Defense and society's crisis preparedness

Jörgen Berglund (M)

Madam Speaker! It has been almost two years since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and the war continues with great suffering for the Ukrainian people. The losses are enormous, with hundreds of thousands of injured and dead on both sides.

Russia has violated almost all international agreements and treaties and has not even hesitated to attack civilian targets, for example hospitals. The Russian regime does not seem to hesitate at anything when it comes to subjugating Ukraine. Therefore, it is important not only that Ukraine triumphs in this war but also that Russia loses. If the Russian regime feels that they emerge victorious from a future ceasefire, the Russian bear will rest only for a short time and thereafter set its sights on the next country, and that obviously must not happen.

Defense and society's crisis preparedness

Madam Speaker! It is therefore of the utmost importance that Sweden, the EU and the rest of the free world continue their support for Ukraine and consistently work for a victory for freedom, democracy and human rights.

The Moderate-led government has, since taking office just over a year ago, taken this issue most seriously and almost tenfold increased the support to Ukraine, from 2 billion to over 20 billion kronor. We have also sent our most advanced materiel, for example the artillery system Archer. In an article in Svenska Dagbladet yesterday, Ukrainian soldiers and commanders who have been given access to the system were interviewed, and they called it a power machine.

Swedish support is making a difference in Ukraine. Therefore, it is incredibly gratifying that the support in this chamber for the line the government is pursuing is complete and compact. Let us continue on this path together.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is in the most serious security policy situation since the Second World War. Russia's aggression in Ukraine is obviously the biggest reason, but unfortunately, there are more dark clouds on the horizon. I am thinking primarily of the war in the Middle East between Israel and the terrorist organization Hamas and the tensions in the Pacific region. I also think of what has happened, in or rather under the surface of, the Baltic Sea with damage to important infrastructure in the form of cables and pipes. This also affects our security situation.

Against this background, it feels extra good and secure to be able to state that the government's budget allocation for expenditure area 6 is increased and will amount to 126 billion kronor in 2024. Sweden will thus already reach NATO's goal next year. But the goal of 2 percent according to the agreement entered into by all eight parties on March 16, 2022, obviously remains firm and must be achieved as soon as possible.

Madam Speaker! Crowns and öres are important, but increased capability is what counts. Therefore, it is good that the government has also signaled that a new defense decision will be moved forward and made in the Riksdag as early as the end of next year.

Madam Speaker! We build security best together with others. The upcoming Nato membership is important not only for Sweden but also for our neighbors and other members in Nato. Sweden will as a member strengthen Nato, and Nato will strengthen Sweden.

Sent last night Swedish time, the undersigned Defence Minister Pål Jonson, together with his American colleague Lloyd Austin, signed an important agreement, a so-called DCA, defence cooperation agreement. This shall facilitate cooperation between Sweden and the USA and make it possible for the USA to, in advance and with clear legal rules of engagement in Sweden, train, conduct joint exercises, preposition materiel, and so on. Together we build and secure freedom, democracy and human rights.

Madam Speaker! Defense and security are far from just military capabilities. Civil capabilities, robustness, endurance, and resilience throughout society are crucial for us to withstand if a war were also to hit Sweden.

What we call civil defense is anything but military defense. Here, each one of us plays an important role. We can and shall, as individual citizens, prepare ourselves to manage on our own for a period during, for example, major societal disruptions, such as a war or various types of peacetime crises.

But of course, this is only one part. Together, we play, and what we call society plays a decisive role. I am therefore proud that the government has taken the questions surrounding civil defense most seriously and, with high speed, taken on the task of building up Sweden's civil defense again.

A symbol of that—it is not, however, a symbolic act, so do not misunderstand me now—is that the government has appointed a minister for civil defense. This also points out that it is important to be able to focus on these important issues which otherwise easily drown among questions about tanks, boots, and ammunition.

To mention a few things, the government has started the Total Defence Business Council, which is to build up the relations between public Sweden and the private business sector, which many times has the resources we need in a crisis or a war. The government has also started the work of reactivating civil duty within the rescue services and repair readiness as a first step. In the field of cybersecurity, a lot is happening. A cyber campus at KTH is underway. An international cybersecurity envoy representing Sweden internationally is also underway, as is the work to get greater power and coordination in the national cybersecurity center. The government has additionally gathered the issues within the Ministry of Defence for better coordination.

Madam Speaker! The government's policy in this expenditure area does not stop there. Even initiatives and reforms for innovation and technological development are in full swing. Sweden is at the forefront in several of these areas, but in order for us to be able to continue to stay at the top, the work must be further developed.

The supply preparedness regarding food, healthcare, medicines, etc., are areas that are important for society to be able to function. Several of these areas have just been investigated or are being investigated. Some of these pieces of the puzzle are being prepared right now in the Government Offices. We do this in order to be able to secure Sweden in the event of a crisis, high alert, or ultimately war.

Madam Speaker! The defense budget has doubled in four years and tripled since 2014, from 40 to 60 to 126 billion. It is strong and shows the direction we need to go in. But now is not the time to pat ourselves on the back. Now we must continue to convert these funds into increased capability, strengthened resilience and readiness. The pace of the capability increase must be raised, primarily in civil defense. Municipalities, regions and the business sector must come on board. That is how we build Sweden strong again. That is how we build Sweden safer, greener and freer.

(Applause)

In this speech, Helena Bouveng, Gustaf Göthberg and Oskar Svärd (all M) concurred.

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Defence's report 24 on defence and society's crisis preparedness.

I want to begin by referring to the fact that the Social Democrats have a specific statement in this report that we stand behind. We also have two reservations, but for the sake of time, I only move for approval of reservation 2.

For us Social Democrats, the principle of total defense has always been the foundation of defense and security policy. When Social Democratic governments during the post-war period built up one of the world's strongest defenses and developed some of the world's most advanced operational systems, it was the idea of total defense that was fundamental.

After the change of government in 2014, when the S-led government began a powerful buildup, it also applied to the entire total defense. This has constituted a good basis for the application for membership in Nato. Now, Ulf Kristersson's government has taken over and continued this development based on decisions in the Defense Consultative Council.

We Social Democrats agree with the government on the appropriations in the budget. This means that just over 126 billion from the state budget next year will go to defense and the society's crisis preparedness. Taken together, it means that the Armed Forces' economic resources over a ten-year period increase by more than 150 percent. But just as the previous speaker said, we must continue the development. We must also ensure that the increased resources are even more clearly linked to stronger operational capability.

In most areas of the report, we are in complete agreement with the government. However, we have a partially different direction and have therefore submitted a separate statement. In our extensive committee motion, we present our holistic view on the future development of civil and military defense. The background to our positions includes, among other things, experiences of the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine. Linked to these and the situation in Africa, we demand that the Wagner Group be classified as a terrorist organization.

Regarding the development of the war in Ukraine, it is also natural to emphasize the importance of continuing to develop the army and the army's brigades, this so that we can both contribute operationally to NATO's operational capability and at the same time manage the land defense of Sweden. We therefore point to the need to establish two new regiments in the future, one in Kiruna and one in Kvarn. At the same time, we point out that we must continue the investments to strengthen the military presence on Gotland.

We also say that the personnel are the Armed Forces' gold and most important resource. We believe that the goal must be to train 10,000 conscripts annually by 2030 at the latest. We want to increase the Home Guard's strength to 25,000 soldiers. For us, equality and inclusion are fundamental requirements for the Armed Forces' future composition.

The experiences from the war in Ukraine also clearly show the civil defense's important role in times of war. A fundamental part of civil defense is a strong civil society. A population that is well-organized and well-informed contributes to strengthening societal functions, upholding democracy, and building resilience against disinformation.

We also see that Nordic cooperation is becoming increasingly important for defending our immediate area. We therefore propose that a Nordic defense commission be established with parliamentary anchoring so that we can jointly develop defense and security policy.

Madam Speaker! The Swedish defense industry is knowledge-intensive and is of great importance for employment opportunities in the country. Swedish-made combat aircraft and submarines manufactured at home in Blekinge are specifically developed for the conditions prevailing in our part of the world. It is therefore important that the expertise and the jobs are retained within the country.

In our committee motion, we propose an investigation to acquire an additional submarine, and we emphasize the importance of Swedish competence within next-generation combat aircraft. To secure the supply of materiel during crisis and war, we recommend a defense industrial strategy and state influence and control over essential security systems.

Madam Speaker! It has now been 650 days since Russia started the illegal large-scale war of aggression in and against Ukraine. It is 650 days of despicable war, human suffering, and death. We unfortunately believe it is likely that the war will continue for a long time, which we mean requires very long-term planning from the side of the Western world and the EU.

The support packages Sweden has contributed to Ukraine so far are important for long-term security in our part of the world. We are prepared to contribute to strengthening Ukraine's air defense. This can be done, among other things, by providing access to the Jas Gripen system.

We want to be clear: We Social Democrats say that Sweden shall continue to support Ukraine as long as it is needed!

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, Sweden finds itself in the most serious security policy situation since the Second World War. Anti-democratic forces with great capacity for violence, both within and outside the country's borders, threaten Swedish lives and our interests, our democracy, and our freedom.

For us Social Democrats, it is a self-evident matter that Sweden shall have a total defense of the Swedish people, for the Swedish people. It is large sums of money that are now being invested in defense. At the same time, we see increased inequalities in our society. There is a healthcare crisis in the regions, and several municipalities are forced to save on the most important thing we have: our future - the children and the schools.

The expansion of the defense shall concern the entire people and be borne fairly. The needs in welfare, the fight against crime, and the finances of ordinary families should not have to take a backseat so that we can manage the important and necessary upgrade of the total defense. We therefore want a readiness tax to be introduced to finance the expansion of the defense.

I want to move for approval of reservation 2 with this. I also want to thank all personnel within the Armed Forces and all veterans and wish them, the secretariat, and the speakers a very Merry Christmas.

(Applause)

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! Member Björklund speaks with great commitment about the defense industry. I appreciate that.

The Social Democrats believe that the state should take greater control over the development of the defense industry, and in the debate the question has been raised whether the state should purchase shares in Saab and become a partial owner in order to provide more capital.

At the same time, the Social Democrats support the ethical principle that defense materiel should be regarded as equally morally reprehensible as pornography, tobacco, and gambling. It is a principle that several state actors agree with and which is also a guiding principle in several regions, most recently in Region Stockholm where the member's party friends pushed through that the ethical principle shall continue to apply.

At the same time as Ukrainian soldiers fight with Swedish weapons in their hands, the Social Democrats are saying that defense materiel is as bad as pornography, but that it is nevertheless something the state should become a shareholder in. To me, this appears as double standards, and I would like the member to clarify for us where the Social Democrats stand on the issue.

I know that the conditions for changing these principles are being discussed now in several parties, and discussions are also being held in the Government Offices. Saab would get significantly better conditions to access capital if we stopped moralizing and instead showed how proud we are. I believe the member shares my pride in the Swedish defense industry.

Can we have this investigated by the member?

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Starbrink, for the question! I am not sure that I can clarify all the details. We have previously, not least in our committee, discussed the defense industry and the classification and titling regarding the poor operations. There, we Social Democrats have exactly the same view. This I can assure Member Starbrink.

We also had a discussion in Almedalen where I myself participated and said that we will do what we can to contribute to changing this. How individual regions have acted, I unfortunately do not have insight into, but we are happy to contribute to the discussion.

When it comes to the defense industry and any potential state influence or involvement, whether it includes shares or not, we have not stated exactly how it should be done. We gladly welcome more proposals to find a consensus on this.

We are concerned that rapid changes are occurring in the world. Ownership structures can change, which could mean that we lose control over our important defense industry. It is with that insight that we want there to be a state commitment.

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer! Then perhaps we can work together to change the rules which, in my opinion, are moralistic and hinder positive development.

It is about state actors such as Miljömärkning Sverige, which takes a hard line when it comes to Swan labeling of, for example, funds. It is also about the Pensions Agency, which also regards weapons as something just as ugly and dirty as pornography. This is a position that does not rhyme with the common will we have here in the Riksdag to support Ukraine with more weapons and not least with more ammunition.

Now I want to urge the members to push forward on this issue so that we can jointly achieve a change. I believe it is important that private capital can enter the defense industry, because the pace is too slow. A significantly larger production is needed, and in that case, I am not sure that the state as an owner or increased state control is the fastest or even the most desirable way to solve this.

I hope for the member's continued support in this work.

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, member, for the continuation of the question!

We believe that it is for precisely this reason that we need to have a defense industrial strategy. We welcome a collaboration with, among others, the Liberals and perhaps the entire committee on this issue, because we believe that it is necessary.

It can be more private capital, but perhaps also state-owned. What we are seeing right now is not a lack of capital but a lack of personnel to both produce and fill the needs we have ourselves, and to sell to the rest of the world. We therefore need to increase the pace of production, and we believe that we need to have a good defense industrial strategy for this.

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

Jörgen Berglund (M)

Madam Speaker and Heléne Björklund! Let me first state that, regarding what we are discussing today, we are in agreement on several points. That is good, and it provides long-term perspective and stability for Sweden in the important issues we are now discussing.

That is why I, even though I perhaps should not be, was surprised that the chairman of the Committee on Defence, Peter Hultqvist, who is a party colleague of Heléne Björklund, thinks that we should nationalize Saab.

Socialists usually like to own things themselves. However, I am not a socialist but a Moderate, and I believe in free enterprise and the private business sector. Therefore, I want to ask a question. I do not understand how the Social Democrats have come to the conclusion that such a need exists now. What problem is a state ownership supposed to solve?

Saab, as it concerns in this case, is an exceptionally well-functioning company that produces world-class products exported all over the world. They have plenty of capital and an extremely large number of customers, and yet the Social Democrats come to the conclusion that we should now buy shares.

I therefore want to ask: Have the Social Democrats intended that one should make a profit on the shares in some way? What is the problem that is to be solved de facto here? That is what I am very curious about.

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Member Berglund, for the question!

I repeat my answer. We do not see that the problems exist today, but as I described in my previous answer, we are concerned that future constellations, changes in ownership, and changes in the structure could mean that Sweden loses control over the defense industry. We consider it to be far too important for that, with the competence that has been built up there over a long period.

We can take the submarines as an example. There, Saab has truly saved Swedish submarines and all the competence that exists there. We completely agree that Saab has made a fantastic journey, but we worry about what could happen in the future with various international collaborations and potential structural changes. There, we see that a state involvement can ensure that production remains here in Sweden and that we retain control.

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

Jörgen Berglund (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Heléne Björklund for the answer. I understand that there is a concern that one could lose the control you describe. But in that case, I think the Social Democrats have lost an important piece of the puzzle, namely the law that entered into force on December 1 this year and which is intended precisely to prevent foreign investors from taking over Swedish companies where there are security interests. Saab is, of course, such a company. I believe that the Social Democrats themselves even voted for this law. Therefore, I was very surprised because the new law has just entered into force. With that law in place, there is nothing to be worried about.

The best way for Sweden to maintain and develop Swedish industry is to continue to develop world-class products and for Sweden also to purchase world-class equipment, that is, as we have done for a long time. I consider that to be the best.

On December 1, a new law came into force. Don't you think it is enough, Heléne Björklund?

(Applause)

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! What Member Berglund says is correct. We think this is a good law. Whether it is sufficient or not, only the future can tell. But we are still concerned, as said, about potential changes in ownership and structural changes.

Unlike the right, who want everything to be private for ideological reasons, we Social Democrats are quite pragmatic, as you have surely noticed over the years when it comes to privatizations. We dare to try, but we also see when it does not work. We do not say that it does not work in the defense industry today. But we see it in very many other areas where the so-called market would solve everything, but where the market perhaps consists of interests that we do not want entering the security and defense industry. Therefore, we propose a state involvement in our defense industry.

(Applause)

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is always pleasing to hear that we are in agreement on many issues. But I have a couple of questions and reflections.

The first point concerns new establishments in the future that you mentioned. To me, it feels very vague. The member also mentioned that there is a great need here and now for war units. In that case, the future feels very far away.

The Armed Forces assess that Russia may have the capacity to attack Europe, in our immediate vicinity, with ground forces within a period of three to seven years. This week we saw that Poland warned that this could happen within three years. It feels closer than in the future.

Now the Social Democrats propose, in light of this threat, that more regiments be established beyond those for which decisions were made in the 2020 defense decision - against the advice of ÖB. But establishing a regiment takes a long time, and it costs a lot of money - perhaps 1.5 billion each. We have seen that the regiments for which decisions were made in 2020 will not begin producing units fully until 2026-2028, and that also feels very far away.

The proposed new establishments in the future will hardly deliver any tangible results regarding war units until 2030, and by then it will start to feel like time is running out.

Why do the Social Democrats not want to listen to ÖB's advice from November 6 of this year? What do the Social Democrats know that ÖB does not? Because it is surely not vote-fishing that we see here?

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Member Wistedt for his questions.

Let me say the following: It is possible that our committee motion is fluffy and future-oriented. We see it as both a responsibility and a privilege to be politicians and to be able to brainstorm about the future and also present political proposals that we also finance. We have not said that this is to take place in the near future.

But we see what is happening in northern Sweden. We have Finland, Sweden, Norway - the Nordkalotten - which is a geopolitically very important strategic area. We see that we need proper unit growth up there. We also have Esrange, LKAB, Malmbanan and so on that must be defended. And we believe that we need that unit growth.

Now the member says that it cannot happen before 2030 even if we make the decision now. Let's see what becomes of that. This is our proposal for the future. We see that a reinforcement is needed in northern Sweden.

When it comes to Kvarn, we see that it is a very low-hanging fruit. The member did not ask any questions about it, but I will answer it anyway. All the necessary permits are there. There are training fields there. And there is a facility for urban warfare. It would therefore be very simple to develop it into a regiment. We therefore consider this to be a low-hanging fruit, and we want to point out the opportunities and needs that we see.

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! It was interesting that the member mentioned Kiruna. I, in fact, had the privilege of being there this weekend to speak. It was very clear that it is incredibly difficult to recruit personnel who can serve up there, and for reasons as simple as the fact that the cost of living is very high for those who are employed there. A member of the Armed Forces has significantly less in salary than a shop employee and earns approximately half of what a person working in the mine earns. Therefore, I ask: How do the Social Democrats intend to staff a new regiment in Kiruna in the long term, as it will require special measures?

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! Then I shall first provide a piece of information, and that is that it is not the Social Democrats who man any regiments anywhere. It is the state and the Armed Forces that do so. It may be good to know.

We have also been in Kiruna and received exactly the same indications, so we agree on that. But that cannot prevent us from having ambitions, and it cannot prevent us from saying that it is incredibly important for geopolitical and strategic reasons that we also have a strong defense up in the Nordic region? As far as I know, there are no regulations stating how large the superstructure must be for it to be called a regiment. That is also why it is a rather low-hanging fruit to have these ambitions and to continue discussing this.

It is possible that it will not be so. But, as said, we see it as a privilege and a responsibility to be politicians and to point out the opportunities that we see for the future.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the report Expenditure Area 6 Defence and society's crisis preparedness. And these are truly important issues to discuss.

We have the toughest security policy situation since the Second World War. It is a situation that will likely be for the foreseeable future. That means we must raise the state of alert. We must be able to handle both crisis and, in the worst case, war. That is why it is so important that we discuss these issues and that we speed things up. I do not believe, however, that we have all the time in the world. We must ensure that we speed up the buildup of the Swedish defense.

Right now, while we sit here in peace and quiet, a war is ongoing in Europe. It has been going on for nearly 20 months since Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and it continues. Unfortunately, there is much that indicates that this will be a long-term war.

Several of us who are in the chamber here today were in Ukraine about a month ago and saw with our own eyes the benefit that our support has provided. As has been pointed out here earlier in the debate, Sweden has provided defense materiel worth the equivalent of 20 billion kronor. It has played a major role. It is everything from anti-tank mines to anti-tank missiles 57, NLAW, to Carl Gustaf grenade launchers, but also Archer and not least Stridsfordon 90, which play a major role, and ammunition that we provide. This is something one is very grateful for.

It is important to point out from here at the parliamentary rostrum that we agree that it is important to continue with the support. It is thanks to the support from Sweden, USA, Great Britain and other countries that Ukraine manages to defend itself. But we must be persistent in our support, for it would be extremely dangerous if Ukraine stops fighting. Then there would be no free Ukraine left. That, Madam Speaker, would also affect our security. Therefore, we have every reason - morally, for our own purposes and for our own safety - to ensure that we continue to support Ukraine. It is very important to emphasize.

This also puts a spotlight on the risk of this spreading. We must not underestimate Russia and Putin. We know that much of the ground forces are now being directed there, but when it comes to the air force and the navy, there is quite a lot left. There are signs suggesting that after a war, one can rearm quite quickly. We therefore have every reason to rearm, and the NATO membership that we hope and believe is imminent is also very important. It raises the threshold and reduces the risk of a potential Russian attack.

Another important matter is the agreement that was signed tonight Swedish time - which must also be approved here in the Riksdag - regarding deepened defense cooperation between Sweden and the USA. It is of utmost importance, Madam Speaker, that it is put in place, because it ensures that there are real preparations if the worst should happen. American troops could in that case be based here, and preparations have been made on how it should be organized. It is deterrent and reduces the sense of adventure in a Russian aggressor.

It is also important to emphasize that a strengthened defense of Sweden and the collaborations we have are the best guarantee against having any war. If it were just a matter of sliding into Sweden, the risk of attack would increase. But if we have a strong defense, both military and civil, and furthermore this defense cooperation increases the chances that our own and future generations escape war. That is why this is so important.

For Sweden's part, we have strengthened the Armed Forces over several years, and we continue to do so. In the Defence Preparation Board, the civil defense is now being discussed where we, to be completely open, have great challenges. The military defense was dismantled to an all too great extent after the Cold War, and the civil defense was essentially completely dismantled. This is therefore the path we have to go, and we must do so because a chain is never stronger than its weakest link.

Military and civil defense are two sides of the same coin. Therefore, it is so important to get it in place and that it is organized in the right way. It must also receive the funds required. To take an example, Madam Speaker, we have much inspiration to draw from Finland. Finland was wise enough not to dismantle civil defense. They can manage to supply their population - not with ready-made rations, but with ingredients for food production - for half a year. They manage in a corresponding way for just as long when it comes to fuel and medicine. It works. They practice. It is of the utmost importance. There we, therefore, have much inspiration and guidance to draw from.

When it comes to the military defense, we have made great improvements, but it needs to be accelerated. Investments will be required. It has been pointed out here that the budget amounts to 126 billion, and that is a lot of money. But it is like paying the home insurance premium, and we will likely need to pay more than 2 percent of GDP to be able to make the investments required in civil and military defense. To tell the truth, we have for a long time been significantly below 1 percent. It is therefore no stranger, Madam Speaker, than when one has a house and spends too little money on maintenance for a long time. Then a day comes when one must spend more. In the same way, we have a situation where we will need to invest more than 2 percent on defense.

What tasks will we then receive as members of Nato? We are not a front state like Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, but our area is important as a base. We must also be prepared to, together with Norway, help out in the Arctic and defend Finland with ground combat troops. There is a deficit there. Likewise, it is in the Baltics. There we need to play a role.

The defense of Sweden now does not begin at Sweden's borders, but it is a matter of us, together with other countries, also defending our allies in Nato. With these words, Madam Speaker, I move for the approval of all proposals in the report.

(Applause)

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Defence's report FöU1, and I would like to begin by moving for the approval of all proposals in the committee's report.

I will now comment on the part concerning military defense, and my colleague will then comment on that concerning civil defense.

Citizens, total defense personnel, members of parliament and especially the population of Finland, who today experience their 105th independence day - may there be many more!

A number of governments of mixed colors have, during the period approximately 1995 to 2015, neglected and disarmed the total defense. 92 percent of the army and over 70 percent of the navy and the air force were decommissioned, and virtually the entire civil defense was scrapped. Defense became a special interest and a budget regulator.

We are facing a reconstruction of the Swedish defense, and much is to happen now. At the same time, there is a shortage of personnel and materiel, but above all, of time. This means that priorities need to be set - fairly harshly, at times - among all that needs to be addressed.

In our cooperation with the government, the Sweden Democrats continue to prioritize support for Ukraine, focus on the Armed Forces' personnel, and immediate measures for existing war units. I will now briefly comment on these three points.

When it comes to the support for Ukraine, we are once again facing a highly tangible threat from Russia. It is not the Swedish defense capability that is deterring war and protecting us from an attack in the surrounding area, but the resistance of the Ukrainian troops, the Ukrainian people's will to resist, and the Ukrainian society's endurance. It gives us time to rebuild what a mess of governments has destroyed over decades. We must be aware of and grateful for the sacrifices Ukraine is making and therefore support Ukraine in the fight for all our freedom and democracy. Ukraine's sacrifices must not have been in vain.

It must be clear to everyone that there is only one acceptable end to the war, and that is that Ukraine wins, Russia loses and those responsible – from Putin down to the individual individuals who have tangibly committed war crimes – are held accountable and punished.

Madam Speaker! We Sweden Democrats are clear that we must be prepared to take extensive strategic risks to continue supporting Ukraine. But we see it as a strategic investment for a free and democratic Europe and for the rules-based world order.

When it comes to the Swedish Armed Forces' personnel, we have today a fantastic resource in the women and men who serve in various positions in the Swedish Armed Forces and in our total defense organizations and voluntary organizations. They have a modern and flexible leadership. They know how to apply mission command and are pioneers both at work and in other roles in society. They are dedicated to the task of defending the country and to doing their utmost in every situation, even if it is costly and difficult.

Therefore, it is important that reserve officers are not denied by their employers the opportunity to serve in a position or to enter and reinforce the Armed Forces as an instructor, for example when it concerns the training of conscripts in war units. It can also involve training for foreign combat forces, and in that case, I am thinking primarily of Ukrainian units or future allies who will come to Sweden to, for example, practice warfare up in the Arctic. There we have special expertise.

Madam Speaker! Reserve officers should not have to lose income during service; instead, they should be fully compensated, and this can happen in different ways. It can happen via the employer, and here I particularly want to highlight LKAB in Kiruna, which in an exemplary manner steps in and tops up the salary for those who go in and serve. It can also happen in other ways, through state provision, but they must be compensated.

Our voluntary organizations must receive significantly more extensive support than today, and the allocated resources must be utilized to the last penny. The voluntary organizations have an important task to fulfill within the framework of total defense and to strengthen the will for defense in Swedish society.

The defense organizations can also effectively reinforce the Armed Forces with instructors when it comes to the training of conscripts in certain segments or the training of allied soldiers regarding special conditions, for example, up in the north. They can also assist the civilian part of the total defense when it comes to transport, communications, animal husbandry, and food supply. They constitute a fantastic and unique resource that we must take care of.

Contracted personnel must be given the opportunity, after passing individual tests, to extend their service or alternatively specialize further when they have completed their contracted period, and thus continue to be able to constitute an important resource for the Armed Forces.

Now we come to our war units. They must immediately become ready for deployment in terms of personnel and materiel. This means that the focus must be on intensifying the training of the conscripts, and it should take place in existing peace-time units. It has been done before, and it can be done again.

We must ensure that the personal equipment is available in sufficient quantity. It must be immediately accessible at the right time and in the right place. It can also be about vehicles being in the right place and not a hundred miles away from the place where they are actually supposed to serve. It is also about filling up ammunition stocks of all kinds.

To do this, it requires a very clear and personal commitment and leadership at all levels within the Armed Forces. Setting up new units takes time and demands large personnel resources.

There are resources that can be better used in the training of conscripts or to fill positions that we have committed to filling at, for example, NATO headquarters. Older, experienced officers are needed here. They do not grow on trees.

Some of the work to become operationally efficient also involves reducing the number of processes, rules, and other constraints that years of too little money, unclear tasks, and fear of breaking rules have resulted in.

The Sweden Democrats have on numerous occasions had and will continue to have a dialogue with representatives from both the government and the Armed Forces regarding the immediate need to clear out the flora of certifications and processes. This can range from the handling of a hunting knife to driving a regular passenger car – that is, things that reasonably must fall under normal common sense and not require special training. Managers at all levels must dare to lead the way and show that it is possible to be creative, that it is possible to find unconventional solutions, and that one must question ingrained routines that are not functional. When it is urgent, 80 percent is good enough.

Madam Speaker! A Minister for Defence in the 1980s, who was indeed a Social Democrat, was clear that everything that is not explicitly forbidden is permitted. It is a spirit that we need to revive.

Other things we must look at are the financing of upcoming defense budgets and not least the upcoming defense decision. Here we will continue to work for it to be 2 percent that constitutes a minimum level for the defense appropriation during a defense decision period. The 2 percent shall be calculated on the traditional model and thus not according to the NATO variant where one can include such things as do not provide operational effect, for example VAT and pension. One should only include such things as provide pure operational effect. And let me clarify. It shall be a floor and not a monetary goal in itself.

Let me conclude by quoting an older and experienced naval colleague: Now it is full speed ahead that matters. If you do not have steering speed, you cannot turn either.

I would like to conclude and wish you all a Merry Christmas and a hopefully much better 2024.

(Applause)

In this speech, Sara-Lena Bjälkö (SD) agreed.

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! The impressions from Bucha and Irpin leave me no peace - tortured and burned human bodies, mass graves and a shattered society, but also a fantastic will to build a new future as part of the modern, free Europe. The young veteran, perhaps only 25 years old, told of his memories from the front, where he lost sight in one eye and was subjected to humiliating and painful treatment by the Russian attackers. His story does not let go of me either. There are so many soldiers and also civilians who have been killed and injured.

The Committee on Defence traveled to Ukraine. I believe that all of us who were on the trip came home with an even deeper insight into what is at stake. We met Ukrainian politicians. They had a crystal-clear appeal to us: Give us more weapons, so that we can defend our country!

Of course they are grateful for the world's support, but it is also clear that much more was needed. There is also a concern that the will to help diminishes when the focus shifts to another and also fearsome war in the Middle East.

What is it then that is at stake? Ukraine as an independent country with a people who get to live in freedom depends on Ukraine winning the war and Russia losing the war. And one only wins the war with the help of the rest of the world. Otherwise, terror and destruction await.

Ukraine's fantastic defense effort is also a defense of freedom in Europe - including our freedom in Sweden. I am grateful for that. I am also proud to be a member of a parliament where there is such strong and united support to continue helping our sister country Ukraine.

The budget proposal that we are now to take a stand on builds upon the strong will to support Ukraine and to strengthen our own defense after decades of defense policy carelessness characterized by pious hopes and a large dose of naivety. Now it is clear to everyone that it is serious, and it must be met with powerful investments and a persistent buildup of our Swedish defense.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is ready for Nato. The budget we are to take a stand on is epoch-making. It is epoch-making by virtue of the fact that we are now carrying out the largest upgrade of our total defense since the 1950s. It is also epoch-making through the most far-reaching reorganization of our security and defense policy in modern times that our upcoming membership in Nato entails.

The Liberals have championed the issue of a Swedish NATO membership since 1989. Our patience has been tested, but we are now completely convinced that within a near future we will become members. It is the single most important defense policy step that Sweden can take in the new, seriously deteriorated security policy situation.

No organization has contributed to peace and security in the world as much as Nato. Countries that cooperate to mutually strengthen each other's security and deter potential attackers is something that has proven to work well throughout Nato's entire history. But Nato membership is not the end goal. It is the beginning of a new era where we build security together with our allies.

The budget for next year marks several important aspects that I want to point out. First and foremost: personnel are crucial. It is therefore important to allocate resources to be able to recruit but also retain personnel, increase the number of conscripts over time, and review conditions and agreements for those who work in the Armed Forces. The Armed Forces must be an attractive employer.

Defense procurement shall continue with high ambitions within the army, the navy, and the air force. It is about new procurement. But I also want to point out the importance of maintaining and sustaining the existing equipment and of replenishing our stocks. It is an effect of us having donated large support packages to Ukraine.

Modern defense must be developed through research, education, and innovation. A military innovation program shall be established. When we take the step and become members of Nato, we shall also engage in Nato's innovation program. FOI shall receive increased resources for important research. Equally important for the defense and our defense industry in the long run is the investment in engineers, which is also part of the state budget.

Madam Speaker! Civil defense is a prerequisite for protecting the civilian population if the worst were to happen and Sweden were hit by war. Russia shows its ruthlessness in Ukraine when it directs its attacks against the civilian population. I mentioned Bucha and Irpin. Imagine if it were Borås and Insjön. How would Sweden meet the enormous pressures?

We must equip our entire defense, and that involves all parts of society and every one of us. Now, resources are being added to the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency, MSB, to strengthen the protection of the civilian population all around our country. But it will be needed significantly more than that.

It is an ambitious work that has started, and a long series of investigations are currently underway in order to be able to improve our preparedness both thoroughly and quickly. Within a few weeks, the Defence Preparation Board will present a new report on precisely civil defense.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is a fantastic country with many opportunities for those of us who live here. It is our ultimate task here in the Swedish Riksdag to uphold our country's independence, our sovereignty and our territorial integrity. We are prepared to defend our country, our population, our democracy, our freedom and our way of life, even by force of arms.

The defense of everything that we consider so important for us is best achieved by becoming an ally in Nato, through powerful and long-term investments in our own total defense, both militarily and civilly, and by creating conditions for research, development, and innovation. It also naturally applies to continue supporting Ukraine to win the war.

It is precisely this that the budget for 2024 is about. I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

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

Emma Berginger (MP)

Madam Speaker! Russia's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine has now been ongoing for nearly two years. It is a terrible war with great suffering and many killed and injured. Russia shows great ruthlessness even towards the civilian Ukrainian population, and the laws of war are not respected. The aggressor Russia also shows great indifference towards lost human lives; not even the lives of its own soldiers are accorded any greater value.

The experiences from Ukraine show that conventional wars over territories are still a reality and something that we need to have a readiness for in order to be able to meet. Miljöpartiet supports that Sweden continues to help Ukraine with both weapons and humanitarian aid. We have voted for all support packages that have been presented by Sweden's government.

That we help Ukraine defend itself against the aggressor Putin is important for the security of all of Europe, for democracy and for freedom. It also has a decisive significance for the view on international law regarding whether Putin's crimes are allowed to pay off or not, something that risks affecting many conflicts around the world. Therefore, support for Ukraine is needed not only from Sweden. Sweden's government must actively work for a united EU that, together with the USA, continues to support Ukraine for as long as is required.

At the same time, we have a climate crisis that poses an existential threat. Climate change is a threat to people's lives, health, and security. It drives people to flee, increases tensions, and the risk of conflicts and war.

At the ongoing climate summit in Dubai, a report has been presented today on the risk of more tipping points being passed with enormous consequences and a potential to threaten civilization as we know it. Beyond these tipping points, the climate changes become self-reinforcing, something that leads to enormous consequences.

Miljöpartiet emphasizes the importance of having a broad view of security. The threat landscape today is broad and complex. We have both military threats and non-military threats and hybrid threats that exist in parallel. We need to have a preparedness to meet both military threats as well as climate change, other natural disasters and pandemics. We need to have a preparedness to withstand both crises and war, and in the worst case, at the same time.

Furthermore, democracy is in retreat in the world, and authoritarian forces are on the advance. Above all, we need to have a preventive approach. The best thing is if we can avoid the crisis or the war occurring.

Therefore, we believe that we must do everything in our power to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and simultaneously adapt society so that it can withstand the pressures from a changed climate. But far too few parties take the climate threat seriously.

The most important preventive measure is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But the government is instead pursuing a policy that increases emissions and thus the risk of a climate catastrophe. We also need to apply diplomacy and conflict prevention as far as possible. At the same time, we need to have a total defense, both military and civil, which acts as a deterrent to war and can, in the last resort, defend our country, our population, our freedom and democracy in the event of war.

Total defense consists of both the civil and the military defense. When it comes to the military defense, we in Miljöpartiet follow the agreement from the spring of 2022 to increase the appropriations for the military defense to 2 percent of GDP when it is practically possible.

At the same time, we argue that the balance between investments in military and civil defense must improve. Miljöpartiet wants specifically to increase investments in civil defense in order to achieve a balanced total defense.

The military defense cannot function without a strong civil defense, and the capability being built up within the civil defense also contributes strongly to society's resilience against crises other than military ones, for example against nature-related disasters in the wake of the climate crisis.

In total, Miljöpartiet wants to allocate 1,805,000,000 kronor more than the government to expenditure area 6. We are the party that invests the most in civil defense. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that civil defense ultimately relies on us having a society and a welfare system that functions in peace. Therefore, Miljöpartiet views with great concern how the current government's cuts affect school, healthcare and elderly care, culture, etc.

In our budget, we want to invest in supporting municipalities and regions in their work with crisis preparedness and civil defense. Much of society's essential activities are carried out by municipalities and regions. We want to ensure that all municipalities have the basic prerequisites to work with preparedness preparations within civil defense and that the development of the capability occurs in line with the level of ambition in other parts of the total defense. We therefore add 500 million kronor to this.

We are also investing 500 million kronor in preventive measures against landslides and other natural disasters that risk becoming a consequence of climate change.

The municipal rescue services need to be strengthened to fulfill their important mission during high alert. Work is also underway here to introduce civil service. That the municipal rescue services' capacity increases is also important for our preparedness to handle forest fires. At the same time, the protection of the civilian population needs to be expanded, for example by renovating shelters and updating the outdoor warning system. Therefore, Miljöpartiet allocates 300 million kronor to this.

As I mentioned earlier, Sweden is subject to hybrid attacks. These are attacks that occur below the level of heightened alert and something that is ongoing constantly. This is not a risk, but it is a reality. There is a great need to strengthen the work of countering cyberattacks both within public administration and with work towards private actors with society-critical activities. This also applies to private individuals. Miljöpartiet wants to make a reinforcement of 250 million kronor within this area.

As mentioned earlier from the rostrum, Sweden needs to rebuild preparedness stocks and build an infrastructure so that the private business sector can contribute in the event of a crisis.

Miljöpartiet wants to create the conditions for MSB to begin the work of strengthening the supply preparedness and therefore allocates 100 million kronor to this in our budget. This is, of course, only a small part of the work that needs to be done to increase the supply preparedness, but it is important that the work gets started quickly.

There is a need to increase the population's crisis awareness. It concerns everything from how one remains vigilant against influence to understanding how one can strengthen their own basic preparedness. Miljöpartiet therefore wants to allocate 50 million kronor to this.

We also want to strengthen the voluntary defense organizations and other non-profit organizations that are important for Sweden's crisis preparedness and civil defense.

We find ourselves in a restless time in a restless world. The threats are broad and complex. Miljöpartiet wants Sweden to have a preparedness to meet both military threats as well as climate change and pandemics. We shall prevent crises and conflicts and strengthen democracy and human rights in order to build a safer, more secure and more peaceful world.

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

Sara-Lena Bjälkö (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the Defense Committee's proposal in report FöU1 in its entirety.

Since the beginning of the 2000s, all of Sweden's governments have acted in the belief of eternal peace. They disarmed and downsized Sweden's defense. They abolished conscription and scrapped military units and military equipment. Readiness stocks of military equipment, even such that could be used civilly, were emptied, destroyed, and donated away as there would never again be crisis or unrest in Europe.

Now we have seen and read time and again how quickly turns can occur in a crisis and war situation. It rarely gives society a chance to prepare, but it must not prevent us from building up a strong and prepared civil defense.

In order for civil defense to be able to fulfill its tasks given the threat situation we may face, civil defense must have broader competence, knowledge, and capabilities than what has been seen to date. In practice, Madam Speaker, it will mean that extensive investments are required in training, equipment, and personnel, as well as in the ability to handle situations with deficient decision-making bases and scarce resources.

Our goal is that civil defense should be able to be self-sufficient for at least 90 days in a crisis and war situation. After that, society shall be reorganized for war conditions. This, Madam Speaker, will of course place demands on the individual citizen in order to increase the individual's understanding of the importance of total defense and every citizen's duty in a crisis and war situation.

It means that in the coming years we will need to work with information and education regarding the total defense's activities and what one as an individual has for rights and obligations. In order for us in Sweden to manage future crises, it is of utmost importance that every citizen consciously takes personal responsibility and prepares so that one can manage without support from society for at least one week. The defense instructors within MSB have lectures on this, and it is warmly recommended to attend them.

We also need to increase awareness among municipalities and regions and also make the business community more involved in the decision-making regarding this.

When it comes to civil defense, the nation's crisis preparedness needs emergency stocks. In order to improve and ensure our ability to cope with future crises, the self-sufficiency level of, for example, food, medicines, and protective and medical care materials also needs to be significantly increased.

Within the framework of the work on emergency stockpiles, a feverish effort is currently underway, and we are awaiting upcoming investigations. At the same time, we should already now hold a discussion on how this is to be financed.

Madam Speaker! Should the entire cost be borne by the state? Should we look at a Finnish model? Or should we have a model adapted to Swedish conditions based on Finland's? Regardless of what we do, it will cost large sums of money, and we believe that the state and the business sector will need to cooperate to best resolve the financing issue.

It is obvious that we then need a mobilization of forces at the municipal, regional and national level. We need to include both the business community, civil society and the individual citizen. Further examples could be that private actors within health and medical care shall be required by legislation to, in their daily operations, place date-sensitive articles and goods into the emergency stocks, for example medicines.

The content of the preparedness depots shall be determined by MSB in cooperation with the relevant authorities. All activities and all decision-making shall take into account the requirements of total defense. Within civil defense, many authorities have made good progress, but it is important that more are instructed to take into account the requirements of total defense in all their activities.

The National Audit Office's conclusion is that Sweden's information and cyber security has not been effective. It is assessed that, among other things, there is a lack of sufficient operational and tactical knowledge regarding how cyber security work is conducted within the authorities and within the private sector. This is something to be taken very seriously, as we have, among other things, potential threats to our nuclear power which can be considered heightened in an increasingly unstable situation in our surrounding world. Here, we Sverigedemokrater consider that increased protection for these facilities is of central importance for the nation's security.

Protection rules must be reviewed, not only for our nuclear power plants but also regarding our nuclear activities and our large-scale hydropower. The security zones around the plants should be given an expanded radius, which also includes the airspace. Therefore, we will work to ensure that the government returns to the Riksdag with proposals for legislation that meets the greater protection needs that today's instability in our immediate vicinity entails.

Madam Speaker! Sweden faces its greatest security and defense policy test in modern times. We all parties take this most seriously. Although we are not always in agreement on details within the military defense and are in disagreement over NATO membership, all parties are in agreement when it comes to the buildup of the total defense and the importance of a functioning civil defense. That is pleasing, Madam Speaker.

With this, I would like to thank all of you here and everyone listening, the Armed Forces, the Home Guard, voluntary organizations and all citizens for all the work you do for our country. I wish you all a Merry Christmas.

(Applause)

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! I thought the member had many interesting points that we share, but it was particularly one thing I caught on with regard to my previous exchange. It concerns the state involvement. The member spoke about the need to increase it in civil defense, and I then look forward to us being able to get a majority here in the chamber to increase the state involvement also in the defense industry.

My question to the member is: How do you view this? Does this only apply to civilian activities, or could it also apply to the defense industry?

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

Sara-Lena Bjälkö (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the question, Björklund! I understand that the Social Democrats are interested in hearing what our side thinks about this. As the member heard, we are absolutely neither for nor against.

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker! No, that is not what I heard. I heard the member say that we Sverigedemokrater want to see increased state involvement. I may have misheard, but that is what I heard. The member did, however, speak about civil defense, so my question is whether you are also open to state control of the defense industry.

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

Sara-Lena Bjälkö (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you once again for the question, Björklund! As you know, I spoke about civil defense. I can then only refer you to the fact that we are now sitting in the Defence Preparation Board. There you can continue that conversation and see where you land.

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Madam Speaker! I stepped in instead of Hanna Gunnarsson, who had an important meeting she had to prioritize.

Today we are debating the expenditure area in the state budget that concerns defense and security policy. Vänsterpartiet has submitted its own proposal for the state budget where we describe our investments and our economic policy. Vänsterpartiet stands behind the agreement from March 2022 to increase the defense budget to 2 percent of GDP for military defense, even though we continue to oppose Swedish NATO membership.

We live in a very serious security policy situation with a war in Europe not particularly far from Sweden. We also see many wars and conflicts all around the world. Millions of people live in the humanitarian catastrophes that wars and conflicts entail, in areas where generations will be affected by the situation that currently prevails. Ceasefire, peace, democracy, welfare and development must be the goal for all people and all countries. We see, not least in Gaza today, how important it is with a ceasefire.

For at least a decade, Russia's aggressiveness and imperialist views have increased strongly. This is visible with all desired clarity in the war currently ongoing in Ukraine, where Russia wants to take over and wipe out Ukraine as a country and its entire culture. This has caused Sweden to have been rebuilding the entire total defense again for some time, both the military and the civil. Vänsterpartiet stands behind that development.

Climate change and natural disasters are another serious threat to the country's and the inhabitants' security. Around the world, natural disasters are a root cause of war and conflict. To counteract climate change is to work for a more peaceful and secure world. Therefore, this must have the highest priority in all parts of society. We must dare to make decisions that counteract these types of crises.

Madam Speaker! The Left Party's most important guiding word in political work is equality, and the work for equality is also important within the field of defense and security. We know, after all, that equal societies are stronger societies. It is by holding together, narrowing economic gaps, helping each other, and taking care of one another that society becomes more resilient against crises and attacks. When we trust each other and get to know each other as individuals and groups, we can see through and expose propaganda and inaccuracies, and when we hold together, we find it easier to handle larger everyday crises such as power outages or worse things like floods and fires.

Our strength lies in our solidarity and community. We all have a common responsibility to meet all forms of threats, whether they are climate-related, come from disinformation, or come from racism and extremism.

Continued expanded equality work within the defense is needed. The proportion of women in the Armed Forces is still too small. The problems with personal equipment must be solved. All forms of harassment against and between conscripts and employed personnel must continue to be countered with greater force.

Madam Speaker! I would like to move for approval of reservation number 4. The Left Party's reservation concerns that the resources of public society must be able to be used in the best possible way during major crises. The authorities must therefore be tasked to cooperate and train for just major crises and be able to plan their operations to be able to resolve major crises such as forest fires together. This requires that we give the Armed Forces the opportunity to dimension their operations not only for war but also for major crises.

Finally, Madam Speaker: For Sweden to be a safe country, a strong society is needed with investments in both defense and welfare. The entire welfare system, for example elderly care and the school, needs to be improved. It is incredibly important that this must not take a backseat to investments in defense.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! It should, of course, be my colleague Mikael Larsson who was here. Then there would have been both more competence as well as more well-articulated statements and a better-dressed gentleman here in the speaker's chair. But unfortunately, he has been prevented from attending. Therefore, I take this.

In the time we are currently in, with war in Europe and unrest elsewhere in the world, expenditure area 6 becomes one of the absolutely most important expenditure areas in the state budget.

Madam Speaker! Russia's war in Ukraine continues, and Sweden is in the midst of an ongoing buildup of the total defense. The Centre Party naturally wants to be and is a constructive voice when it comes to increasing defense spending to at least 2 percent of GDP to raise Swedish defense capability and the combat readiness of war units, while at the same time we must reach NATO's objectives in accordance with what was agreed in Vilnius 2023.

It is, however, important to distinguish between the two percent target and the reporting we do to Nato and what we actually get out of an increase in our own defense capability. ÖB writes in its advice that it is expected to reach the target of 2 percent by 2028. Centerpartiet stands behind the agreement from March 16, 2022, which all eight parties stand behind. There is no doubt about that.

Madam Speaker! We in the Center Party include 100 million more in our budget proposal for the war units than the government does, as we see that it is important to increase the possibility for the defense to develop forward. All branches of the forces - the army, the air force, and the navy - are needed and are part of a common system. With Sweden's position in Europe and much water around us, the navy will be important to continue protecting Sweden. But our navy will also mean a lot from a NATO perspective.

It is however important that Sweden, while national growth in the Armed Forces is occurring, must also be able to lead the way so that the military support to Ukraine continues. The increase in the defense's capability is however necessary and important and must not be eroded by decisions to also support Ukraine. The Center Party therefore considers that the replacement of materiel for our own defense force for that which goes to Ukraine should lie outside the national defense budget's framework.

Madam Speaker! The necessary and substantial upgrading of the military defense must be followed by further upgrading of the civil defense, by creating increased resilience in society as a whole. Centerpartiet considers that the municipalities have a key role in civil preparedness planning, not least regarding population protection. The war in Ukraine has shown that available and secure shelters are of very great importance for the civilian population to be as safe as possible if bombs fall.

In order for the municipalities to have the opportunity to carry out the ambition increase and the upgrading of civil defense that the world around us demands, the Center Party considers that an additional 50 million kronor needs to be added to the municipalities' work. Then they can hire more people with readiness competence and carry out more exercises and training with officials, politicians, and other actors. The Center Party also makes the assessment that an additional 50 million kronor are needed in 2024 to secure the citizens' safety in a civil defense through further reinforcements of the population protection and the shelters.

However, we cannot achieve a stronger civil defense unless more societal areas strengthen their preparedness planning, their resilience, and their robustness. In the ongoing war in Ukraine, Russia has repeatedly carried out both cyberattacks and physical attacks against, for example, the energy sector. This now needs to be strengthened in Sweden, among other things through MSB. Resilience must be significantly strengthened, and the discrepancy between the threat picture and our actual capability must be reduced.

It is also important that the government, in its focus on giving FRA the responsibility, takes into account the concern that can be felt and that affects us all regarding the fact that FRA's ability to inform broadly has previously been shown to be limited.

I also want to highlight the green industries as an important part of the total defense. Sweden's farmers and their opportunities to also act in a civil defense are incredibly important under disrupted conditions and need to be strengthened.

Madam Speaker! The Defence Committee is now working on its report on civil defence. It will be an important report for strengthening the total defence. Also, the report on military defence that will arrive in April will be important for the defence of Sweden. The Centre Party is active in the committee and will continue to be so.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion: There is a separate opinion from the Centre Party in the report. Therefore, we abstain from taking a position in the vote.

Finally, I would like to wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 14.)

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