An enhanced gaming regulation

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! Many Swedes enjoy gambling. For the vast majority, it is a pastime, or perhaps one wants to support the local sports club. But we also know that even if it is a pastime for many, for others it is a tragedy. People develop a gambling addiction and incur debts so that they are forced to leave their homes. Perhaps it even goes so badly that people take their own lives.

A broad majority - a cross-bloc agreement - decided in this Riksdag in 2018 to regulate the gambling market precisely to enable stricter requirements and a regulated gambling market and to prevent people from falling into addiction.

Today, the gaming industry is also a business, and much of it works well. The gaming industry turns over 26 billion and gives 7.4 billion to the state in tax revenues. It provides over 12,000 jobs and also generates billions for sports, the horse industry, and local community life. But we know, as said, that there are still far too many who fall into gambling addiction.

Statistics Sweden and the Gambling Authority have conducted an evaluation of how the gaming industry and the gaming market function. What we have on the table in the Riksdag today are further proposals to tighten the requirements on the gaming companies, to enable the Gambling Authority to access unlicensed gaming companies and illegal gambling, and to increase the possibility of ensuring that fewer people – preferably none at all – fall into a gambling addiction.

Mr. Speaker! Many of the proposal's suggestions are good and provide various keys and sharpenings to enable an even better and more regulated gambling market and a gambling inspection authority that can take measures. But on two points, the opinion of the Moderaterna and a large majority in the committee differs from what the proposal suggests.

One thing concerns further changing the rules for moderate marketing. There, as mentioned, a broad majority in this Riksdag decided on stricter requirements for marketing that apply from 2019. Now, finally, practice has begun to settle, and we see moderate marketing from the gambling companies. To then change the law once again today does not feel serious. A majority of us in the Culture Committee think it is better to wait until the previous legislation that applies from 2019 has fully taken effect and that we see that it works.

Mr. Speaker! Then there is another point in the bill where a majority in the Culture Committee has chosen to reject the proposals, and it concerns the slot machines on the Finnish ferries. There, the bill proposes that one should change the regulatory framework in the middle of the open sea depending on whether one is in Swedish or Finnish waters. It is a completely impossible situation, which would mean that one must either perform a cash reconciliation in the middle of the night out on the open sea or that the boats are forced to have two sets of slot machines with different taxes and different rules. It would make the whole thing extremely complicated.

Such a proposal must, in that case, of course be negotiated from the Swedish side together with Finland, so that an agreement is reached on how to handle the slot machines, just as in today's reality an agreement has been reached on which regulatory framework shall apply.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I want to repeat that many of the proposals in the bill are good. This is welcomed by us Moderates, our coalition parties, and a broad majority in the Culture Committee. But on two points, I will therefore move to reject the proposals in the bill.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! I quote the government statement: "Swedish companies - not least the many small companies - need relief from bureaucracy and administration." As a member of the Centre Party, I am the first to sign on to this, and I know that we share many of the Moderates' positions here.

That is why I also become thoughtful. Because with the new bill, where the government and the Moderaterna have now had the opportunity to change a little, there also comes a new requirement that certain arcade games - that is, pinball machines and classic arcade games like Pac-Man - shall introduce cash registers. It is a requirement that has not existed previously. It goes directly against the government's declaration's appeal for less administration and bureaucracy.

Kristina Axén Olin! I simply wonder: What justifies introducing this, something that has not been in place during the last 50 years that arcade games have existed?

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! The Centre Party has also raised this issue in a follow-up motion and in the Cultural Committee, I know. I welcome that. It is a problematic issue.

It is possible that the Centerpartiet is right. In that case, I hope that we can all be prepared to consider changes, so that we get the best system that can be found. But right now, we have at least not had the opportunity to take a position on the Centerpartiet's proposal.

What we are now proposing is in accordance with the proposal in the bill. If it then turns out to be an impossible situation, we will have to return to it.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! Since the government withdrew the bill and made certain changes, one could imagine that it would have looked at this as well. Introducing something that is said to potentially be bad simply does not work, especially not for the companies that will be affected by this. It is about cultural actors who protect this cultural heritage.

My question is quite simple. How many arcade games can install a cash register today? And how large are the problems today caused by not having a cash register? These are reasonably quite simple things. If a new legal requirement is to be introduced, it is required that one has also investigated how large the problem is and what possibilities are available. I wonder if this government and the previous government have actually done this.

I am very curious about this. In practice, these games cannot install any cash register. There is not a single game in the world that has such a cash register. None are manufactured. Historically, none have been manufactured. We have had 50 years of arcade games, and it has not been a problem previously. Now, when this is an almost dying culture form that is truly worth preserving, the government chooses to make it difficult for them! For me, this is insane, and I do not understand how it aligns with classic moderate business and cultural policy.

My questions are simply: How extensive is the problem today, and how many can install cash registers? What basis is there for introducing this new legislation, which will hit very hard?

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! Rickard Nordin raises a part of the gambling bill that actually highlights the problematic aspects regarding the gambling market and gambling issues. It is constantly a balancing act. How are we to accommodate that Swedes choose to play games and gamble for money while simultaneously protecting people and consumers to ensure that fewer fall into addiction?

What the Riksdag decided in 2018 has largely functioned well. Today we see a significantly smaller proportion of Swedes who play in illegal games. Previously, it was almost half of the Swedish players who used unlicensed gambling companies, but the last time it was measured - I believe it was last year - it was 87 percent who used licensed gambling companies.

Much has therefore improved, but there are still things that the Swedish Parliament should do to structure and regulate the gambling market. It is about enabling the Swedish Gambling Authority to take measures so that fewer fall into addiction or use illegal gambling. This is what we are taking a position on here today.

We will return to these questions. We have investigations currently underway that look at whether even more needs to be done to reduce the risk of abuse. I am sure that Rickard Nordin and Centerpartiet will remind us all here of this. If it has become crazy regarding questions concerning cash registers for slot machines, the Riksdag can simply make a new decision.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! This is an issue that has been handled for a longer period by the Swedish Riksdag and by the Cultural Committee. Just as was recently said from the rostrum, there will be further investigations, so we have reason to return to questions concerning gambling and gambling addiction.

Regarding the bill that is now on the table, I would like to begin my speech by extending a special thanks to the former Minister Ardalan Shekarabi, who has worked with these issues for a long time and who has a strong personal commitment to the matters. I would also like to thank the members of the Cultural Committee from the previous parliamentary term, who I know have done a great job in meeting with stakeholders and in contributing to making this product as good as it is.

It should also be said, Mr. Speaker, that we are, for the most part, in agreement between the opposition and the majority in the Culture Committee regarding this proposition. That is, of course, pleasing.

Its main content concerns measures to shut out unlicensed gambling from the Swedish gambling market, requirements for permits for gambling software, a ban on promoting illegal gambling, and also an expanded ban on advertising for unlicensed gambling. Miljöpartiet thinks this is absolutely excellent. It is important that we move forward with it.

There are three things, Mr. Speaker, that the Green Party has chosen to reserve itself against in the bill. I intended to speak briefly about those three parts.

One concerns risk classification. Here, Miljöpartiet has joined Vänsterpartiet in a reservation. We believe that a system with risk classification would need to be developed. Gambling is a public health problem, and Miljöpartiet believes that we must take this public health problem most seriously. According to the Public Health Agency, around 340,000 people in Sweden, i.e., over 4 percent, have some degree of gambling problems. It is a public health issue that we must take seriously. Even more alarming is that there are many children and young people who have either ended up in or risk ending up in gambling addiction.

If we had a system with risk classification, Mr. Speaker, would it be possible to make a differentiation when different regulations are developed, for example when it concerns marketing or gambling responsibility. It could also facilitate the work against gambling addiction. When we look at the legislation moving forward, one could look at different risk classes for gambling and thus be able to design the legislation in a more precise way.

It is stated, Mr. Speaker, in the bill that certain forms of gambling are more risky than others. Miljöpartiet argues that it is also a reason to proceed and investigate the issue of risk classification. I hope that the new government will be open to not excluding this issue in the future. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that it is an important issue and that Folkhälsomyndigheten could be a strong part of such a development.

Then it concerns the second part, where Miljöpartiet has a reservation. We believe it would be good to develop the work with spelpaus.se and to, in different ways, reach out to those people who have themselves realized that they have become trapped in a gambling addiction and have therefore registered with spelpaus.se.

The Swedish Association for Gambling Addicts has noted that far too many people who have activated a gambling break experience a relapse when the suspension has expired. We believe that this is problematic and something that we should address further. The Green Party has submitted a motion during the general motion period where we put forward several different proposals on how we could adjust and build upon the function of spelpaus.se. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, the Green Party has backed two motions in connection with the government bill, one from the Left Party and one from the Moderates, which concern giving the Gambling Authority the mandate to develop the website spelpaus.se in different ways. It is about being able to work more proactively, so that those who have registered at spelpaus.se then have the opportunity to receive extended support regarding their gambling addiction.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it concerns perhaps the most important reservation from Miljöpartiet. It concerns the committee majority's proposal on handling the issue of tightened regulation of the marketing of gambling. The new government has therefore chosen to move for a rejection of the part concerning requirements for moderation in the marketing of gambling. Miljöpartiet considers this to be a betrayal, above all towards all those children and young people who are in the risk zone of falling into gambling addiction.

We know that the marketing of games risks affecting people with gambling problems negatively. When special consideration is to be taken when making the assessment of how risky a game is and of the marketing, we mean that it should be considered, partly, how great a risk the game in question poses for the development of gambling problems, and partly, to what extent the marketing risks reaching persons under 18 years of age.

This, Mr. Speaker, we do not see as an unreasonable step to take even if it was recently that we made the previous tightening. I and Miljöpartiet truly want to appeal to the government to reconsider in this matter and to proceed with this tightening, because we believe that anything else would be a betrayal of all those, not least children and young people, who risk being affected by gambling addiction.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of reservation 1. I also, of course, agree with our other reservations.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! I react to the fact that Amanda Lind says that the Moderates and a majority have moved for a rejection of the proposal in the bill on moderation in marketing.

Mr. Speaker! It is not that we have moved for a rejection of it, but the Riksdag has already decided on this on the grounds of the previous proposition. We have decided by a broad majority that there shall be moderation in marketing. And there are, of course, a lot of other rules regarding this.

What we have now moved to reject is to change the law again. We have just introduced a law that has begun to take effect and which has finally gained some case law. It does not feel serious, Mr. Speaker, to then go to the Riksdag and decide on a proposal that practically all referral bodies - except for the Public Health Agency and the Social Insurance and Work Environment Authority, I believe it was - consider would be a total ban on advertising for gambling companies.

Right must be right. We already have a virtually unanimous Riksdag today that has decided on moderation regarding the gambling market. Therefore, I wonder how Amanda Lind reasons regarding this. For example, the gambling companies generate 350 million kronor in advertising revenue for the newspapers. If we were to completely prevent the gambling companies from marketing, I would like to know how Amanda Lind envisions we should finance the media, which already faces very difficult circumstances today, Mr. Speaker.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Just as Kristina Axén Olin says, there are already today demands for moderation. That is also what I said in my speech. What is in the bill and which the majority has now chosen to actually remove concerns making a number of specific clarifications regarding the overall assessment that the Public Health Agency and the National Board of Health and Welfare consider important to prevent aggressive marketing from reaching children and young people, among other things.

This, it must be said, is not to take a particularly large step forward. There have been proposals - and there are proposals - that are even more far-reaching when it comes to aggressive gambling marketing.

Mr. Speaker! I mean that it would have been wise to take this step on the advice of the Public Health Agency. It would have been a good step to take when it comes to us taking our responsibility as legislators to handle gambling addiction and gambling abuse.

Then it concerns Kristina Axén Olin's second question regarding the economy. It is absolutely an important question, and the Green Party takes it very seriously. In our reservations and in this trade-off, we have chosen to want to take an additional step when it comes to advertising, but then we are naturally also prepared to compensate the media, the sports movement, and civil society for the potential loss of this income. We cannot determine the regulatory framework for the marketing of gambling based on revenues to civil society, Mr. Speaker. That would be very strange. We must instead find a good balance, and here we believe the government has missed the mark.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! Amanda Lind is now speaking about aggressive marketing that reaches people. There should be no aggressive marketing or advertising when it comes to gambling in Sweden; that is why the Riksdag has decided on moderation and that is what we allow in Sweden.

The law was implemented in 2019, and since then it has taken some time to find a reasonable balance. There have also been a number of cases regarding marketing that will be tested. If now all referral bodies except the Public Health Agency and the National Board of Health and Welfare consider that a further change to the law would mean a total ban on marketing or advertising for the gambling companies, how can Miljöpartiet and Amanda Lind ignore the fact that it would essentially mean a completely impossible situation for the gambling companies - and for the media, which is already on its knees in the work of financing, for example, newspapers? I have seen nothing in Miljöpartiet's budget proposal about compensating the media for a loss of revenue equivalent to all the gambling advertising that exists today.

Mr. Speaker! I hope that Amanda Lind can imagine letting the law that the Riksdag has nevertheless decided on, and which concerns moderate advertising, take effect, so that we can ensure that we get a regulated and nuanced industry.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I share Kristina Axén Olin's view of a nuanced and regulated industry. That is what we want, but then we must also have a balanced debate. Nowhere in my speech did I speak of a total ban on gambling advertising; that is a pure falsehood from the Member of Parliament.

What was in the bill and which was a balanced wording was that the gambling law should clarify the overall assessment – how risky the marketing of the game is, how great a risk of developing gambling problems the game in question entails, and to what extent the marketing risks reaching persons under 18 years of age. There has never been any talk of a total ban. These are pure falsehoods from the rostrum.

However, we in Miljöpartiet are very keen on finding a good balance, Mr. Speaker. There is healthy gambling - the gambling that is positive for many people in Sweden, including the sports movement, and which absolutely generates revenue - but when we are to regulate the legislation for marketing, I mean that we must listen extra carefully to the Public Health Agency and take extra great responsibility for all those people who are either already in gambling addiction or risk falling into it.

I therefore regret that the choice is made to remove that question. I hope that the government can consider taking this into account in the future.

(Applause)

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Mr. Speaker! As we now consider the bill on strengthened gambling regulation, I can only regret that the most central proposal, concerning stricter requirements for moderation in the marketing of gambling, is proposed to be rejected. This is a bill that was submitted by the previous S-led government to counter a serious social problem, namely gambling addiction – and then primarily linked to casino games and online casinos.

Mr. Speaker! Gambling addiction is today a public health problem. Around 340,000 Swedes today have some degree of gambling problems. This is about a market where many consumers are very vulnerable. There are clear figures showing that unemployment, mental ill-health, and various forms of substance abuse can lead to an increased risk of gambling addiction. There is also today a dark figure regarding suicide cases linked to gambling addiction. This addiction is still very taboo, and insufficient measures are taken to prevent specifically gambling addiction.

The Public Health Agency's figures show that over 75 percent of 16-17-year-olds are reached by gambling advertisements during a week. Furthermore, 34 percent of 16-17-year-olds state that they have gambled for money during the past year. These are deeply alarming figures that must be taken most seriously. They are also figures that apply today, when the gambling market itself claims that many measures have already been taken.

The further clarification in the gambling law proposed in the bill was intended to ensure that, in an overall assessment, it would be determined whether the marketing of the game is moderate. In the assessment, particular consideration would be given to how great the risk is that the game being marketed could lead to gambling addiction, as well as to the extent to which the marketing reaches persons under 18 years of age.

Mr. Speaker! I can only regret that it is not public health and the protection of our children and young people as well as the most vulnerable in society that is taken into consideration when this proposal on moderation in marketing is rejected. Rather, it is the gambling companies' interests that have been allowed to take precedence.

I will say quite honestly, Mr. Speaker, that I hope we will not be standing here again in a few years because the development has not gone in the right direction. I sincerely hope that the gaming industry continues to take a great responsibility, and I hope that the Tidö parties will not have to feel guilty that the abuse in society has not decreased - and that more children and young people have ended up in an abuse that will affect them for the rest of their lives.

With this, I support all reservations, but I move for approval only to reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! I return to what I raised in the exchange with the Moderates. This bill originally comes from the former Social Democratic government. Here, a new requirement for cash registers is introduced for those who provide certain arcade games, that is to say games that do not involve money. You do indeed pay money, but you do not win money; it is therefore not that type of gambling addiction. One needs to make a distinction between gaming and gambling, and in this case, it is about gaming – that is to say arcade games, Pac-Man, and so on.

As has been said, there are no such games in the world that have a cash register, and it would involve very large costs to somehow retroactively install it. It is unclear if it is even possible to do at all, given that it often concerns old machines that are in no way prepared for this. My questions to the Social Democrats, who are responsible for the legislation, are therefore: What impact assessment has been made for this? How large is the problem? Why is one introducing requirements for cash registers at all? What are the expected effects of this for this form of culture and the gaming industry?

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Mr. Speaker! The entire bill has overall been about reducing gambling addiction in society and reducing the risk that children, young people, and others vulnerable in society will find ways into gambling and into gambling in a way that is harmful and dangerous. This proposal is a part of just that. It is about reducing the paths into more dangerous gambling and gambling.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! This is just fantastically exciting. So, the Social Democrats believe, think, and feel that playing pinball is the path into a gambling addiction that concerns money. I cannot interpret that in any other way. Then I wonder: What research exists on that at all? Is there anything that supports that claim?

We also know that this gambling has historically been incredibly much larger. Take the 70s, 80s, and 90s, when this was big for real – then these requirements did not exist! It is even so that we finally, which I will return to in my speech, abolish the licensing requirement that has existed since the end of the 70s. Back then, politicians considered this to be bad youth environments, but we abolished the licensing requirement. If the Social Democrats' theory here holds, one is therefore going completely against one's own previous theory by now facilitating this – even though one simultaneously introduces requirements for cash registers, which is bureaucratic madness because it is not possible to implement.

That one claims that this should be some kind of gateway to gambling for money is incredibly much harder for me to understand than that one simply introduces cash registers. Again: What is the basis for the claim that this should be a way into gambling and gambling addiction? What is the basis for the proposal to introduce this type of cash register? We haven't had it at all, even though this was significantly larger previously. What do the Social Democrats see as the consequences of this for this form of culture? What are the consequences for the protection of the cultural heritage that this type of slot machine, which is not about money, actually is?

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Mr. Speaker! Once again, the entire bill is about taking a comprehensive grip on how gambling addiction can reach children and young people and the most vulnerable in society, and this was one of the proposals. Now the proposal will pass.

I must say myself that I find it regrettable that we do not get the part on stricter requirements for moderate marketing on the spot. The bill would collectively have countered abuse in society and closed the gaps that we have today when it comes to trying to curb increased abuse among children and young people. The proposal that Rickard Nordin is now referring to would have been a part of that.

After the decision that will be made here in the chamber later this afternoon, the bill will not have as much impact. It will become toothless as the part regarding requirements for moderation disappears.

Again: I understand that the member is taking out a proposal and focusing on it. But the bill is overall about reducing the risks that children and young people are reached by advertising and marketing and find ways into playing and doing so in a harmful way.

(Applause)

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

Jonas Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are therefore debating the Committee on Cultural Affairs' report on strengthened gaming regulation. It will be a somewhat odd debate given that it concerns a bill from a previous, Social Democratic government but is now being handled by a new parliamentary majority and with a new government in place, where the Sweden Democrats are part of the government base.

I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservation 14 from the Sweden Democrats, even though I obviously stand behind all our reservations in the report.

The Sweden Democrats have also received support for two motions which are found in the report as the committee's proposal for a decision, which is pleasing. One concerns the issue of requirements for moderation in the marketing of gambling. There, the committee proposes that the previous Social Democratic government's proposal in the bill should be rejected. The other concerns an agreement between Sweden and Finland on slot machines, where the committee's proposal is also to reject the proposal in the bill.

It should however be said that the Sweden Democrats see most of the proposals in the bill as positive. The proposal on business-to-business licenses is one such. It is a proposal that we Sweden Democrats have motioned for earlier in the Riksdag and which now looks to become a reality.

Mr. Speaker! I intend to go into more detail on the marketing issue and the changed requirement for moderation that is proposed in the bill and which the Culture Committee now wants to reject.

The Sweden Democrats consider it very important to maintain strong consumer protection in the Swedish gambling market. We have a statutory requirement today for moderation in marketing, and we shall have that because the gambling market is not just any market, given the issues with gambling addiction and so on.

We see, however, with the current legislation how case law is developing in the area regarding the current requirement of moderation, so that it becomes clearer what applies in the gambling market. And that is important. The Sweden Democrats therefore consider it inappropriate that we should interfere in this here and now and weaken the current legislation while practice is in the process of establishing itself. Should the requirement of moderation in the legislation be adjusted, as proposed in the bill, gambling advertising risks becoming aggressive again with gambling companies testing the limits of what applies, similar to the situation we saw a number of years ago in connection with the deregulation of the gambling market.

In addition to the reason that it is important to let practice establish itself, there are also other reasons to stand behind the committee's proposal for a decision in this part. Exactly what the consequences would have been if the proposal for a changed moderation requirement had passed is quite unclear. It is more extensive than the current moderation requirement, but it is not as extensive as the requirement for special moderation. It is also highly unclear how it would affect other important values in the gambling market, for example, channeling. That we have good channeling is important precisely for consumer protection.

The Sweden Democrats do not rule out that the legislation on the marketing of gambling may need to be tightened in the future. But at the current stage, we believe it is wiser to let case law continue to establish itself for the legislation that is already in place. In this way, we also avoid any abruptness in the Swedish gambling market regarding which laws and rules shall apply for both companies and consumers.

Mr. Speaker! I will also comment on the agreement between Sweden and Finland regarding gambling on passenger ships in regular scheduled traffic between both our countries. The proposal in the government bill from the previous government to terminate the agreement now appears to be stopped by the Riksdag.

The problem with the proposal in the bill is that it does not follow any other proposal that can replace the agreement in a reasonable way. If the proposal is torn up, as several parties obviously want, it could lead to game operators and shipping companies being forced to follow unreasonable requirements. For example, it could involve machines needing to be emptied and adjusted at sea at the land borders in the middle of the journey. It thus risks becoming both unnecessarily messy and bureaucratic.

Mr. Speaker! In addition to the proposals in the bill, which the Riksdag now appears to be stopping as a result of motions from the Sverigedemokraterna with several, we also have several of our own reservations in the report. I intend to highlight two of these. Firstly, it is about that political parties as well as associations and companies owned by these shall not be included in the exception in the gambling act which allows these to conduct lottery activities; secondly, it is about stopping the exception from the prohibition to offer gambling on credit.

That an exception exists for ordinary Swedish association life to conduct lottery activities, not least small-scale such activities, we do not think is strange. Many probably also imagine that it is precisely what the exception is intended to aim for, and we think it is good that it exists. But that political power parties, for their own gain, tailor exceptions in order to give their own parties and coffers enormous advantages on a separate arena that brings in enormous amounts to these parties is not reasonable. Even more wrong is this in combination with the exception that enables gambling on credit. Even if the credit amount that one can get today is not particularly large, it is a principled problem that can also be large enough in financial terms.

That there are problems in the area is clear. It was only a few years ago that it became known that the social democratic gambling company Kombispel had, for a long period, sent the Enforcement Authority after lottery buyers over 10,000 times. Many of these people were already in debt at the time, but the company obviously did not care about performing credit checks.

Mr. Speaker! Let us gladly talk in this chamber about the marketing issue, about the agreement between Sweden and Finland and about other important issues concerning the gambling market. But we also need to talk more and, above all, act on the issue of how political parties act for their own gain when it comes to the legislation surrounding lotteries. It is time to act.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Mr. Speaker! A very large part of Sweden's population gambles for money every week. One submits a betting slip, buys a scratch card, or bets money on who will win the weekend's top match.

Gambling can give us excitement, a break from everyday life, and hope for the big win. For most of us, it is perfectly okay if there is no jackpot. We do not need to win back the lost stake, and many are satisfied that the wager goes to an organization that makes a contribution to children's sports or for people in social vulnerability. But for a small part of the population, gambling becomes something that takes over one's thoughts, ruins one's finances, and tears apart relationships with friends and family.

According to the Public Health Agency, around 340,000 people in Sweden, around 4 percent of the population, have some degree of problem gambling, and around 40,000 children are affected by a parent having an unhealthy gambling habit. Gambling addiction is therefore a public health problem that must be taken seriously and handled politically, and in my contribution today I will primarily address the Left Party's proposal for further tightening of gambling regulation to prevent problematic gambling.

A risk classification of the different forms of gambling would give consumers a clear warning about which games are riskier than others. It is important that those who wish to gamble for money can make a conscious choice. For example, researchers point out risk factors such as when there is a very short time between the stake and the purchase as well as the result in a game, and therefore online casinos constitute a greater risk than, for example, monthly lotteries. From Vänsterpartiet, we believe that such a labeling of gambling can serve as a basis for differentiating the regulatory framework for, for example, marketing. The greater the risk, the stricter the rules. I regret that neither the old nor the new government is addressing this issue.

Mr. Speaker! The Public Health Agency states that gambling advertising is probably not a primary cause of gambling problems, but that its impact is not negligible. Gambling advertising risks normalizing gambling, and certain groups are more vulnerable than others. Those who have risk factors such as mental ill-health or other addictions are at a higher risk of experiencing problems with their gambling, and those who already have a gambling problem react more negatively to gambling advertising than others. Gambling advertising therefore poses a risk for already vulnerable groups.

The gaming industry organizations Sper and Bos have adopted guidelines for marketing for their member organizations, and my opinion is that they have done a solid job in providing good support for those companies and organizations that want to get it right in the design of their advertising. We in Vänsterpartiet see that unfortunately it is not enough to set up frameworks for the design of the marketing itself, but consideration must also be taken into account regarding the dissemination – when and where one may be forced to encounter gambling advertising.

We have compared this with the marketing of alcohol, where the law states that special moderation shall be observed. Special moderation means that the marketing may not be proactive, intrusive, or encourage the use of alcohol. Vänsterpartiet proposes a similar regulation of gambling advertising. Today, children can be met with gambling advertising in town, at the bus stop on the way to school, and when they read a regular daily newspaper. This normalizes gambling for money and lowers the thresholds for young people to try it. I heard an example the other day where an 18-year-old had accumulated 1 million in debts linked to gambling. It is not a good way to start one's adult life. It also relates to the issue of quick loans and different types of credits, which must be regulated.

Vänsterpartiet shares the previous government's concern that the public benefit lotteries may have difficulty finding customers if the marketing regulations are changed too much, but we believe it would have been possible to open up for exceptions for the type of lower-risk games they offer. The public benefit lotteries are an important source of income for Sweden's civil society and do not contribute to gambling addiction in themselves.

In the long run, Vänsterpartiet wants to propose a ban on gambling advertising, but since this will probably require constitutional amendments and affect many actors, it is important that the issue is properly investigated before such a proposal is submitted.

Mr. Speaker! Since 1 January 2019, persons with a Swedish personal identity number can themselves request a ban from all licensed gambling that requires registration according to the Gambling Act. This was a major and important step. When a person wants to play at a licensed company and needs to log in to the gaming system, the gaming company must check against the function spelpaus.se whether the person has banned themselves from gambling. Today, over 82,000 people have banned themselves for a shorter or longer period, which they can choose themselves, and are thus in the national register.

It is a failure in itself that so many have been allowed to play for so long that they themselves experience it as having become a burden for them. Here, the oversight capability has failed. The companies that have had these people as customers should by this point have established routines to stop the gambling earlier. Now, many are in such a bad state that they find it very difficult to stop. According to the national support line, it can be as many as 58 percent of those who are banned who continue to play on unlicensed sites.

In the current situation, there is no instance that proactively contacts people who have registered themselves in the registry to offer them support and help. It is a cry for help when one shuts oneself off, but there is no one there to catch it. There is a gap in the system here that could be closed by designating a party responsible for following up and contacting these people, who may need to be offered treatment or contact with the municipalities' debt counseling.

We raised this issue in the Social Affairs Committee earlier, when the action plan for ANDT issues was being addressed, where there is an addition regarding gambling. I think it should be possible to gather broad support for an improvement, and I regret that does not seem to be the case here in the chamber today.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to raise an issue that there has not been sufficient political discussion about. There is a possibility in the law for pubs and restaurants to conduct a minor casino activity in connection with their other activities, so-called restaurant casinos. This means that the restaurant has a blackjack table or a roulette with the possibility of gambling for money, an activity that has previously been quite small. Based on the new law, however, changes have been made, and it has become possible to gamble for more money. This has grown, and we see that there are now great risks that people can quickly lose a lot of money in this activity.

These restaurant casinos have been exempted by the Gambling Inspectorate from the regulatory framework to counter money laundering that other casinos are covered by, which has made this a new way for criminal organizations to hide their revenues. Here, more really needs to be done moving forward.

I move for approval of reservation 12.

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

Catarina Deremar (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is about reinforced gambling regulation. After listening to the debate here, I believe I hear that we agree on much. Above all, we want to protect those who happen to suffer when it comes to being affected by the negative sides of gambling addiction.

I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservation 3 in the matter. In my speech, I will not mention much more about this, as it has already been up for debate through my colleague Rickard Nordin, who will return to this in a separate speech.

Gaming is, as many have noted, not just any commodity. It has attracted people in all times, and we have it as entertainment as long as we can manage it. For the vast majority of people, it is not a problem. Some of us may not even look at gaming, while others are constantly triggered by it. We must find a balance when it comes to what is reasonable for the companies and the gaming market, but we must not forget the large funding that civil society receives for its activities from gaming.

As we have said, we need to consider what is reasonable, and that is where the channeling is important. The deregulation entered into force on 1 January 2019, so it has not been that long. Should we take further measures now before we know how it has turned out? I find it a bit difficult to see that we should proceed already now.

One of the reasons why we in our follow-up motion proposed a rejection of the part involving termination between Sweden and Finland and our Finnish boats is that this small gambling market is unique. It exists in a delimited area. The agreement exists between two countries, and we have a long tradition of cooperating in various ways there. This agreement also contains a regulation with low stakes and low win levels, which nevertheless promotes consumer protection.

It is difficult to discern what the previous government desired and wanted to achieve by terminating the agreement. In any case, I find it difficult to both see and understand those reasons. But now the new government has complied, among other things, with the Centerpartiets motion not to terminate the agreement, and we obviously view that positively.

There are many people who gamble in Sweden. During the corona pandemic, a concern arose regarding increased problem gambling and an increased risk of gambling addiction. There are no limits to what it means for the individual. The fairly large social circle surrounding the person who has a gambling addiction is also affected by this. It is important that we follow the development to see if new measures are needed to counteract the development so that no more people are affected by this.

I view the gambling break positively. We can perhaps look further into how we can make it even safer and more secure. It is a prerequisite that it is a good protection for players. The alternative with a lower channeling could result in gambling occurring unregulated, so we must, of course, maintain the protection.

The conditions for the public benefit lotteries' ability to continue providing income to civil society and its activities have been hindered following the deregulation of the gambling market. A review needs to be conducted to secure the public benefit lotteries' opportunities to operate on the gambling market.

Mr. Speaker! There are probably reasons for us to look a bit more at what is being done in Åland with Paf and how they work with, among other things, strengthening cultural and association life in Åland. In 2020, a total of 15 million euro was distributed to public benefit purposes in Åland, of which 4.9 million went directly to Åland's cultural and sports life. It would be interesting to look closer at that.

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

Rickard Nordin (C)

Mr. Speaker! Quite exactly 50 years ago this year, in November 1972, Pong was launched. It is one of perhaps the most classic arcade games that has ever existed. It is sometimes said to be the first game. It may not have been, but it was at least the first major arcade game.

It is therefore appropriate that we today will abolish the law on certain arcade games, the so-called pinball law. It was introduced in the late 70s, early 80s, because the politicians of that time considered pinball halls to be bad environments for youth. It was also very much based on personal experiences rather than anything else.

Requirements for permits with associated fees were introduced to be able to display this type of gaming, and the law has followed suit since then. It has also been applied to things such as internet cafés, for which this type of permit has also been required, and today's gaming establishments.

It has also created problems for someone who owns an arcade game, for example a pinball machine, and wants to exhibit it at a nostalgia fair. In that case, the fair needs to have this type of permit in order to be allowed to exhibit it. It simply creates very many problems entirely unnecessarily.

It is fantastic that the repeal of the law coincides with just this week. On Friday, the world's largest computer festival, Dreamhack, begins in Sweden. It also has a large part of problems with this type of permit.

On the other hand, one cannot simply be happy. It could have happened significantly faster. The basis for the abolition is the individual motion that I wrote in 2014 and which a unanimous Riksdag stood behind in 2015.

Mr. Speaker! I will say as Gert Fylking said: Finally! It is about time that we now abolish this shit. Unfortunately, we cannot rejoice completely and fully. There is an ignorance about gaming as a cultural form and a form of entertainment. It is not about what is called gambling in English, it is about gaming.

In Sweden, we only talk about gambling. But there is an essential difference between gambling for money, gambling, and games that sometimes can cost money but that do not at all need to have money as a prize, or rather are not with money as a prize, that is, gaming.

Now the new requirements are coming. The flipper game law is being scrapped, admittedly. But now they are demanding cash registers for these machines instead. It has never existed in history; not even when it was significantly larger did it exist.

In the two exchanges I have had during the debate, this ignorance shines through. In the exchange with the representative from the Moderaterna, there was talk about gambling for money, problems with illegal gambling and slot machines. It is not at all about that type of cash register. Here, one is talking about gambling and not gaming, which the new legislation aims at.

In the exchange with the Social Democratic representative, it was talked about that it should curb gambling addiction among young people. In that case, one has not understood at all what it is about. It is said that one should look at the whole. But it would have been perfectly fine to break out this regulation on cash registers and not introduce it. It has nothing to do with gambling addiction among young people. It will only make it more difficult for cultural activities.

I understand that the overall legislation is good. Centerpartiet stands behind it. But the Socialdemokraterna did not have to submit proposals regarding this part at all. There were no requirements for it. No one suggested it. It was something of their own making. It simply would have gone significantly better without this.

I can only regret this. With this attitude, one makes the same equivalence as with pinball and arcade games. The lottery tickets at the church's Christmas bazaar this weekend are also something you pay money for, and furthermore, you can get a physical prize. It is a significantly greater risk than when I pay a little money to get a short experience. It is in that case also a gateway to youth substance abuse when my son plays on the chocolate wheel at Liseberg. It is significantly worse from this perspective.

I do not think that the Social Democrats, or for that matter the Moderates, want to abolish the chocolate wheels at Gröna Lund and Liseberg or the church's Christmas lotteries. But that is actually how the reasoning goes in this case. For me, it is completely unacceptable.

Mr. Speaker! There is not a single pinball machine in the world today that has a cash register or where one can install a cash register. The phenomenon of arcade games is also on the decline - unfortunately, I must say, as I think it is an exciting and interesting cultural form that is also worth preserving. Now, you are making it harder for them.

It is probably not possible to exhibit on the same scale as before if one introduces requirements that have never before existed, even though this has been significantly larger previously when it obviously was not a problem.

No impact assessment has been made. There is no description of the consequences of what it will lead to. For me, it is not only ignorant and inappropriate. It is culturally political madness. I do not understand the lack of understanding shown by the other parties. I understand their stance on gambling, but not on gaming. I move for approval of reservation 3.

I also want to give, perhaps above all the Moderaterna, who opened up to the possibility that there may be reason to review this, but also other parties, the chance to change their minds. In our [session] we will again treat the individual motions. Then this question will be included.

Now one has half a year to see: Is it sensible, really? We will have to see what consequences it will have. I know there is an industry and enthusiasts out there who think it is insane. They are terrified and will need to hold back with this type of game. We will have a poorer cultural life when the legislation goes through.

I promise that I will return to this debate. I expect the parties that stand behind the proposal to have read up, return, and change their minds.

(Applause)

A strengthened gambling regulation

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 19.)

The Swedish National Audit Office's report on the state's crisis support to sports and culture during the corona pandemic

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