Committee Report - the committees' activities during 2025 etc.
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned the committee report and the quality of the Swedish inquiry system. MP argues that the committees are important for democracy and that inertia in the system is a guarantee for well-elaborated proposals 1. MP also wants to expand referral lists to include children and young people 2. V emphasizes that the inquiry system provides high quality but expresses concern that the government ignores the Council on Legislation and that the referral times have been shortened 2. C argues that the inquiry system is being weakened and that the government ignores the Council on Legislation 3. C criticizes that gender equality analyses are ignored and demands higher requirements for gender equality analyses in government inquiries 3.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Jan Riise (MP)
Madam Speaker! The Committee on the Constitution's activities span a broad area which nevertheless can be said to reflect many different perspectives and sides of Swedish administration. On one side, there is the annual spring review with last year's reports concerning individual ministers and their potential shortcomings in the handling of their affairs. We saw the result of that yesterday with great interest and many questions from the media and from people on social media.
Now we move to a completely different area, namely the committees' activities during 2025. It may not attract quite as much media attention, but the committees are important elements in the system, or perhaps the safety net, for public power towards the voters and for all parts all others in Sweden who do not yet have the right to vote, for example, youth and all those waiting for a decision on citizenship.
Madam Speaker! Committees are a summary name for the assignments that can result from various decisions that the government makes. They can be established in slightly different ways. They are called preparations, commissions, councils, or simply investigations with specific investigators. Formally, the committees constitute part of the response to the requirement for preparation, as expressed in the Instrument of Government. It is therefore up to the government to decide how the work shall be organized and carried out. But one must, of course, remember that the purpose is to provide the Riksdag with a basis for decision-making that is well-elaborated.
During 2025, 60 committees were appointed and just over 100 were concluded. At any given time, a fairly large number of committees are ongoing at a total cost that ended at 470 million kronor in 2025.
Madam Speaker! The KU says in the report that the committee's account provides valuable knowledge about the Swedish investigation system. The proposal is that the report be added to the records. But I also want to say a few words about the motions that have been dealt with in connection with this.
One of the motions does not take entirely unexpectedly up the time that the preparation of matters takes or can take. The proposer argues that that time needs to be shortened in many cases, not least against the background of an increasingly changing world.
The committee finds that the requirement for preparation in the Instrument of Government in itself gives the government great influence over how the processes are designed. But the committee also points out that it is reasonable and necessary for the democratic process that at least the political parties in parliament actually have time to familiarize themselves with the issues being discussed, partly in order to be able to develop and highlight alternative solutions and issues.
In the review of this year's referrals to the Committee on the Constitution, we have also reviewed how the requirement for preparation has been handled, particularly within the Ministry of Justice, where during the current parliamentary term we have seen that a large number of investigations and legislative proposals have been developed.
KU expressed no direct criticism of the preparation but pointed out that the requirements for consultation time etc. exist for a reason. The inertia in the system is not necessarily a disadvantage, but rather a guarantee of well-elaborated proposals.
Finally, Madam Speaker, the committee has also addressed a motion on the recurring question of whether we in Sweden might be over-implementing the directives coming from the European Union. It is not least the business community that expresses fears that this could lead to reduced competitiveness if the implementation in Sweden involves increased burdens.
One should naturally not underestimate the advantages, for example within the area of sustainability, that can be achieved by adapting the minimum options to Swedish conditions and ambitions. The committee proposes that the motion be dismissed with reference to the fact that work on the implementation of EU rules is ongoing.
With that said, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal to submit the report to the records.
Jessica Wetterling (V)
Madam Speaker! To begin with, I move for approval of reservation 1.
This report contains an account of the committees that the government has appointed and which have the task of investigating one or more issues. In the compilation, the number of investigations and statistics on the gender distribution in each respective group within the committee system are reported.
Despite the fact that we have a reservation, this provides the Riksdag with valuable information regarding the composition and activities of the committees. We in the committee note that, on the whole, there is a relatively even gender distribution in most categories.
But when looking at the statistics over time, one can also see that men have historically been overrepresented as chairpersons of committees and underrepresented as secretaries. Over time, however, these gender differences have been leveled out, but in recent years men have once again been considered underrepresented, according to the criteria of the Discrimination Act, when it comes to being secretaries.
Madam Speaker! Our Swedish committee system is something to be proud of. It is a central part of the democratic decision-making process. Personally, I am proud that for a long time we have chosen to ensure that the legislation we decide on in here maintains high quality and is comprehensively reviewed by both the Council on Legislation and other referral bodies, for example, authorities, courts, and other organizations. It gives us decision-makers and legislators a better basis, higher quality, and a greater anchoring in society before the legislative changes occur.
Mr. Speaker, I must admit that I am a little worried. Recently, SNS Demokratiråd published a report showing that this government receives twice as much serious criticism from the Council on Legislation as previous governments and that the Council on Legislation is ignored to a greater extent. I also note that certain legislative proposals from this government receive very stinging criticism from other referral bodies, which is not heeded at all. This is regrettable and worrying.
Madam Speaker! The committee and inquiry system, whose basis therefore forms the foundation for the decisions we make in here, is an important way to be able to influence legislation and political power. Before major reforms are implemented, as mentioned, a government inquiry is usually conducted, whereby experts from different areas, for example civil society and researchers, are consulted. The inquiries' description of reality, with its problems and strengths, then as mentioned forms the basis for the political solutions that can become reality. Before the government submits its proposal, a large number of instances have been asked to submit views during a referral round.
In both of these instances, it is important that the perspective of young people is included. But from LSU's own member survey, it emerged that the invitations for consultation decreased by 30 percent during the previous parliamentary term. During this parliamentary term, both the investigation time and the consultation time have generally become shorter, which makes it even more difficult for civil society to have time to exert influence.
We in Vänsterpartiet believe that it is important that representatives for young people can participate in the democratic process and are invited to a greater extent to sit in reference groups and advisory boards and also get to respond to referrals. Therefore, we want to see an update of the committee regulation so that state public inquiries concerning children and young people shall actively seek their experiences and opinions. This is something that we believe the government should do: expand the referral lists and include children and young people in the impact assessments.
Helena Vilhelmsson (C)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate! It is the first time I am participating in a debate on behalf of the Committee on the Constitution – it is an honor. Out of respect for the rest of the Committee on the Constitution's work, I will stick to the reservation that the Center Party has and which falls within my area of responsibility, namely equality.
But, as I said, today we are debating the committee report, an account of the government's investigative process. It sounds like a technical and boring administrative issue and perhaps like a detail, but it is not, as so many before me have said. This report concerns one of the foundations of our legislative process. It is about the quality of the underlying materials that we have here in the chamber and shall make decisions based on.
Even here we have a Swedish model with independent committees which, together with thorough referral procedures, is one of democracy's greatest strengths. Legislative proposals are thus illuminated from all sides, and consequences are analyzed. We build a society on knowledge and not solely on political opinion.
Madam Speaker! That is precisely why it is worrying to see the development that is occurring otherwise and which this report and previous reviews actually highlight. I would actually go so far as to say that a weakening of the investigative system is taking place. It is serious and occurs parallel to what we know is happening generally: that this government is increasingly disregarding the opinions of the Council on Legislation. I do not think it is enough to say that work is underway when the deficiencies are so obvious, especially when it concerns gender equality analyses.
Today we are experiencing an unambiguous backlash against equality – a silent dismantling of the tools we have to ensure that decisions do not fall unfairly and cement old injustices. In our motion, which the committee now proposes that the Riksdag should reject, we point to a fundamental problem. It is all too common for an investigation to state that a reform will have an unequal outcome, but the government still chooses to proceed with the proposal. This has not only happened during this government – that must be said. So it happened with several of the reforms during the pandemic. This is, therefore, a criticism that all parties need to take to heart, including my own. The equality analysis then becomes merely a paper product, an administrative exercise without real significance.
This has been investigated by, among others, SKO, Sweden's women's organizations, which clearly point out what I said: Even though it is known that it has a negative effect on equality, one proceeds anyway.
Madam Speaker! Gender mainstreaming is the tool that many governments have used to ensure that the gender perspective is not missed in all work. What consequences do different decisions have for gender equality? It is about understanding that a seemingly neutral proposal regarding pensions, taxes, or labor market measures can have completely different consequences for women and for men. It is about making visible the human being behind the figures in a budget, for example.
Therefore, it is both sad and unworthy that this government has removed the requirements for texts on gender equality integration in the regulatory letters for over 40 agencies. When we ask why, we are told that the work is being evaluated, that they will get back to us, and that it is still possible to have a dialogue with the agencies regarding gender equality issues. That might be the case, but I do not believe the answer would be the same if it were about removing the wording on combating gang crime in the Police Authority's regulatory letter.
That dismissing proposals to ensure that the work with the investigative system is gender-balanced from the start with the answer that the work is ongoing is a clear signal that gender equality has actually been moved from core activities to the periphery. It is no longer a self-evident part of every decision.
We know today that women lose millions in lifetime income due to an unequal distribution of the parental leave, among other things. We know that women dominate in occupations with higher sickness absence rates and lower wages. We know that only a fraction of venture capital goes to companies run by women. We cannot accept this development.
Therefore, we believe that the requirement for gender equality analyses must be raised in government investigations and decision-making bases. If an investigation shows that a proposal risks increasing economic inequality, the government must either present a revised, better proposal or clearly and honestly justify to the Riksdag why it chooses to proceed with a policy that makes Sweden less equal. The responsibility must be made visible.
Madam Speaker! Good legislation requires a good basis. When we compromise on the quality of the analyses, we compromise on the quality of our decisions, and we compromise on equality. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I move for the approval of the Centerpartiet's reservation number 2.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.