changed to result reserve. The funds that are reserved in the result reserve shall be able to be used to achieve good economic management - but without the current limitation that it must occur within a business cycle.

A new rule is introduced, and it is that the municipality and the region can, under certain circumstances, reserve funds in the results reserve so that they can, for example, have the opportunity to plan for some major future investment and so that the need for borrowed capital shall decrease. Let us say that one has planned to build a senior housing facility in a few years. In that way, one gets greater disposal over the municipality's or the region's funds. It also means that one gets a greater opportunity to have an economic buffer for unforeseen expenditure increases or loss of income.

Another part of the report concerns that the Act on Municipal Accounting and Reporting shall be amended so that it appears from the balance sheet how much money is in the profit reserve. It shall also appear from the management report if funds from a profit reserve have been used and, if so, for what and why. Furthermore, the requirement regarding decisions on specific guidelines for how pension funds are managed shall be removed.

It is also new that the audit report shall be made available to the public on the municipality's or region's website from the time the meeting where the audit report is to be discussed has been announced.

All this contributes to increasing transparency and facilitating accountability because the residents can more clearly discern how the funds are used.

With this, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and rejection of the motions.

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

Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on the Constitution's report KU2 Efficient economic management in municipalities and regions.

Sweden's municipalities and regions are in a strained position. It is obvious to everyone, as the entire society has been affected by the enormous inflation which has driven up, for example, wage and pension costs for the activities being conducted. Electricity prices also increased sharply as a consequence of the shut down nuclear power.

When the results equalization reserve was introduced just over ten years ago, the idea was precisely to be able to match certain increased costs during a recession through savings during a boom, even if one perhaps did not account for skyrocketing electricity prices as a consequence of the decommissioned nuclear power.

Through Sveriges Kommuner och Regioners reports, we have been able to take note of the strong results that municipalities and regions achieved during the years 2021 and 2022, partly thanks to significantly increased support from the state for the corona pandemic, partly by the Sverigedemokraterna together with M, KD and V also pushing through extra support to our municipalities and regions against the then S-government's will. These are funds that to some extent ended up in the results equalization reserve and which can now be used. This is good, and that was the intention with the system we have today.

Mr. Speaker! Now the government proposes that the result equalization reserve shall be replaced by a result reserve, which is good, and I fully agree with my party colleague Victoria Tibloms' speech earlier in the debate. Through this new proposal, municipalities and regions will get better conditions to plan their savings, while the result reserve becomes somewhat more flexible when it comes to how previous surpluses can be used to plan for larger costs and upcoming investments. It should naturally be encouraged that municipalities and regions can use their own money to a greater extent to finance costs and planned investments instead of borrowing money at sometimes high interest rates.

An example of a loan debt in Sweden exists in my home municipality, the Social Democrat-governed Gävle. There, the municipality had a debt of 10 billion kronor last year, which means 100,000 kronor per inhabitant in Gävle municipality. This is a result of a rapidly growing population, as a consequence of the previous migration policy. This in turn required the municipality to quickly invest in preschools and schools and so on, while tax revenues did not increase to the same extent because people did not enter employment. Why this did not happen is another debate, and I therefore leave this part now.

Mr. Speaker! The Government's proposal is well-considered and will result in better conditions for our municipalities and regions to achieve sound economic management, while the municipalities and regions have continued work to do regarding structural changes, new technology, and other things that can contribute to the tasks being performed efficiently. In this, every municipality and region generally has great opportunities to decide how to get there.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! Protecting the welfare state during economic downturns and crises to ensure the welfare that many parties here in the Riksdag say they defend should be a matter of course. In the basis for the Committee on the Constitution, we see that the issue is being investigated. Mattias Eriksson Falk's party colleague said it was a very good investigation, and therefore I now give the Sweden Democrats the opportunity to say what one actually thinks about introducing a guarantee model. We do have a good investigation that we can take a position based on.

In that case, one only refers to the fact that further investigation is needed, so I would therefore like to have an answer to the question: What do the Sweden Democrats think about guaranteeing welfare even during economic downturns and crises? That was one of them.

The second thing is that many parties have talked about how it is very good to have a results reserve. We think so too. We stand behind it. But as I said in my speech, the basis for being able to use that legislative change is that one has resources to set aside for other times, that is to say, finances to save money for more difficult challenges in the future.

It does not provide the SD-led government with the conditions for that. Many municipalities and especially regions - we are in a healthcare crisis - are not even managing the welfare today. How are they going to be able to use the opportunity for result reserves for future expenditures in the future?

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

Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)

Mr. Speaker! That we today have money in the result equalization reserves in many municipalities and regions is due precisely to the extra support that the Sverigedemokraterna, together with other parties, pushed through during the previous parliamentary term, against the will of the then S-government. We have thus contributed to building up just those reserves that municipalities and regions can use when the economic downturn and skyrocketing prices are now a fact, partly as a consequence of shut down nuclear reactors, partly because Social Democratic policy has led to higher costs for society.

We are now trying to rectify this by, in the budget proposal for the coming years from the Sweden Democrats and the government, allocating 10 billion in general support for the welfare sector. It also concerns targeted funds of 6 billion, including a sector support directly to health and medical care of 3 billion kronor. The Sweden Democrats and the government are therefore allocating a lot of funds to the municipalities and the regions.

At the same time, the municipalities and regions have work to do themselves to get into balance. They know themselves best, and I can point to both Gävle municipality, which is my home municipality, and Region Gävleborg, which is my home region. There, they actually need to make structural changes – or prioritize correctly.

In Gävle municipality, the Sweden Democrats proposed that the 55 million kronor that the Social Democrats provide for high-culture for high-income earners should be cut and instead these funds should be prioritized for welfare, which the Social Democrats say no to. During the previous mandate period in Region Gävleborg, we proposed that 15 million should be saved on the Gävle Symphony Orchestra, which also is primarily for high-income earners, and instead prioritize the money for welfare.

The Social Democrats instead choose in the region to remove ADHD assessments for children, they make large cuts within public transport in rural areas, and they remove the requirements for general specialists at the health centers.

You are cutting back on welfare - we want to prioritize correctly.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! I asked two questions to Mattias Eriksson Falk. I did not receive an answer to either of them, so I will ask them again.

What is the position of the Sweden Democrats regarding a guarantee model so that municipalities and regions can manage during economic downturns and crises? That was my first question, and it was not mentioned at all.

Then I think it is strange that one pats oneself on the back for an announcement that everyone, even we Social Democrats, stood behind. We did, in fact, ensure that we added funds—three times as much as the tax loss—to municipalities and regions during the crisis that was during the pandemic because we knew that the challenges were great.

We did what was necessary. Now the question is whether the Sweden Democrats are ready to do so moving forward, or if one should leave municipalities and regions in the lurch.

When it comes to resources for municipalities and regions, I note that it is only stated that they have not done what they are supposed to. I will take that with me, because I do not believe that so many municipal and regional politicians agree with that. They need resources to be able to manage the welfare moving forward, but those resources are not being given. Insufficient money is being provided.

We are all so happy and satisfied that we are going to change to a results reserve so that municipalities and regions can save for large expenses in the future. But many municipalities can barely keep their heads above water as it is today. How are they then going to be able to manage to set aside money in the future?

It is a good change, but the SD-led government does not provide the conditions to be able to use the legislative change that we are now proposing.

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

Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I always find it interesting that the Social Democrats seem to land on the idea that it is someone else who should fix the problems that they themselves have created. I mentioned in my speech, for example, the poor migration policy that has been conducted for a long time in Sweden, which has driven up costs for municipalities and regions when it comes to access to welfare and when it comes to investments—also as a consequence, interest costs, as one borrows for the investments that are made. The Social Democrats cannot see this. They do not have the insight to see what they themselves have caused. I mentioned closed nuclear power as an example of skyrocketing electricity prices, and one is driving up costs for municipalities and regions that have energy-intensive activities to run and finance.

The Social Democrats refuse to see this. They are not prepared to make structural changes in the operations or to make priorities, but instead they choose to finance high culture for high-income earners rather than putting money into welfare. The Social Democrats choose to remove requirements for general specialists, remove ADHD investigations, and worsen public transport - because they choose to prioritize high culture instead of investing in welfare. It does not surprise me. The Social Democrats have never seen the problems that society actually has as a result of their own policy.

Effective economic management in municipalities and regions

The Sweden Democrats and the government choose in the state budget for 2024 to allocate 10 billion in general support to municipalities and regions as well as 6 billion in targeted support, just to create better opportunities for our municipalities and regions to achieve a good economy. But municipalities and regions also have a job to do. A tip to Eva Lindh and the Social Democrats is to start by reviewing the grants you give to your own organizations, for example ABF or Ibn Rushd. There is money to be found there. Start by looking at the problems you have created yourselves.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 16.)

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