Stronger protection for the civilian population during high alert
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns strengthening civil defense and the protection of the civilian population during high alert. SD believes that the state has a fundamental responsibility to protect citizens and advocates for stricter supervision, the introduction of protected spaces, and clearer distribution of responsibility 1. S argues that civil defense has been neglected and that the state must take a clearer national responsibility for funding and resources 2. M considers the proposal to be a decisive and well-balanced step 3. C wants the need to be planned early and requests clear governance from the government 4. MP supports the government's main direction but believes that the state must have the primary responsibility for maintenance 5. V are critical of the accessibility and demand sharper wording 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Björn Söder (SD)
Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the Committee on Defence's report on stronger protection for the civilian population during high alert.
This is an important report. It is ultimately about the state's fundamental responsibility to protect its citizens. In a time when Europe's security situation has deteriorated, war is raging again on our continent and the threats to civil societies have become increasingly tangible, Sweden must also strengthen its civil defense.
For a long time, some in this chamber lived in the belief that war was something distant, something that belonged to history. Despite many warnings, not least from us in Sverigedemokraterna, the preparedness was dismantled. Experiences from previous generations were forgotten, and important systems were allowed to decay. But reality has caught up. We now see clearly that peace and freedom can never be taken for granted. Therefore, we must build a robust society – a society that functions even under the most difficult pressures.
Madam Speaker! A central part of this work is the protection of the civilian population. Sweden today has around 64,000 shelters with space for approximately 7 million people. It is an asset that many other countries lack. But we also know that large parts of the stock are old, that cities have grown and changed, and that today's threat picture looks different than when many shelters were built. It is therefore wise that the government now proposes a new, modern law on shelters and protected spaces. It is not enough to lean on old structures. We must adapt to the reality we live in today.
The report involves several important improvements.
Firstly, the control of existing shelters is strengthened. This is absolutely crucial. A shelter that only exists on paper protects no one. If doors do not work, ventilation is missing, or equipment is unusable, fine registers or old decisions do not help. Therefore, sharper supervision, clearer responsibility, and requirements for maintenance are needed.
Secondly, the possibility of so-called protected spaces is introduced. This can involve tunnels, basements, and other underground facilities that can provide a limited but still important protection. It is common sense. In a sharp situation, society must be able to use all reasonable resources to protect people, not just traditional shelters.
For the third, the distribution of responsibility regarding evacuation and accommodation is clarified. If people need to leave their homes, there must be planning, leadership, and order. Municipalities, county administrative boards, and other actors need to know what applies before the crisis arrives so that one does not start discussing responsibility when the danger is already here.
I want to particularly highlight the importance of information to the general public. The proposal in the report means that the municipalities shall inform the residents about which shelters and protected spaces exist and how these can be used. This is very good. Preparedness is not just about buildings and legal paragraphs. Preparedness is also about knowledge. Do people know where they should go? Do they know what applies during an alarm? Do they know how they should act? If the answer is no, we have deficiencies that must be corrected.
We have sometimes in Sweden been afraid to speak plainly about threats and risks, but the citizens deserve the truth. A mature society informs, prepares, and strengthens its population.
Madam Speaker! There are those who object to the costs. Yes, preparedness costs money. But a lack of preparedness always costs more. It costs in the form of chaos, insecurity, and suffering – and in the worst case, human lives. We therefore need to see investments in the protection of the civilian population as exactly that: investments. They provide security, resilience, and freedom of action. A country that can protect its population is also a country that stands stronger against pressure and attacks.
For Sweden, this is also about the will to defend. When people know that the state takes their security seriously, trust is strengthened. Then, the will to defend the country together is also strengthened.
Madam Speaker! Sweden is now rebuilding the total defense. The military defense is being upgraded, but the civil defense must go hand in hand with this. Soldiers defend the territory, but a society is also defended through functioning electricity supply, healthcare, transport, food supply, and protection for civilians. This report is therefore an important piece of a larger work. It does not solve everything, but it takes Sweden in the right direction.
We need more preparedness, more realism and more accountability. And we need a Sweden where people know that the state stands ready when the worst happens.
With this, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and rejection of all reservations.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! Sweden's security is determined not only by military capability but also by how well society functions when it is subjected to pressures, whether people know where to seek shelter, whether municipalities have the conditions to act, and whether there is a clear overall responsibility – all the way through. That is why the protection of the civilian population is a central part of the total defense, and that is why this committee report is so important to debate.
We Social Democrats share the view that civil defense has been neglected for a long time. There is no doubt that the shelter system needs to be reviewed and that issues of responsibility need to be clarified. But for that very reason, the solutions we decide upon must also hold up in practice.
There are parts of the government's bill that are necessary and correct. That the regulatory framework is modernized, that the responsibility for information is clarified, and that the protection of the civilian population is more clearly linked to the total defense concept is an absolute step forward. But a strong civil defense requires more than good intentions. It requires feasibility, and it requires that responsibility and resources go hand in hand.
Madam Speaker! One of the weaknesses in the proposal is precisely that the state places an extensive responsibility on municipalities and property owners without fully taking responsibility for the financing and the practical conditions. We know that Sweden's municipalities look very different. They have different economic conditions, different settlement structures, and different capacities.
When the state delegates a central part of civil defense to local levels without sufficient funding, there is an obvious risk that the protection of the civilian population will become unequal. People's safety during high alert may then come to be determined by where they live. This is not reasonable, and it is not compatible with the idea of equal protection for the entire population. Civil defense must not become a patchwork.
Madam Speaker! A robust civil defense ultimately rests on trust. People must feel a confidence in society – that society is there even when things are difficult. They must know what is expected of them but also what they can expect from the state. That trust is not created by the state pushing responsibilities down the system and hoping it works out. It is created through clear national governance, long-term funding, and an accountability that holds even when the pressure increases.
That is precisely why it is problematic that this proposal lacks sufficient answers on how municipalities are to manage the task over time. Protection of the civilian population is not a project; it is a permanent societal function.
Here we consider the Social Democrats' follow-up motion and the upcoming reservations to be important. They take their starting point in the protection of the civilian population and in the fact that this is an overarching national responsibility. We point to the need for a consequence analysis of this extremely important area in order to ensure clarity regarding state funding, better national coordination, and a long-term perspective that ensures equality throughout the country.
I want to be clear: It is not about slowing down necessary reforms, on the contrary. It is, Madam Speaker, about ensuring that this can actually be implemented – in everyday life, in crisis, and in times of high alert.
Madam Speaker! Civil defense does not begin when the alarm sounds. It is built here and now, through information, exercise, functioning structures, and clarity.
When the distribution of responsibility becomes unclear or when resources are not in proportion to the task, we risk undermining the resilience we so much need.
It is also a question of geographical justice. A child in a smaller municipality should have the same right to protection as a child in a large city and vice versa. The level of protection cannot be determined by a municipal budget or by who happens to own the property where one has their home.
Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats support the goal of strengthening the protection of the civilian population. But we believe that it requires the state to take a clearer responsibility, not just in words but in action. Therefore, I move for the approval of reservation 1 and reservation 6. The protection of the civilian population is a national task. Then the overall responsibility must also be national all the way.
Alexandra Anstrell (M)
Madam Speaker! Sweden is in a very turbulent time with difficult-to-assess threats and rapid changes in our global environment. The threat to Sweden is largely linked to what is happening outside the country's borders. War, conflicts, and tensions in the world affect our country, and much indicates that this will continue even in the coming years, which will be characterized by great uncertainty.
What for a long time was considered unlikely – war in our immediate vicinity, Europe – is today a reality. In that situation, one thing is clear: A strong total defense begins with protecting the civilian population.
The report we are considering today, FöU12 A stronger protection for the civilian population during high alert, is therefore not just a technical legislative proposal; it is a decisive step in the reconstruction of our civil defense – a civil defense that for a long time was largely dismantled but which we are now making historical investments in. The government is therefore now carrying out the largest upgrade of our total defense since the 1950s.
Madam Speaker! The proposal in the bill entails three important improvements. Firstly, we get modern legislation on shelters and protected spaces. This is necessary because today's system in many parts is adapted for a different security situation. Secondly, we strengthen the planning for evacuation and accommodation. Ultimately, it is about people knowing what applies and that society can actually manage to act when needed. Thirdly, we take a holistic approach to civil defense. Shelters, other protected spaces, and evacuation shall function together, not individually. They need to complement each other.
Madam Speaker! As a Moderate in the Committee on Defence for nearly eight years, it feels good to me that this is finally being put in place. We have debated shelters many times, and I can think that it is actually more than just a legal text.
When it comes to civil defense and the protection of our population, it is about the trust that the state and the municipality will protect its citizens, that the municipality can take responsibility and that society will function during both crisis and war, i.e., even under the most difficult conditions.
A modern war does not only hit military targets. It is very clear in Ukraine how it hits civil society. It hits cities, infrastructure and people. Therefore, we must take responsibility for a stronger protection of the civilian population.
Ukraine has taught us a lot and continues to teach us. I was there a couple of weeks ago. It was moving in many respects. I asked a question about what they do when the alarm goes off and everyone has to go down into the shelter. If someone is in a wheelchair, how do they do it? They help each other. Yes, but if someone is old and needs help, how do they do it? They help each other. It is very nice and actually quite obvious.
Naturally, one can place more demands on this legislative text, that it should be more and suit more. But, Madam Speaker, the proposal is well-considered. It is based on sound investigations, broad referral processing and a clear analysis of today's threat situation. It is not the final point, but it is an important and necessary step that it is good that we take right now.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I would like to move for the approval of the committee's proposal in its entirety and the rejection of all reservations.
Mikael Larsson (C)
Madam Speaker! The protection of the civilian population is something that Ukraine has had to work enormously on since Russia's full-scale invasion. Now that total defense planning is in full swing in Sweden, it is also an important issue for us here. From the Center Party's side, I will raise several important areas in today's debate on shelters, accessibility, and availability across the entire country.
Madam Speaker! It is welcome that the government, through its bill, is now presenting a new law on civil protection. The Centre Party considers this to be important and has motioned extensively on it in the Riksdag during previous parliamentary periods.
An important part of civil protection is that it must cover the entire population. The Centre Party therefore considers, in line with what is stated in some referral responses, that issues of accessibility must be taken most seriously. When it comes to new shelters being built, the Centre Party argues that they shall be accessible for persons with disabilities. If the existing stock of shelters is to be renovated and refreshed, it is also possible to make them accessible for more people.
Madam Speaker! Information is A and O. It is important that Sweden's inhabitants know where the shelters are located, and it is important that different actors – property owners, state and municipality – inform about this. Likewise, it is important that the information should reach everyone and be available in several different languages and in plain Swedish.
Madam Speaker! As the Centre Party has previously stated, there are, against the background of the deteriorated security situation, strong reasons to review and strengthen the security for civilians during high alert and, in the worst case, war. Not least, it is important to review where in Sweden the protection of the civilian population is lacking today. There are areas and locations in the country where the shelters are very few or even completely lacking.
Of course, there are towns and places where, for obvious reasons, there are specific needs for high capacity in civil defense. But it is as the Swedish Defence University points out among others: "Against the background of, among others, the Russian attack against Ukraine, it is difficult to point out in advance areas that have less need for shelters." This means that people throughout the country, in cities and perhaps in larger localities in rural areas, need to know where they can take shelter.
Centerpartiet makes the assessment that shelters in several parts of the country will be needed in light of this and considers that the government should return to the Riksdag with a statement on how it intends to provide for this.
Madam Speaker! When it comes to amendments to the Planning and Building Act, the Center Party sees a need that even in an early planning process, for example in a larger development, one can plan for the need for new shelters. Preferably, even before one has reached as far as a building permit case, one should have an idea of what the need looks like regarding civil defense around the country. This requires close contacts between municipalities and responsible authorities.
The need for guidelines, advice, and support is obvious, especially in light of the concern that the legislative changes will lead to more protracted building permit processes, as some referral bodies point out.
When one has reached the point where the building permit is to be applied for and the house is to be constructed, the question of shelters should be able to be handled expeditiously. This means, of course, that the government in this area needs to be clear in its guidance of the relevant authorities.
Madam Speaker! In light of this – and linked to our follow-up motion which is being addressed in this committee report – we think it is important and good that this has come and that it is very well delivered. But we have reservations.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I would like to move for approval of the Center Party's reservation number 5.
Ulf Holm (MP)
Madam Speaker! It is the serious security policy situation that lies behind what the Riksdag has to debate today, namely the report A stronger protection for the civilian population during high alert.
This is an important issue. It is an important part of building up the Swedish total defense, and it is needed in this very serious security policy situation. We have heard several speakers who have touched upon this. In Ukraine, there is experience of how important it is to protect the civilian population in the war that is currently ongoing.
From the Green Party's side, we stand behind the main direction in the government's proposal regarding new legislation concerning shelters and protected spaces. It is absolutely necessary to update the legislation in this area in light of the global situation.
Today there are 64,000 shelters with space for 7 million individuals. That is not enough for everyone. Therefore, it is good that the new legislation concerns the development of so-called protected spaces. Protected spaces include, for example, subways, road tunnels, and other underground facilities, such as basements. The protected spaces are primarily located in large cities. It is also primarily there that shelters are currently lacking. Exactly how this is to be designed, the government will return to later on, and we hope that it will be a good solution to this.
Madam Speaker! Today's shelters are not in the best condition. A major task is therefore to inspect existing shelters and to carry out maintenance and improvements of them. This concerns everything from ventilation spaces to how they should function in practice. This is an important part of the upgrading of the civil defense.
Several referral bodies have pointed out that the state must take a greater overall responsibility for the implementation of this work. Miljöpartiet shares this opinion. The state has a responsibility in the matter and cannot delegate to the municipalities to carry out this without the state taking a financial responsibility. Municipalities look very different and have very different conditions. Therefore, the state must have a primary responsibility for this.
Madam Speaker! In the government's proposal, an important issue has been missed, namely the protection of persons with disabilities. Sweden is, according to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, obliged to, among other things, take necessary measures to ensure protection and safety for persons with disabilities in risk situations, including in armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies, and natural disasters.
Few shelters are however today adapted for persons with disabilities. The Government notes in the bill that the Swedish Civil Defence Authority's mission, according to the current ordinance, to work towards ensuring that shelters are accessible, shall continue to apply. At the same time, the Government states that, based on how today's shelter stock looks, it cannot be guaranteed that all existing shelters are accessibility-adapted or can even be accessibility-adapted. The Government also notes that even in new construction, it cannot be guaranteed in every individual case that shelters will become accessibility-adapted.
I share the government's view that it is not possible to guarantee that all shelters are accessible, but the government's level of ambition is far too low in this area.
Madam Speaker! In this matter, we have a reservation. To my and the Miljöpartiets joy, the government has already complied with parts of the criticism because an investigation has now been commissioned in this matter. The day after the committee adjusted the report, it was decided to task the Authority for Civil Defence with increasing the protection for persons with disabilities in the event of a crisis or war. The Authority has been tasked to map the accessibility in the country's shelters and produce a methodological support for municipalities and regions. This is a welcome announcement. I believe the investigation should be completed by 2027.
Madam Speaker! The Government highlights in the bill that municipalities shall, through the bill, have an obligation to provide information to their residents and that, within the scope of this, they should be able to provide accessible information about which shelters are adapted for persons with disabilities. That is good, but at the same time we know that even today there are significant deficiencies in society's ability to reach persons with disabilities with important information in a crisis. It is therefore important that the obligation to provide information does not only include where accessible shelters are located. It is also about emphasizing that the municipalities shall ensure that the information is available in a way that allows persons to utilize it. This can, for example, mean information in easy-to-read Swedish, sign language interpretation, braille, or audio reading.
With that, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the Environment Party's reservation number 4.
Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)
Madam Speaker! We live in a serious security situation. The Swedish total defense has been rebuilt and strengthened during recent years. The most important thing during major crises and wars is to protect the population from dangers. For that, it requires, among other things, healthcare with sufficient resources to receive many patients, rescue services with sufficient resources to extinguish fires and save lives, as well as shelters where the population can take cover during attacks.
The government has proposed a new law on shelters and protected spaces. That is good. But the bill is not good enough when it comes to accessibility for persons with disabilities. The experiences and knowledge of disability organizations must be better taken into account in the work that is done moving forward. We in Vänsterpartiet urge everyone to read the referral responses and comments from the disability rights organization DHR, which expresses great concern regarding the lack of a disability rights perspective in the bill.
The Government does indeed note in the bill that the Civil Defence Agency shall work to ensure that the shelters are accessible for persons with disabilities. However, it is not assessed as possible to accommodate the views put forward by DHR, and the Government only wishes to consider the views within the framework of the upcoming work. Vänsterpartiet argues that this is not sufficient and that a sharper wording should have been included in the Government's proposal. That there are accessible shelters and protected spaces for persons with disabilities must be a self-evident starting point for all actors working with the issue. This must, however, be arranged without it, as the Government fears, leading to a reduction in the number of shelter places in total.
Crisis preparedness and civil defense must have a clear accessibility perspective. This applies to things such as access to shelters, electricity supply to charge assistive devices such as wheelchairs, healthcare and medicines, the possibility to bring leadership and assistance dogs, as well as information both in advance and during serious incidents. It is society that must be responsible for ensuring that this perspective is included in crisis preparedness and total defense, not the individual or the organizations within the disability rights movement.
Sweden has a large number of old shelters that for a long time have neither been inspected nor renovated. The shelters are usually not built with accessibility for people with different forms of disabilities in mind, even though the purpose of the shelters is to provide protection for all different people, especially those people who need society's help and protection the most. It will unfortunately not be possible to rebuild all shelters so that they have high accessibility. During inspections of shelters, requirements should therefore be placed on the property owner to remedy any simpler deficiencies in terms of accessibility for people with disabilities.
We believe that the government should task the Authority for Civil Defence to work towards ensuring that there are shelters and protected spaces available for persons with disabilities. This is something we in Vänsterpartiet believe the Riksdag should stand behind and make known to the government. I therefore move for approval of reservation number 2.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.