A faster expansion of correctional facilities and detention centers

Leif Nysmed (S)

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats have no reservation regarding the committee's report CU25, but we have submitted a special statement, which I intend to elaborate on.

We note, just as the government does, that there is a shortage of space in correctional facilities and detention centers and that there is a need to be able to promptly expand the Swedish Prison and Probation Service's operations. We therefore see the need for legislative changes that can contribute to a faster expansion of the number of places. Against this background, we have chosen not to submit any follow-up motion.

When it comes to the authorization for the government to issue regulations and exemptions from PBL, we would however like to emphasize that this must be used with great restraint and with consideration of both municipal self-government as well as fundamental requirements for legal certainty and proportionality.

We will closely monitor how the government uses the authorization and what effects the reform has. If there are reasons to do so, we will also return with proposals in other contexts.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I want to point out once again that now is the time to take action. It has been four lost years for the construction sector – for everyone within this sector. We have halved housing construction. We have bankruptcies that are at record highs within the construction sector, and this continues even into 2026. We have over 10,000 unemployed construction workers in Byggnads akassa, and that is only a portion of all the unemployed. Despite the fact that many have left the construction industry, the figures are at record highs.

The construction workers who leave school and hope to get an apprenticeship do not get this today. Only 10 percent in Stockholm County received an apprenticeship employment after finishing school last year. It is a crisis – it is bad for the entire construction industry.

Much more could be said, but since the responsible minister is not present at the debates on the government's proposals, I will return with more in the interpellation debate that I have called the minister to on Thursday. It is a small cliffhanger for everyone who wants to participate in debating the crisis in the construction industry a bit more closely.

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

Amanda Palmstierna (MP)

Mr. Speaker, members and observers! The government wants to open up the possibility of bypassing the Planning and Building Act and proposes that the government should be granted the right to issue regulations on exemptions from provisions in the Planning and Building Act in order to arrange temporary correctional facilities and detention centers.

The Council on Legislation rejects the government's proposal. It is argued that this entails a departure from the democratic processes that the Planning and Building Act is based on. It is also argued that the consequences have not been investigated and cannot be assessed.

The government's proposal for exemptions from the Planning and Building Act differs, according to the Council on Legislation and according to the Green Party, from the exemptions that currently exist for extraordinary situations. The Council on Legislation argues that the current exemptions are characterized by the fact that they apply to situations that are difficult to foresee, for example the corona pandemic that hit Sweden and the world, while the current proposal is primarily a predictable consequence of the government's crime policy.

We in Miljöpartiet reject the government's proposal that the government should be granted the right to issue regulations on exemptions from certain provisions in the Planning and Building Act. We cannot see how the democratic processes that the Planning and Building Act is based on and the local self-government, which the government speaks so warmly for in so many other cases, can be bypassed in this way.

The proposal on the table means, as has been said, that the Planning and Building Act shall be able to be bypassed not only for extraordinary events that could not have been foreseen but also when the consequences have been known for a long time.

During this parliamentary term, the government has changed practice for the worse in several different ways. A new such practice is a forced and rapid legislative process where legislations become haphazard and where the government has made it a habit not to listen to experts and the Council on Legislation when legislative proposals are being prepared.

Mr. Speaker! This goes against the rule of law. We see a risk that a new practice is being opened up where the government bypasses the democratic processes of the Planning and Building Act. In that case, one should ask the question: What could the next step be expected to be?

With that, I move for the reservation to be granted.

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

Roger Hedlund (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Amanda Palmstierna, for your speech!

I note what is being said in the debate. The serious shortage of detention centers, prison places, and residential places that exists can be solved by the Tidö parties not implementing the increased penalties. It is also what the Council on Legislation points out can be done to avoid making exceptions in PBL in order to quickly produce new residential places and detention centers.

We are now hearing the same thing from Miljöpartiet, Mr. Speaker, but for ideological reasons. The path we are to take is, therefore, to stop the realignment of crime policy and oppose stricter penalties and thereby stop the expansion of institutions and prisons. It is the bureaucratic path we are to take, instead of choosing a fast track here to solve the shortage of prison and institution places.

The overcrowding we see today, Mr. Speaker, is extremely extensive. It is 140 percent overcrowding in institutions and 128 percent in prisons. How, as Amanda Palmstierna suggests, are we to solve this overcrowding without a fast track to produce new prison places and institution places?

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

Amanda Palmstierna (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Roger Hedlund, for your question!

We can see that the government during this mandate period has acted late in many different issues. Also in this issue, regarding the expansion of institutions and prisons, it has acted very late. That is why we see the desperate measure of opening up for relaxations in the Planning and Building Act. The government could have worked on this in a more orderly manner a long time ago, together with the municipalities where there is the same majority as the Tidö government has.

I also want to say that the government's proposal in the field of justice is not in line with what experts consider to be a good way to prevent and reduce crime. If one were to adopt available expert knowledge, it would look different.

When it comes to, for example, putting 13-year-olds in prison, which has been very much debated, we think it is much better that they are taken care of within Sis, where they are used to meeting children and young people and can offer children an equivalent schooling. When these children are in Sis homes and receive schooling, we believe they have the opportunity to move away from crime, instead of being in prison where they receive good knowledge on how they can continue with crime. It becomes, so to speak, a greenhouse that results in even more crime and an even worse situation in society.

If one were to take in the expert knowledge and what actually works, we would not need to be in today's situation.

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

Roger Hedlund (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Amanda Palmstierna, for your answer to my question! However, I can state that the reason we stand here today with overcapacity despite everything is the Socialdemokraternas and Miljöpartiets policy in Sweden for very many years, which has contributed to this development within the justice system.

That we today have people who need to be imprisoned is due to the fact that crime has been able to spread because there has been a lack of ability to counter it in Sweden and a lack of ability to understand the consequences of the Swedish immigration policy.

Mr. Speaker! Regarding the point that we should have had foresight in this matter and that the work should have started much earlier, as Amanda Palmstierna argues, I just want to inform that it takes between six and eleven years to build institutions. The responsibility for ensuring that the expansion was started lies with the Social Democratic and Green Party government that ruled during the previous mandate period. If it had been done, we would not have the overcrowding that we see in Sweden today.

That we are standing here and establishing a fast track to be able to get new detention and prison places is the consequence of the Social Democrats' and the Green Party's policy in this area. Therefore, it becomes a bit comical, I must say, Mr. Speaker, when one puts forward that argument – that it is the government together with the Tidö parties that has caused the overcrowding in the prisons in Sweden today.

On the other hand, I am proud that today we are forced to expand the facilities and detention places so significantly due to our increased penalties and our investments in the justice system.

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

Amanda Palmstierna (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Roger Hedlund, for your answer!

I think it would be better to be proud of actually reducing crime than of filling up our prisons. We see that if one had followed the experts' line, that is, what they say is the way we can reduce crime, then we would be in a different place today. Of course, those who commit crimes must be dealt with. That is absolutely the case. But the policy that the government is pursuing is not the most effective way to reduce crime. That is what we object to.

I am also thinking about this fact that the government constantly wants to link the wave of refugees with crime. I don't know if Roger Hedlund read Dagens Nyheter this morning. It says there that the municipalities have said no to this return migration train that the Tidö government wants to see because they simply live in a reality. How would we then get our elderly care homes to function and our healthcare to function? There are incredibly many people there who are educating themselves, who work and who build this country together with us. If we deported them, who would then take care of our elderly? The municipalities have a major problem with competence supply – also moderately-led municipalities in many cases.

There is a completely different way to go in a Sweden where we can work together and listen to what the experts say. Then we would end up in a completely different place.

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

Ludvig Ceimertz (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to pause for a moment regarding the overall picture of what Miljöpartiet is saying here.

Let us be clear about what you in Miljöpartiet are saying! You say no to accelerating the expansion through the proposals that are on the table here today. You say no to renting detention places abroad that could relieve the correctional services here and now. You say no to more foreign citizens serving their prison sentences in their home countries. You also say that there should be requirements for single cells within the correctional services, and that would severely diminish the capacity within the correctional services here and now.

Each of these positions can, of course, be discussed individually, but together they create a very clear effect. It is a policy that hits hard against the capacity in a system that is already very strained today.

Mr. Speaker! We have overcrowding already today. We know that more people are sentenced to prison. We know that more people are sentenced to longer prison terms as a result of necessary sentencing increases. We know that it takes a long time to build new facilities. Then one must also ask the decisive question of how this is to hang together.

No to building faster, no to temporary solutions and no to renting places abroad and furthermore demands for single cells – then in practice only one solution remains, and that is to lower the sentences. It is earlier releases, and it is that fewer are sentenced to prison. In a time when gross violence is still extensive and when gross organized crime is still large, is that really a line that Miljöpartiet takes responsibility for?

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

Amanda Palmstierna (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Ludvig Ceimertz, for the question!

The purpose of our crime policy is not to fill up prisons at all costs, but the purpose is to ensure that people move away from crime so that we do not need to fill up prisons in this way.

Of course, those who commit serious crimes should be taken into custody and not be on the streets where they can commit more crimes and threaten our citizens. But we see that the crime policy that the Tidö government is pursuing is not effective in preventing crime. And we have seen proposal after proposal where experts advise against it. But the Tidö government does not want to listen; instead, they would rather have a policy that sounds good on paper but does not work so well in reality. That is where the major dividing line lies. We want to ensure that people get out of criminality.

When it comes to increased penalties: Yes, it was needed. Now, criminal policy is not my area of expertise. It is the Planning and Building Act we are debating here, even if the member is bringing the debate into another area. But it is fundamentally the difference between our criminal policy and yours: Our policy is always, in all areas, based on what experts say.

It is not that we are saying that the Planning and Building Act should be stopped. The expansion is ongoing and continues to be ongoing. What we are saying is that this has been known for a long time. Then one should have been able to act in a different way at an earlier stage, but in proposal after proposal, the government has acted very late during this parliamentary term.

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

Ludvig Ceimertz (M)

Mr. Speaker! What effect has the government's crime policy had then? We have seen that lethal violence has been halved. We have seen that the number of shootings has decreased by 75 percent. It is a clear effect in a positive direction; I believe we can all agree on that.

But the fact remains that we already have overcrowding today, and that is largely due to the fact that the expansion started far too late. Despite the fact that the need was known and despite the fact that the need grew, a decision was made for 1,500 new places over an eight-year period.

Since the 2022 election, decisions have been made regarding 6,000 new places. That means that the pace has increased significantly, despite the fact that Member of Parliament Palmstierna wants to make it seem as though it is this government that has been sluggish.

But the fact remains that in a situation where we have overcrowding today, they say no to faster expansion. They say no to renting prison places abroad. They say no to foreign citizens serving their sentences in their home countries. They also demand that single cells should be the norm, which severely worsens the space situation.

In this situation, we must act, for example by building out faster and increasing the pace even further. That is why this bill is very important. But then the Green Party says no. Each position can, as said, be reasonable in itself and open for discussion. But together they form a whole that severely exacerbates the situation and which actually risks threatening the rule of law if an even more pressured situation arises in Sweden. I do not want to walk that path, Mr. Speaker.

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

Amanda Palmstierna (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for continued questions here, Ludvig Ceimertz!

When it comes to whether the government's crime policy is effective and whether it is based on experts, there are different parts. But what I am referring to here is putting 13-year-olds in prison, and there the member himself probably cannot even think that it is based on what the experts say. They have truly advised against it. A unanimous body of experts has highlighted that this is not a sensible way to go, without that this will increase crime. For example, one will not be able to ensure an equivalent schooling.

As said: The Planning and Building Act exists. It is still possible to expand. But one could have worked more collectively and with better foresight regarding these issues, together with a crime policy based on what the experts say and which thereby reduces crime.

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

Roger Hedlund (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We Tidö parties – that is, the Sweden Democrats and the government – are today jointly conducting an offensive crime policy with major reinforcements throughout the entire justice system chain. This ranges from new tools and new resources for the police, as well as more money and more people working within the authority, to what concerns the justice system and the courts, and further to more prison places and remand places.

More people in prison means that we need more places. Longer sentences also mean that we need more prison places. We are therefore here to discuss this now.

Due to the policy of the Sweden Democrats and the government, we have a high occupancy rate. That is to say, very many people are today sitting in these places in the prisons. The facilities today have an overcapacity of 140 percent and the detention centers an overcapacity of 128 percent. We are, therefore, facing an acute situation.

The forecast for the number of new prison places and remand places that need to be built by 2035 implies a doubling from today's levels. Taking this into account and the large expansion that is thus required, we must take into account that it currently takes between six and eleven years to build a facility. This means that we really need to establish fast-tracks for this.

We need to ensure that conditions are created for temporary prison places while waiting for the new facilities to arrive. This is carried out through time-limited building permits. We are therefore making this possible through a form of fast-track to produce more detention and prison places. This is important for the criminal policy shift that the Sverigedemokraterna, together with the other Tidö parties, are carrying out today.

In order for it to be practically possible to incarcerate the people who have been sentenced to prison, more prison places are needed. In the long run, we will of course have permanent prison places, but pending this, we need temporary solutions.

We also need to ensure that through local initiatives in the municipalities, good conditions are created to find locations where Kriminalvården can propose new institutions. It is also good when local initiatives regarding the issue arise. In Gävle, for example, we in Sverigedemokraterna submitted an initiative matter in October 2023 because we thought that Kriminalvården should be approached and informed about the critical situation we have in Gävle.

In Gävle we have a prison, we have an institution, we have a good labor market and we have good conditions to be able to expand the Prison and Probation Service's activities. When there are such great conditions as we in Gävle presented, we think that one should also start planning in order to be able to expand the institution in Gävle more quickly. However, it did not work, because the municipality's response was that they did not want to highlight this location because they considered that it is the Prison and Probation Service that should identify locations instead of the municipality highlighting them.

It was also not considered economically justifiable to take the initiative for the boards to begin planning for a new detailed plan for the area, in order for the municipality to be able to more quickly help arrange new sites for the correctional services.

That was the answer we received from the Social Democratic majority in Gävle municipality. So we cannot have that, because then we will get no good synergy effect between the Riksdag, regions, and municipalities to enable the entire criminal policy reorganization and produce more prison places in Sweden today.

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

Ludvig Ceimertz (M)

Mr. Speaker! For all too long, the gross criminality was allowed to grow ever stronger in Sweden. The gangs became more numerous and the violence more brutal, and during the dark record year 2022, we had more than one shooting a day.

The Moderate-led government has therefore fundamentally restructured crime policy, from previously having a focus on the perpetrator to now having a focus on the crime victims and on society's need for protection. The plan is clear: to strike against gross violence, strangle the criminal economy, and break the new recruitment of children and young people.

Mr. Speaker! This is fulfilled with concrete politics. We have given the police new tools: preventive coercive measures, security zones, and expanded camera surveillance. We are tearing down secrecy barriers so that authorities can act together, and we are striking at the criminal economy through expanded coercive measures, strengthened opportunities to seize criminal profits, and new structures against subsidy fraud and money laundering.

We are now carrying out the largest reform of criminal law since the Penal Code's inception. We are increasing the penalties for a large number of crimes, we ensure that the entire sentencing scale shall be used, and we abolish quantity discounts. We make it possible to sentence gang criminals to double prison sentences, and we tighten the rules for parole. We also introduce preventive detention so that the most dangerous repeat offenders can be kept locked up for a long period.

Mr. Speaker! This has already yielded results. The deadly violence has been halved. The shootings have decreased significantly – by 75 percent since 2022 – and more seriously criminal individuals are being prosecuted and kept off our streets.

It does, however, have consequences. When more people are sentenced, and when more are sentenced to longer terms, more places within the Prison and Probation Service are also required to uphold this in a legally secure manner and with high quality so that recidivism in crime can be reduced.

We must be honest; the expansion of the criminal justice system started far too late. For many years, too little was built. There is great reason for self-criticism for the previous Social Democratic government, which did not get the construction started.

This government has taken action. We have already made decisions on over 6,000 new places across Sweden. New is being built, expansion is being built, and doubling is being done. The criminal justice system's budget has more than doubled, and the expansion is already occurring at a pace that Sweden has not seen before. However, it is not enough. We must increase the pace even further if we are to be able to do this in a legally secure manner.

We do more than just build. For example, we have signed an agreement with Estonia to temporarily rent 600 prison places at the prison in Tartu. By renting places abroad, we can relieve the correctional services here and now.

Despite much having been done, the situation is strained. The occupancy is high, the pressure is increasing, and a central challenge is that it takes too long to build new.

It is here that this bill comes in and does good. We ensure that it becomes easier to use time-limited building permits for institutions and prisons. This means that municipalities, even when the need is not temporary, can say yes to construction on the condition that the site can be restored and that the measure fundamentally meets the requirements for a permanent building permit.

It is an important change, because today such building permits can often be rejected on the grounds that the need is not considered temporary. Now, instead, an opportunity is opened to get started earlier and without having to wait for a complete planning process. This means that construction can be started faster, while basic requirements for suitability and reversibility remain fixed.

These permits can also apply for longer – up to 20 years. This gives the Prison and Probation Service a significant opportunity to use temporary solutions in a good way while permanent facilities can be expanded in the background. This creates stability in the planning and makes it possible to actually invest in such solutions instead of working solely in the short term and with less effective alternatives.

We also give the government an authorization to, in an emergency, decide on temporary exemptions from the Planning and Building Act. It is about being able to simplify or temporarily deviate from certain requirements for building permits or planning processes in order to quickly establish new sites where the need is greatest. This shall be used when there is an acute and tangible risk of a serious shortage of sites that risks compromising legal certainty.

This is time-limited and shall be proportionate, which is also clearly stated. It is therefore not a new normal. It is about creating a necessary state of readiness to ensure that the rule of law functions even in a very pressured situation.

Mr. Speaker! During this parliamentary term, we have moved the positions in the fight against crime. We have tightened the penalties and given the justice system more tools, and we now see how more serious criminals are prosecuted and kept off our streets. But we must also ensure that those sentenced to prison can serve their sentences. The rule of law must function all the way, not just up to the judgment but also to the execution.

This is what this bill is about. It does not only concern a part of the Planning and Building Act, but this is part of a whole where we ensure that the reforms we implement actually work in practice. Ultimately, it is about something much larger than building permits and processes: It is about crimes having consequences, crime victims getting justice, and laws being upheld.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move for the approval of the bill.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 29 April.)

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