(cont. from § 12) Alcohol, narcotics, doping, tobacco and gambling (cont. SoU19)

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the previous statement.

I intended to continue on the track I started before the question period and the voting, namely regarding the sale of farms. It is an issue that I know also engages the Sweden Democrats. From the Sweden Democrats, six motions were submitted regarding the sale of farms during the general motion period. The question I am considering, also regarding the Sweden Democrats, is naturally why there is such a great need to submit motions in an issue where it should be a matter of the Tidö parties' collective policy.

All four Tidö parties went out in the election campaign and said that they are positive towards the sale of farms. There were obviously some hesitations among the Christian Democrats, who corrected this a month ago when Ebba Busch visited Visita and who are now crystal clear that the sale of farms shall be introduced.

At the same time as the parties officially stand behind the line, one clearly sees a great need to submit motions on the issue. What is sensed is that one perhaps does not fully trust the work that is ongoing in the Government Offices. It has been six months anyway, and nothing noticeable has happened in the process. Not even a timetable has been presented.

Why was the question of farm sales not so important that it was included in the Tidö Agreement? Obviously, some pressure would have been needed.

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

Anna-Lena Blomkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

Just as the member is engaged in the issue, this is an issue that the Sweden Democrats have championed for a long time. This is evident, not least in our reservation and the fact that we have submitted a motion on the issue.

The Sweden Democrats believe that the government should take into account the investigation that has been published regarding the sale of farms in its work. We are only six months into the mandate period, and we will continue to pursue the issue of the sale of farms in the future.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! We are six months into the parliamentary term, and there has been quite a lot of time. Just as I have mentioned before, there are four responsible ministers in place within the Social Ministry's area. One is responsible for precisely this issue and should be able to push it forward properly.

Then my final question to the Sweden Democrats is whether you intend to take any form of initiative to press the government representatives to actually carry out the issue of farm sales and submit a proposition to the Riksdag.

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

Anna-Lena Blomkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Tobias Andersson has recently submitted a written question to the Minister for Social Affairs. The answer we received was that the usual work of preparing the referral bodies' views is ongoing and that, in the work, among other things, the complexity of the question and possible consequences need to be considered. Furthermore, the government viewed positively the possibility of enabling small-scale farm sales of alcoholic beverages on the condition that the retail monopoly is protected.

We look forward to being able to, together with the Center Party, push the government to begin the work on a bill that enables farm sales of alcohol.

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Mr. Speaker! The goal for public health and the goal within the ANDTS area sounds simple: Health shall be good and equal across the entire country and throughout the entire population. It should not matter where we live, how we grew up, or where we come from. But in reality, we have a long way to go to reach the goal. There are completely unacceptable health disparities today, and we must close those disparities.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report. I also want to emphasize in this connection that I am glad that a lot of very good things are happening right now in this area. Fewer people shall die, and fewer people shall suffer. This applies to both those who are affected and their relatives. The work currently underway for a competence center is important. It is good that games are included and that both money and assignments are directed toward preventing people from engaging in something that is fun at first but gradually becomes a quagmire that topples their entire private finances.

We Liberals also think it is positive that the harmful effects of tobacco are clearly emphasized and that trade-offs are made between the different types of nicotine and tobacco products. It is important to ensure that smuggling is truly countered, so that people cannot pass the products on to persons who are still children.

When it comes to alcohol, there is an important balancing act. On one hand, one should be able to eat and drink well and run a restaurant, but on the other hand, one should not be harmed by the alcohol or risk harming someone else. I am glad that we are now, in a cautious manner, reviewing the regulatory framework and seeing if it is possible to modernize and simplify for serving permits, so that people can run a restaurant, eat, and at the same time have good health protection.

A lesser-known danger in the area is nitrous oxide. The chronic consequences are serious. A single overdose for a young person who does not know that nitrous oxide is dangerous can mean immediate life-threatening danger. Even here, I am pleased with the government's steps to achieve a clear regulation of non-medical use of nitrous oxide as well as, not least, age limits.

Finally, we have the narcotics issue. Many interventions are needed in many different ways here. Needle exchanges, LARO, and better access to overdose-reversing medications are needed. More professional groups need these medications to be able to save lives.

I am pleased that the National Board of Health and Welfare is tasked with conducting mapping to improve addiction care in our country. I am also grateful that an investigation is currently reviewing which interventions can reduce suffering and death in other countries and where we can take part of those examples to protect our most vulnerable. Furthermore, I am pleased that work is underway to ensure that the care chains hold together. A person who has been under the care of the Prison and Probation Service or the State Institution Board should not be released completely alone when leaving the Prison and Probation Service or Sis, but should be held by the hand all the way until they have a chance to get a new life.

Very many people with addiction also suffer from other illnesses; it can be anorexia, bipolar disorder, depression, or other severe sufferings. On paper, the Health and Medical Services Act is already clear today that the region and the municipality shall cooperate to protect these persons and provide good care, but that is not how it looks in reality. This has not functioned. People have ended up in limbo - the municipality or the region has said that the other instance must help them before they can get help. One must first get rid of one's anorexia, and then one can get help with one's addiction - or vice versa.

I am very happy that we are now moving towards a principal for healthcare. It will make a big difference.

In conclusion, I want to say that we shall have the regulations, the care and the society that best reduce suffering and death and that provide a healthy population that feels well throughout life, whether one is a relative or a patient and ill. There is no room here for prejudices, moralizing, or straw men, but we shall alleviate suffering and give people as good a life as we can without anyone being harmed along the way by what someone else chooses to do.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Lina Nordquist, for the speech!

I intend to stick to the theme of farm sales, even regarding the Liberals.

"One says one thing before the election. Then there is the election, and after the election, one says another thing." This has indeed become something of a trademark for this government and perhaps in particular for the Liberals. My reflection is, naturally, whether this is a statement that also applies to the issue of farm sales.

As I noted earlier, the investigation was complete and was on the government's desk when the new government took office. They have had almost half a year to make a decision on this issue and produce a bill and place it on the Riksdag's desk, but that has not yet happened.

The Liberals were, just like the Centre Party, the Sweden Democrats and the Christian Democrats, clear during the election campaign that farm sales are something that should be introduced in Sweden. My question to the Liberals is: Do the Liberals still stand by the introduction of farm sales? And what are the Liberals doing to push this process forward so that we actually get a government bill on the Riksdag's table in the end?

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Bergenblock, for the question!

I think, to begin with, that it is fantastic that the member has such an optimistic view on the speed of democracy - the government that took office on 17 October should naturally already have produced a bill on this issue. I would have of course wished for that - it would have been very good - but the wheels of democracy turn slowly; this applies both when society moves upwards and when decisions are made that take it downwards.

From the Liberals' side, we are in favor of farm sales as long as the monopoly is not risked. We think it would be very positive.

As the member may know, there is an announcement from the Riksdag from 2018. There is also an investigation that was commissioned with the support of just the Liberals and the Center Party, and this investigation has been presented quite recently. I look forward to seeing the result and how it would be possible to produce a legislative proposal - can we do it without risking the Swedish monopoly for public health?

I hope, just like the member, that this will not take too much time.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! That the investigation was presented recently might not be entirely correct – it was presented in December 2021, and after that, it was out for consultation for half a year. The consultation responses arrived in June 2022, and since then, nothing more has happened other than that the consultation responses have been compiled.

What is needed now is a government bill. The basis for drafting the bill is already in the investigation; there are ready-made texts there to use. Of course, there are considerations to be made, but they have been made in the investigation. What is needed is a position from the government. Is one prepared to take this issue to its conclusion, or is one not prepared to do so?

It is stated very clearly in the investigation that the monopoly is not threatened by the design of the farm sales that is addressed there.

I would like to see a certain speed and a certain tempo in democracy. I am also quite experienced in this area after previously being involved in municipal politics – it takes quite a long time there too. But the issue of farm sales is nothing that can be said to have moved quickly. Since 2007, when the Center Party began to actively pursue this issue in the Riksdag, three inquiries have been conducted. The third inquiry on farm sales has been finished since December 2021. What is needed now is actually for someone to get to the point, write the bill, and place it on the Riksdag's table. I hope that the Liberals will help to push for that to happen.

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Mr. Speaker! It may be a question of definition whether five months of government tenure is a long or short time to specifically prioritize the farm sales at a time when Sweden faces very large challenges.

Regarding the point the member raised about the Liberals' position, I can conclude by saying that we from the Liberals said one thing before the election, namely that we want farm sales provided that this does not pose a risk to Sweden's monopoly in order to protect those people who may be exposed to risk during high alcohol consumption. After the election, we said the same thing, that is, we still want farm sales provided that people are not exposed to great risk by the monopoly being risked.

Now five months have passed. We shall have to see how many more months are needed before we see results in this issue.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! Sometimes when we talk about farm sales, I wonder if this debate is not more about business policy, but I will leave that question for the time being.

I have worked with issues concerning alcohol and drugs for a very long period in my professional life, Mr. Speaker, and I am somewhat concerned about certain things that I have been able to see during this period. It concerns the drug issues.

I think that for a while we distanced ourselves from the war on drugs, which has been worked on very much in other countries and which has also been abandoned in other countries. It has failed everywhere in the world. But the government wants to tighten the narcotics legislation by having all narcotics sales result in at least six months of imprisonment instead of the current minimum penalty of 14 days of imprisonment. It may feel irrelevant to talk about legal issues, but this slides straight into the question of narcotics.

The changes, which were already prepared by the previous government, are described as a way to reduce gang crime. We do have a very restrictive drug policy. One could argue that it should have spilled over into gang crime, but that cannot be seen. There is also nothing to indicate that the criminalization of personal use makes the police better at intervening against serious drug crimes.

The implication of this is that the sharp increase in gang violence that has occurred over the last ten years has happened despite the police having directed increasing attention towards the street level and drug users. The more police who are engaged in prosecuting persons for drug use, the fewer resources the police will have to intervene against and prevent truly serious and potentially system-threatening crime. This includes, for example, the gang shootings.

Mr. Speaker! During 2021, there were a total of 450 drug-related deaths, which is a decrease, and we should be grateful for that. But it is still a high figure in relation to the rest of Europe.

It is primarily needle exchange and harm reduction that saves lives. One can then wonder why it took so long, from 2006 to 2011, to get needle exchange established in, for example, Stockholm. I was one of those who worked on this issue. The same applied to harm reduction.

Every year without needle exchange and harm reduction are lost years for those who are dependent, and I therefore move for approval of reservation 10.

People with addiction are stigmatized and treated as criminals instead of receiving the care they need. Swedish drug policy must therefore be changed, something we all largely agree on. There is a great need to evaluate how the drug legislation, including criminalization, works in practice. There is, in fact, a lack of knowledge regarding what effects the legislation has had.

This is an important issue that all parties in Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner have highlighted, and also the Public Health Agency and researchers. But the new SD-dependent government has chosen not to look at the criminalization, which I think is unfortunate. There was a chance to squeeze it into the investigation or do a separate investigation on this.

There is a great need to work in every way to reduce mortality and misery and provide good care and treatment. One needs to realize once and for all that addiction is a disease that one cannot punish away.

Mr. Speaker! Alcohol is not just any commodity, and the issue of alcohol should not be left to the market. It is public health aspects that should govern alcohol policy, not the alcohol lobby. But there is a strong tendency in motions from C, M, and SD to highlight alcohol as just any commodity. I can read a motto into these motions: Cry out, more alcohol for everyone! I find that a bit tragic.

Approximately 400,000 children grow up in families with risky alcohol consumption, and 100,000 children are in a situation where the parents are in contact with addiction clinics or are being treated in hospitals for addiction.

However, it is only 2,000-3,000 children who receive support due to the parents' dependency. Many of these children, of course, are doing very poorly. Today, it is voluntary for the municipalities to provide advice and support to these children. Therefore, we want the government to investigate whether legislation is needed so that children and young people of parents with dependency and mental illness shall receive broad support and assistance measures. It should not be "free play".

Vänsterpartiet stands for a solidarity alcohol policy. This means that we believe that the availability of alcohol should be limited. We shall have high taxes, a strong Systembolaget, and stricter rules for private import. Lower total consumption also means that alcohol-related ill health and mortality decrease.

Allowing farm sales of alcoholic beverages alongside Systembolaget, which has been a theme during today's debate, would of course mean a departure from the systematic and coherent alcohol policy we have long had in Sweden. Alcohol would then risk becoming a market issue.

We also see that advertising for alcohol is spreading a bit everywhere, and we think that is unfortunate.

Sweden risks obtaining a business-friendly alcohol policy with easily accessible and cheap alcohol that reaps more fatalities and makes people sicker, where children of parents with excessively high consumption try to make themselves as invisible as possible.

Alcohol is not just any commodity. Let us all take that into consideration.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I move for approval of the Centerpartiet's reservation 8 under point 8 on the sale of alcoholic beverages in yards.

Once again, the Committee on Social Affairs has been flooded with motions regarding the introduction of farm sales of alcoholic beverages in Sweden. Of 53 motions received within the ANDT area, 18 concern farm sales, that is, every third motion. It is not only the most common motion within the ANDT area, but it is actually the most common motion overall within the Social Affairs Committee's entire area. No other proposal within our area of responsibility engages so many of the members of Parliament.

Centerpartiet has championed the issue of farm sales for a long time, and we often meet beverage producers in the countryside who describe how they want to develop their businesses. Guided tours, tastings, and restaurant operations already occur in many places today, but what is missing and in demand is the opportunity for sales. Many find it frustrating that they cannot sell their own artisanally manufactured and locally produced products at the site where they are manufactured.

Not least, many foreign tourists are surprised when they visit small-scale beer, wine, or spirit producers in Sweden and then cannot buy the drinks on-site. The idea that one would not be able to take a bottle of wine home after a visit to a German or French vineyard is, of course, ridiculous. But in Sweden, this is reality, and the visitors are instead referred to a systembolag often many miles away.

Mr. Speaker! Since 2007, the issue of farm sales of alcoholic beverages has been investigated three times, and just under a year ago, the latest investigation was completed. The two major stumbling blocks in this issue have concerned public health and Systembolaget's monopoly. Therefore, it was naturally pleasing that this time it could be established that farm sales can be carried out without any noticeable impact on public health and without the retail monopoly being compromised.

Since the investigation was completed, it has been out for consultation, and over 180 consultation responses have been received, the majority of which are positive. Above all, the proposal is supported by municipalities, the business community, and rural organizations because they see the added value that such a reform can bring. Farm sales, in fact, create new opportunities for jobs, rural development, food production, and tourism. For example, it is estimated that it can create around 1,300 new jobs in Sweden.

The question has thus been investigated and the referral responses compiled, but since then, not much has happened. That the previous government did not address the issue during its last months in power is perhaps not so strange because the Social Democrats have constantly been skeptical of, if not opposed to, introducing farm sales. But that nothing more has happened after the new government took office is remarkable.

During the election campaign, we could joyfully note that not only the Centerpartiet but also the Sverigedemokraterna, Kristdemokraterna, Moderaterna, and Liberalerna declared themselves positive towards farm sales. This guaranteed a broad majority in Sweden's Riksdag after the election, and in total, these parties now have 200 of 349 mandates.

The government has now sat for nearly six months with this opportunity and this majority situation, but nothing has happened. That, Mr. Speaker, leads me back to all these motions. The issue of farm sales is something that the Center Party has pushed for many years in the Riksdag, so one might think that it is only Center Party members who have submitted motions on the issue. But that is not the case. The 18 motions are distributed evenly between the Center Party, the Moderates, and the Sweden Democrats.

What one might ask, of course, is why members of parliament from the government base consider themselves forced to submit motions on an issue that the government already claims to support. Perhaps it is that the members are aware of the stalling process that seems to be ongoing in the Government Offices and therefore feel forced to act in the ways that are available. The Center Party has long had a suspicion that there is a division in the issue, not least from the responsible minister, and that it is for that reason that nothing is happening.

Despite the fact that all the underlying documents are ready in the Government Offices, one has still not managed to draft a government bill. The responsible minister has not even been able to provide a timetable for a forthcoming bill when the question has been asked. Certainly, there are complicated considerations to make, but the two major issues regarding public health and Systembolaget's monopoly are investigated and answered. What is needed now is not more investigations but action.

Mr. Speaker! If the four parties in the government base are serious about introducing farm sales as the Center Party has advocated for a long time, it is not sufficient to let the issue be postponed. Sweden's small-scale producers of beer, wine, and spirits have waited long enough. The Swedish countryside has waited long enough. Swedish consumers have waited long enough. This issue does not need to be left fermenting any longer; instead, it is time to tap the proposition. It is actually time to make a decision to introduce farm sales now. I expect a proposition on the floor of the Riksdag as soon as possible.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! There is obviously much that can be said about the sale of farms. There is also a wide range in the discussion about what the sale of farms actually entails.

It would be one thing if it were only about small local producers who get to sell a few bottles in connection with a study visit to the farm. But the investigation that is now on the government's desk has as its main proposal that it should apply to all production sites. In that case, it is not so much about farms with the wind rustling in the wheat and the sheep bleating in the adjacent pasture, but it is about metal sheds in the cities' industrial areas.

The investigator estimates that there are approximately 800 manufacturers in Sweden. This is to be compared with 450 Systembolaget stores. The proposal by Member Bergenblock could therefore lead to a tripling of points of sale. Can we then claim that we have a retail monopoly? Can we then claim that we protect public health? Heavy referral bodies claim that we actually cannot – that there is a great risk that the EU will say that we actually cannot.

Several referral bodies also argue that Sweden will not be able to turn back the clock and end the farm sales after the trial period and return to the old order. An abolished monopoly is an abolished monopoly.

I find it difficult to understand the Center Party's immense and uncritical enthusiasm for this. It is even harder for me to understand when I see the price tag. The investigator estimates the gains from farm sales to be between 137 and 148 million kronor per year. The same investigator estimates that the cost to society will be between 235 and 287 million kronor for premature deaths, care and treatment, production loss, and crime. Buying alcohol directly from the producer thus risks costing much more than it tastes.

My question to Member of Parliament Bergenblock is: Does the Centre Party really think it is reasonable that society should bear the cost so that alcohol producers can sell their bottles directly to the consumer?

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, member, for the question! Whether the Center Party thinks it is reasonable to introduce farm sales or not, I believe I have stood quite clearly on this during this debate, as we have asked all of the government's supporting parties about this question and my speech is principally entirely devoted to farm sales.

We see great benefits with the introduction of farm sales, but we do not do it in an uncritical way. That was also the reason why the investigation looked the way it did. The starting point this third time the question was investigated was to produce a legislative proposal that is compatible with the exception from the EU and which means that we can retain Systembolaget's retail monopoly. And this is exactly what the investigator has delivered on. The investigation clearly states that this can be implemented without the retail monopoly being compromised. The Center Party stands completely behind that we should keep Systembolaget in Sweden and keep the retail monopoly, and therefore we are also very satisfied that this is the conclusion drawn in the investigation.

Regarding public health, it is also noted that it is very clear that a farm sale in the manner proposed in the investigation will not have anything other than a marginal impact on public health. That is not where the large-scale alcohol sales will take place. That is not what will provide the opportunity for large-scale alcohol consumption. The Centre Party therefore stands completely behind the fact that farm sales need to be introduced in Sweden.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! I note that Member Bergenblock does not quite answer my question as to whether the cost for this is truly reasonable. I believe that is because we have different views on how we best use society's resources.

I think it is important that we ensure that we use the taxpayers' money to improve public health and prevent the harmful effects of alcohol so that people can be healthy and live long lives. I think that tax money should not be used for measures that risk public health, measures that specifically benefit the businesses that produce alcohol or measures that risk Systembolaget's retail monopoly.

And as I said, not all referral bodies agree that the proposal will not be able to have negative consequences. Therefore, all proposals for changes to our retail monopoly should be preceded by consultations with the EU Commission and by a request for a binding advance ruling that we do not lose the Swedish Systembolaget's position through the pending proposal on farm sales.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is therefore established that we do not risk public health by opening up for farm sales. That is not where the large-scale sale of cheap alcohol in Sweden will take place. On the contrary, we are talking about artisanally manufactured products in limited areas. Furthermore, the proposal contains a total volume limit for those who may be relevant for farm sales. There is also a limit on how much you are allowed to purchase when shopping at a farm.

In order to be able to shop, one must also, according to the commission's proposal, simultaneously participate in some form of study visit activity. One cannot, therefore, just go there on Friday evening and buy a few bottles of wine and take them home; instead, it presupposes that it is a planned visit in advance. This does not threaten public health. If there is something regarding Swedish alcohol sales that threatens public health, it is rather the sale of cases of wine at low prices at the Swedish state-owned Systembolaget, but that question we are not debating here.

This is an opportunity to open up for new branches within the business sector and to give manufacturers of wine, spirits, and beer all around our country the opportunity to get additional turnover in the business they already conduct. For me, there is nothing wrong with business policy. There is nothing wrong with us having manufacturers of beer, wine, and spirits in Sweden, but on the contrary, it is part of the Swedish food supply. But we shall continue to have a restrictive alcohol policy and a remaining Systembolaget. Farm sales are not a threat to this.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! I will be quite brief in my reply. I am astonished by the Center Party's absolute fixation on the sale of farms in an entire debate where many others have spoken about drugs, tobacco and so on. It is interesting, I must say.

I do not think that retail sale is unproblematic. I do not, therefore, think that alcohol is just any commodity, and I think it is strange that it is not taken into more consideration. For me, it becomes strange that there is such an enthusiasm for retail sale. It almost sounds as if we will soon have the square here in front of the Riksdag House filled with angry people who want retail sale. I must say that I have seen very little of this among people, even out in the countryside.

It is clear that this issue will, in one way or another, disturb the monopoly – I am unfortunately convinced of that. Not everyone thinks it is a fantastic idea. The question is also whether farm sales will really ensure that the countryside flourishes. I thought in my simplicity that other measures were needed.

I think it is strange that the question of farm sales has received such prominence as it has today. It is the only issue that the Center Party has raised here during these two hours. I think that is a bit strange, because there are many other important issues.

It is also about public health. The more alcohol there is in a society, the more people will drink, and when total consumption goes up, we risk more harm. There is no doubt about that. I wonder, Mr. Speaker, why the Center Party has not taken this into account a bit more. There are 800 motions, if I haven't misinterpreted anything.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! When one engages in this form of debate, one must try to focus, and this time we have chosen to focus on farm sales because we see that there is an opportunity to get it implemented in the Swedish Riksdag. We wonder why it takes so long when we have a clear and large majority for the issue in the Riksdag. We perceive that far too little is happening.

I can state that the basic view on the danger of farm sales differs between Vänsterpartiet and the Socialdemokrater respectively and the Centerpartiet. As I have said before, Centerpartiet safeguards Systembolaget's monopoly, and we safeguard a restrictive alcohol policy. We see the harmful effects that alcohol entails, but we can also state that alcohol is a part of society in Sweden today and that it needs to be regulated in the right way. Regulation in the right way in this case means that we can very well, just as is stated in the investigation, introduce farm sales without it threatening public health or affecting it more than marginally.

When it comes to whether other measures are needed for the Swedish countryside, we can also take a bit of rural policy now while we are already underway here. Huge amounts of measures are needed for the Swedish countryside, but if one takes away both this and that, it is clear that perhaps nothing will be left.

It is a matter of taking advantage of the opportunities that exist to create the conditions to develop small companies all over Sweden, not least in the Swedish countryside. It is about jobs, it is about letting the small companies grow, and it is about creating new opportunities for tourism and visits all over the Swedish countryside. I believe that this can be a quite important issue, but we have a whole battery of questions when it comes to how we should develop the Swedish countryside.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! I still believe that through farm sales, the door will be opened for more actors. This issue is not driven solely by those who live in the countryside and who want wine, beer, or whatsoever on their farms, but there are quite obviously other actors standing and watching what will happen and who hope that the monopoly will fall so that they can cash in a bit more. It is, therefore, the alcohol industry. I am completely convinced of that.

If we open the door for other actors in that way and start the process without having secured the possibility of retaining the monopoly in a good way, we are in a rather precarious position.

Those I know, Mr. Speaker, who come here from other countries, become completely fascinated by the fantastic Systembolaget with all its varieties of wine, beer, and other things. It is more than what one sees in the shop in Brussels, Paris, London, or wherever one ends up.

I think we should be very careful with our alcohol monopoly. We must absolutely not let the market into alcohol policy, or rather, not let alcohol policy be taken over by the market. I see a great risk with this issue escalating further and how it will end. I really hope that there is some resistance in the Government Offices against this. Perhaps there is – who knows?

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! There are, of course, those who wish for the Swedish Systembolaget's monopoly to fall - there is no doubt about that. The Centre Party is not among them, hence the assignment that we were involved in formulating for the commission: what a legislation that fits within the framework of retaining the Swedish monopoly should look like.

Just such an investigation has been delivered, and it states that it is possible to introduce farm sales without the monopoly being undermined. It is the Center Party's position that it should be so. We shall keep Systembolaget's monopoly, and we can introduce farm sales, just as has been done in Finland, albeit in a slightly different form than what the investigation proposes. It is therefore possible to do so with the current legislation.

I am absolutely certain that many foreign tourists who come to Sweden are fascinated by Systembolaget, which has a wide range of different types of wines from all the countries in the world, of types of spirits and of types of beer. But I can guarantee that the foreign tourists are far from as fascinated when they visit a vineyard or a microbrewery in Sweden and cannot buy products to take home after the study visit or the tasting. This is what the foreign tourists wonder at.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! Member Bergenblock said it was remarkable that a government bill on farm sales had not reached the Riksdag from the new government, which has now been in power for less than half a year. What I find remarkable, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that Member Bergenblock did not devote any other issue than farm sales any attention in his speech.

I and Member Bergenblock are in agreement regarding how important it is to introduce farm sales, so I am truly pleased by the great commitment that both the individual member and the Center Party have in the issue. But I think at the same time that it is remarkable that the member did not devote a word to the high drug-related mortality or to what we can do more to prevent abuse, which the Center Party has historically spoken so much about.

But, Mr. Speaker, when I once again looked through the reservations from the Center Party that are in the committee report, I understand why Member Bergenblock has completely and fully focused on only one issue when we are debating an umbrella of many, large and important issues. It is namely the fact that there is not a single reservation from the Center Party that contains any real new proposals.

It is one distraction after another in the air, it is proposals regarding things that the Riksdag has already made announcements about, and it is proposals regarding things that the new government is already working on. I have thus received an answer as to why Member Bergenblock does not devote any attention to any other issues than just the sale of the manor.

I think, however, it is remarkable that he does not say anything about the high drug-related mortality, what we can do to reduce alcohol abuse, or what we can do for the preventive work. Is the commitment that the Center Party has previously had in these issues completely blown away? That is my question to Member of Parliament Bergenblock.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! The Centre Party always has a great commitment to the ANDT issues, and we also have a number of proposals there.

Then we reserve ourselves to the extent that we have a deviating policy, where I believe that we should pursue new issues. We can state that we have much policy that we think is important to invest in. It is not just about the Social Affairs Committee's area but also about other areas and committees.

We see the need for strengthened preventive work within ANDT policy. It is about engaging schools, community organizations, and parents to meet at least the discussion that exists in society today regarding the legalization of, among other things, cannabis and to ensure that one brings down that discussion, breaks down the arguments, and stops the eagerness for legalization that unfortunately exists among many young people today. It is one of the things that we are driving.

We want to keep Systembolaget, just as I have said before. We are crystal clear that it shall remain. We are to have a restrictive alcohol policy. But it shall not be stupid for that reason.

We also have proposals to stop the sale of nitrous oxide and ensure that it is regulated by law. This can be seen in the reservations in the report.

We want to develop Swedish addiction care. There is no doubt about that. One must be able to quickly access treatment if one has an ongoing addiction, and we view the Samsjuklighetsutredningen very positively. Centerpartiet has for a long time championed the issue that we must make addiction primarily a matter of healthcare because it is a form of illness. We have also pushed for, for example, needle exchange programs in all parts of Sweden.

But we also see a need to reduce availability in different ways with more police on the streets and with more effective police work.

So, we have proposals regarding the ANDTS policy. But just this time, I chose to focus on farm sales.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! Member Bergenblock says that one writes reservations when one has a differing opinion. But the problem, Mr. Speaker, is that the reservations that the Center Party has in this report are not about having a differing opinion, but about opening doors. They are waving their arms in the air.

Take, for example, this matter regarding the delivery of tobacco products. It is an issue that we Moderates have championed. During the previous parliamentary term, we succeeded in getting a referral through. Now, an investigation is working on looking at how this can be regulated so that it does not become legal.

Also regarding the nitrous oxide, it is an investigation that looks at how it can be regulated. Therefore, I mean that the Centerpartiet is spinning in the air here. I have had higher thoughts about the Centerpartiet and about them continuing to come up with constructive new proposals. But there are no such proposals in this report.

Mr. Speaker! To return to the farm sales, Member Bergenblock has throughout the afternoon expressed his frustration that we do not already have farm sales on site.

I basically share this frustration. I too had wished that it had been introduced a long time ago. But MP Bergenblock and his party can perhaps be a bit self-critical. Had they not supported a Social Democratic government, we could have already had farm sales. The Center Party had the opportunity to ensure that Sweden also had a bourgeois government earlier that could have delivered exactly what MP Bergenblock has spent the entire afternoon on, namely farm sales.

I would have wished that it had already been in place. But I feel secure and firmly convinced that the new Moderate-led government will ensure that Sweden will soon have a model for farm sales in place.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! The first of these investigations into farm sales was carried out in 2007, that is, during the time of the Alliance government. At that time, we from the Center Party did not succeed in pushing this through the government and the Riksdag. There was a division among other parties in the government base then.

Time has passed, and a new investigation has been conducted. But the investigation should have been carried out under all circumstances completely independently of which government was in power during the previous mandate period.

When the investigation was finished and the referral responses had been submitted, there was a change of government in Sweden, and we never had it tested whether it actually would have become legislation with the previous government or not.

What we can state now is that we have a broad majority in the Swedish Riksdag for this. 200 of 349 members, if everyone follows their party lines, will support an introduction of farm sales in Sweden. I truly hope that this will be implemented, not just during the mandate period but actually within the near future, and that we can thereby see this through once and for all. If a government bill were to be submitted during the year, perhaps we could devote next year's debate on the ANDTS issues to completely different areas, even from the Center Party's side.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues! We now leave the topic of farm sales. As appears from our documents, Miljöpartiet stands behind the same reservation that was previously requested to be granted by the Socialdemokraterna.

I intended to speak about some other issues. Miljöpartiet sees great value in that the entire gambling policy is handled collectively. Therefore, we welcomed the strategy that was presented last parliamentary term in this area with some additions. We particularly appreciated that gambling addiction was also included in the strategy.

Miljöpartiet wants to generally emphasize that these issues are part of the larger public health policy work. It is important to see how various types of risk use create ill health that affects both the individual and society, and to have an ambition to identify the mechanisms and to prevent the problems. A common ANDTS strategy also implies an increased opportunity to carry out joint interventions and measures, which is valuable because several forms of dependency often have a close connection to one another.

In addition to the public health policy perspective on these issues, Miljöpartiet also wants to generally emphasize the harm-reduction approach and that the policy in the area should aim to save lives and minimize avoidable harm. This perspective should be stronger than a repressive stance, according to Miljöpartiet.

Mr. Speaker! Miljöpartiet considers that Sweden, like other countries in the Nordic region, needs a public health law, a regulatory framework that more clearly than today clarifies what the responsibility for public health work looks like at local, regional, and state levels. The clearer this is for politicians, civil servants, and residents, the more likely it is that the public health perspective and public health work will be highlighted more and achieve a greater impact.

The Commission for Equal Health also writes in its final report about the need for such a clarification and proposes an investigation to review whether existing areas of responsibility are sufficient or whether a public health act can better contribute to the goal of good and equal health. Such a law would clearly contribute to further focus and activity regarding ANDTS issues. We believe that the government should review the issue and return with a proposal for a public health act.

Mr. Speaker! The harm reduction efforts should be strengthened within addiction care. For example, needle exchange and medication-assisted treatment should be made more accessible.

The tip of Sweden's restrictive drug policy has, historically speaking, unfortunately been directed towards the group with addiction instead of, for example, the criminal networks or the causes behind the use. Pleasantly enough, the attitude has changed in recent years, but there is more to be done. Needle exchanges are still lacking in many of the country's regions. Here, the state needs to be clearer in order to guarantee equal care. Needle exchanges shall be available for those who need them, regardless of which region in the country one lives in.

Something that many authorities, including Socialstyrelsen and Folkhälsomyndigheten, have requested is greater accessibility to medication-assisted treatment, not least because it varies between the regions. The authorities emphasize, among other things, the importance of information to both persons with problematic drug consumption and their relatives, as well as better access to needle exchange. Another low-threshold activity that has been tested with great success in other countries, and which is also mentioned by Folkhälsomyndigheten, is injection rooms.

Access to Naloxone also needs to be improved. Someone who otherwise risks dying from an overdose can survive with the help of the medication. The regulations have been simplified somewhat so that people can have Naloxone prescribed. But we believe that the question of making it over-the-counter should be reviewed. It is primarily people around a person with severe substance abuse problems who would feel safer if they could easily obtain Naloxone to give to the person using drugs in case of a suspected overdose.

Mr. Speaker! Gambling addiction is an addictive disease that affects many, both the individual with the addiction and relatives. It can destroy people's lives, and it is incredibly tough, not least for children who have parents who have fallen into this type of addiction.

Local cooperation between, among others, debt counseling, healthcare, social services and voluntary organizations needs to increase. In order to detect more people with gambling addiction, questions should be asked within primary care to identify at-risk individuals in the same way as currently occurs regarding smoking and alcohol. The Government should review how this can be implemented.

How children and young people are affected by the gambling or gambling problems of parents and other close adult relatives is an area where more knowledge is needed for appropriate measures.

The Green Party considers that the Public Health Agency needs to receive a clearer mandate to investigate how children and young people are affected by the gambling and gambling problems of parents or other adults. The agency should also be tasked with producing material for schools that wish to work with preventive measures regarding gambling. Preventive measures are central, not least in the current situation where many people have had their finances severely worsened and there is reason to fear that more, out of desperation, may end up in gambling addiction.

I naturally stand behind all of the Green Party's reservations, but for time's sake, I move for approval of only reservation 11.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

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

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