Criminal justice issues

Pontus Andersson Garpvall (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Tonight, the Riksdag is debating the report on Prison Service Issues. The Committee on Justice proposes that all motions should be rejected, among other reasons, with reference to ongoing investigation and preparatory work.

The shortage of prison and detention places in Sweden remains large. The reasons for this situation are several.

Firstly, Sweden has had skyrocketing crime for decades that has truly begun to encounter resistance only during this parliamentary term.

Secondly, previous governing politicians have not seen things coming. For an all too long time, the fact that crime increased in Sweden was denied. A new prison takes a staggering approximately seven years to complete from the decision until the first inmates move in. Had the expansion been started earlier, we would not have this situation today.

Thirdly, the Sweden Democrats' and the government's crime policy means significantly more prison years for Sweden's criminals. This, in turn, means that more prison places are needed.

With that said, Mr. Speaker, I am not satisfied with the pace of the expansion of Swedish prison sites. In my opinion, the work should proceed even faster. The problem is not only that the completion of new prisons takes longer than the completion of the Öresund Bridge, but also that Kriminalvården and Specialfastigheter have not succeeded in getting the shovel in the ground at more locations than so far at a sufficiently fast pace. Hagfors, Munkfors, and Åmål are municipalities that have clearly expressed interest, but the interest has not been strong enough from the authorities.

The Prison and Probation Service's capacity report from 2025 showed a need for 29,000 places in 2034, i.e., an increase of 17,000 places from today's approximately 12,000. In other words, the shovel should already be in the ground at more places now. The latest capacity report from this year was significantly more cautious in its forecast, with an estimate of 19,000 places by 2035, i.e., an increase of 5,000 places.

If we imagine that a new facility could have approximately 500 places, if it is very large, that means ten new prisons are needed in just ten years. Given the slow construction process, it surprises me that the spade is not in the ground in more places.

Despite this criticism, it should be said that very much has been done in the last four years. The number of prison and detention places has increased by approximately 2,000. Here we are talking primarily about densification at existing prisons. It is now largely standard with bunk beds in cells, and some of these cells are smaller than six square meters. It is also about that certain rooms, for example visiting rooms, have been converted into cells. Modular prisons have also been built inside prison yards. Four completely new prisons are underway, and from July, Sweden will place 600 prison inmates at a prison in Estonia at two-thirds of what a prison place costs in Sweden. This is completely necessary and good policy.

In my opinion, far too few people are in prison in Sweden. There are many dangerous people out in society who can be a danger to ordinary, law-abiding citizens. It shows every time a new shooting or a new explosion is committed, every time a woman is abused by her husband, and every time a child is subjected to an assault.

The state's most important task is to protect the country from external threats, and therefore we shall have a strong defense. But the most important internal task for the state will always be to protect its inhabitants from other dangerous individuals within the state's borders. Therefore, we always need to ensure that we have a strong police authority and correctional services as well as strong courts and other law enforcement agencies.

It is simply when these two social components function and are strong that people can live in freedom within the state's borders – freedom to be able to go wherever one wants without risking being subjected to assault or abuse, freedom to be able to start a business without risking being extorted by criminals, freedom to receive the service one is entitled to without paying money under the table, and freedom to be able to go to work, earn one's money, and avoid being robbed on the way home. It is not something one can count on everywhere in the world.

When the state is weakened – and by that I mean the state's main tasks, such as a strong defense or a strong judiciary – people live in a lack of freedom.

I personally have no sympathy for people who make life harder for others. Criminal individuals, corrupt officials, enablers, or people who recruit others to commit crimes have no place in my Sweden. For society to function, the state must do what it can to remove them from society. It is these people who should live in captivity, in an institution, for a long time.

Sweden is fortunately not in the same situation as many other countries around the world. Sweden is a good country. But when we have politicians who do not see things coming, who deny obvious facts about societal development and who do not handle matters in time, we move towards a situation where more and more people live in a lack of freedom.

I am proud to belong to a party and a government base where we do what we can to make Sweden safer, freer, and more Swedish.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden shall have a strong correctional service – a correctional service that protects society and carries out sentences but also prevents people from reoffending. It is precisely there that the Swedish correctional service has long been an international model. We have not been satisfied with just locking people up. We have had the ambition that people should come out better than they were when they came in. It is a strength and something we should be proud of.

If we are to be able to continue being proud of the Swedish correctional services, we must listen to the Swedish Prison and Probation Service. We must listen to those who every day work in detention centers, in prisons, and in probation. We must listen to their experiences, risk assessments, and warnings when they today describe a situation that is no longer just strained but also in some parts acute.

Mr. Speaker! The Prison and Probation Service is undergoing a historical expansion. Since 2019, prisons and detention centers have been practically permanently overcrowded. In recent years, the authority has indeed increased capacity significantly, but a large part of this, as we have just heard from the member from Sverigedemokraterna, is due to double occupancy in existing cells and even in visiting rooms, not through new modern spaces built for that purpose.

We know that the needs will increase even more in the coming years due to decisions on extensive sentencing increases that we will make in this chamber. It puts enormous pressure on the entire operation – the staff, the work environment, the security, and the recidivism prevention work.

When the over-occupancies become permanent, there is a risk that the correctional services will be shifted from being an activity where one both carries out sentences and prevents recidivism to, to an ever greater extent, becoming pure detention. It would be a very serious failure.

If we do not give the Prison and Probation Service the conditions to reduce recidivism, we will also not succeed in the long term in breaking the gangs or breaking the violence. The person who leaves an institution and comes out without treatment, without care, without education, without work, or without functioning support runs a greater risk of returning to crime. In that case, we fail both the crime victims and society.

Mr. Speaker! I am deeply concerned about the development where institutions become places where destructive norms, threats, unauthorized influence, and radicalization are given more space because society is unable to keep the mission together. It is therefore important to say that the Prison and Probation Service's mission is greater than just creating places. It is about the content of the execution. It is about security, treatment, education, care, and opportunities to build a life without crime.

Mr. Speaker! The Safety Commission was appointed by the Social Democratic-led government in 2020, and it continued under this bourgeois government. It was a commission that actually managed to unite the entire Riksdag. All parties stood behind a work that was based on research and practical experience. It is no longer common, but incredibly valuable. Therefore, it is of course disappointing that we have not received proposals in this chamber that build upon the commission's proposals in their entirety without having made a selection. Some proposals are important and necessary, but they tend to lean more towards the repressive than the preventive. Parts such as care, cooperation, and paths back are missed.

For me, it is quite simple: If we are to seriously reduce recidivism, it is not enough to toughen the sentences. We must also implement the proposals that ensure people actually have a chance to leave crime behind. Particularly important are the proposals in the Safety Commission regarding improving the chances for those released to establish themselves in the labor market. The person leaving the Prison and Probation Service must be met with a real chance at work or education. Work is the foundation for freedom and independence. This also applies to those who have served a sentence.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats highlight in today's report concrete proposals concerning permission and release. The prison and probation service already performs highly qualified risk assessments today, but they are not always noticed and the information does not always reach the police. That is, of course, not reasonable.

We mean that the Prison and Probation Service and the police should be tasked with developing a standardized procedure for information sharing before permissions and release. It is about strengthening security and preventing crime, and about the different parts of society having to work together, not in silos. In the same way, we want to see mandatory so-called release calls where the police meet the perpetrator and where the person is offered continued rehabilitation even after they have left the Prison and Probation Service.

For crime victims, not least women who have been subjected to violence in close relationships, information at permission and release must function significantly better. Information must be able to be combined with concrete support, protection, and help from society. If there are children, their needs must be at the center.

Mr. Speaker! We must, of course, also talk about the expansion of the Prison and Probation Service. The current pace is not sufficient. The Prison and Probation Service itself points out, among other things, that today's procurement process hinders the new construction. Therefore, we Social Democrats have proposed that, among other things, Specialfastigheter should be given a clearer public mission to support the Prison and Probation Service in its expansion of prison places. It is a concrete answer to a concrete problem.

We also want the Prison and Probation Service to be present throughout the country. Therefore, it is incredibly important to have an in-depth dialogue with municipalities that are interested in new construction but also in the expansion of existing institutions and jails. In the acute situation that exists, every project and planned construction must be utilized to the maximum.

Let us be clear: More walls are not enough. The Prison and Probation Service also needs more trained employees, a better working environment, more continuing education for the staff, and a clear political accountability so that the agency can fulfill its mission.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats stand for a crime policy that is tough on crime and smart on recidivism. We stand up for the crime victims, public safety, and a correctional system worthy of its name.

If we want people to leave crime behind them, we must give the Prison and Probation Service the opportunity to do its job fully. That is how we protect society not only today but also tomorrow.

Of course I stand behind all our reservations, but I move for approval only to reservation 5.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damsgaard (M)

Mr. Speaker! The government is now carrying out the largest offensive against crime in modern Swedish history. It is about strengthening the entire justice chain, new tools for the law enforcement authorities, a complete renovation of crime prevention work, and a complete review of the penal code.

We are shifting the focus from the perpetrator to the crime victim. The sentences shall reflect the severity of the crimes. We are introducing double sentences for crimes committed in criminal environments. Today's form of bulk discount shall be abolished, and the rules on parole have been tightened.

Imprisonment aims to provide redress to crime victims and to give the perpetrator the opportunity to re-enter open society as a law-abiding member of society after the sentence. But imprisonment also aims, not least, to protect society from dangerous perpetrators. The question of toughening sentences is about justice, that effort should pay off and that crimes should be punished.

Mr. Speaker! In order to manage all of this, the Prison and Probation Service needs to be significantly expanded. From 2023 to 2028, the Prison and Probation Service's budget will more than double – from 14 to over 30 billion kronor per year.

Since 2022, 5,000 new places have been added. In the Prison and Probation Service's capacity plan for the years 2026–2035, the Prison and Probation Service has projected a sharp increase in the number of people in prison from today's 9,000 to approximately 17,000.

This forecast is based on legislation from January 1 of this year as well as the reforms financed in the budget bill for 2026. To this are added the non-time-bound reforms from the Criminal Justice Reform Commission as well as changed rules for conditional release, which require an additional large number of places. Furthermore, from the summer, a system with youth departments for young people under 18 years old sentenced to prison will be introduced instead of closed youth care as it is today.

Mr. Speaker! To state the obvious: The number of admissions depends, by its nature, on the development of crime. The government's offensive against crime ultimately aims for crime to decrease and for Sweden to become a safer and more secure country.

One thing is certain, however. A substantial expansion of prisons and detention centers will be necessary during the ten-year period we have ahead of us. It is a matter of expanding existing detention centers and prisons, building entirely new detention centers and prisons in Sweden, and in more cases transferring execution to the convict's home country in cases involving foreign citizens.

The government has also signed an agreement with Estonia to rent 600 prison places in Tartu starting this year. The Riksdag will address that issue later during the spring.

In this context, Madam Speaker, there is reason to remind us of how it sounded when we debated the corresponding report last year. At that time, I sought clarity on the Social Democrats' position regarding correctional places abroad. In the Social Democrats' reservation in the report, they were very clear that they did not want to proceed with the plans to rent prison places abroad. They expressed it in the following way in their reservation: "We therefore request that the government should not proceed with the plans to rent prison places abroad."

After that, the Social Democrats have gladly changed their minds. The question of prison places abroad can thus be added to that list of proposals where the Social Democrats are first firmly opposed, only to change their minds a short time later.

We remember how it was when the Riksdag decided on legislation for security zones. Then they argued that the zones were discriminatory. But only a few months later, they wanted to introduce security zones in all of southern Stockholm.

The Social Democrats' comrades on the red-green side, the Green Party and the Left Party, however, seem to continue to oppose the proposal for detention centers abroad. It is clear that with a red-green government, many important crime policy reforms would not be implemented due to the Social Democrats' own inability but not least also because the red-green comrades would function as effective brake blocks.

Madam Speaker! Persons who repeatedly commit crimes account for a very large proportion of the total crime in society. An effective recidivism prevention effort can therefore provide great gains for society, both for the individual and for society as a whole.

One of the Prison and Probation Service's fundamental tasks is to work towards preventing recidivism, among other things by cooperating with various actors in society. In order to strengthen the work on preventing recidivism and to create conditions for a broad consensus and long-term perspective on these issues, the government steered the direction for the parliamentary safety committee.

The preparation had received a rather broad and somewhat vague mandate from the previous, Social Democratic government. Now, it became a clear mandate linked to the work of preventing recidivism and to reviewing society's work with preventing recidivism in crime.

The Safety Commission submitted a long series of proposals for reforms in broad agreement. In a reservation, the red-green parties, as the member before me described, wish to issue a notification to the government to implement the Safety Commission's proposals. It feels good that the four parties who seem to disagree on most things can still agree on something.

In one case, it is a rather weak requirement. The referral has been out for consultation, and the government is now working systematically further with these issues.

One of the proposals that the committee agreed upon was to expand the possibility of executing a prison sentence outside of an institution with what is commonly called an ankle monitor. It is a reform that has been requested from the Prison and Probation Service and which has been in place since January 1 of this year.

The committee's proposal regarding release and supervision is handled in the bill on a purposeful civil protection and clear reactions in the event of recidivism. The bill is being processed in the Riksdag now during the spring session.

The government has also given two assignments to strengthen the Prison and Probation Service's recidivism prevention activities. This involves, on one hand, further developing measures to counter recidivism, and on the other hand, working together with the Consumer Agency to counter over-indebtedness among those detained in prisons and in remand centers.

There is also a broad consensus to strengthen health and medical care in relapse prevention measures. The Government is also continuing to work on these issues.

Madam Speaker! When we talk about work to prevent recidivism, it is impossible to ignore the lax way we in Sweden have handled persons who repeatedly relapse into crime. An important part of the upcoming penal reforms is therefore that recidivism shall lead to harsher penalties more than it does today. In plain terms, it means that those who relapse into crime will receive more tangible consequences.

A prerequisite for a crime to be punished more severely is, however, that Sweden also has Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister after the election.

I note that Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet want to make single-cell housing the norm within the Prison and Probation Service. It may sound like a simple matter, but I can tell you who are listening that it is no small matter.

We have today several thousand double-bedded places in prisons and institutions. These are places that do not easily let themselves be replaced. It would not only put a stop to the harsher sentences that are now on the way. The question is also which criminals Miljöpartiet and Vänsterpartiet want to be released early to enable single-bedding. Is it the rapist? Is it the gang criminal who has threatened witnesses? Or is it the one who has smuggled weapons and narcotics to Sweden?

I do not expect any answer to this question today, but it is obvious that with a social democratic red-green government, the reforms that the Moderaterna and the government are putting forward will not be able to be completed.

Madam Speaker! Even though it is difficult today to assess the exact number of detainees in prisons and detention centers in ten years, it is obvious that a powerful expansion of the Prison and Probation Service will be required. Everyone easily realizes the magnitude of the challenge. It is naturally about the physical expansion itself, but also about the Prison and Probation Service's supply of competence. But the fact that it is difficult does not change the fact that it is necessary.

I would finally like to take the opportunity to thank all employees within the Prison and Probation Service for the efforts they make every day. Even though the work situation can sometimes be challenging and strained, it is a proud and committed professional group I encounter every time I visit any of the Prison and Probation Service's operations.

I vote in favor of the proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Gudrun Nordborg (V)

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 4, but I naturally stand behind all the reservations that Vänsterpartiet has signed.

Just as we must act to limit new recruitment into crime, we must strive very much to create opportunities for those who have already been included in criminal activities and make it so that we enable exits and, of course, counteract recidivism.

Of course, gender plays a role here, as it always does. In the criminal arena, the man has been the norm. When we talk about crime, we often see tough men in our inner image.

We could perhaps say that it would be enough if it stopped there. But now it is unfortunately the case that women also appear on the criminal arena even when it concerns very serious crimes. The macho man has thus received a certain company of women who copy the macho ideals.

We must approach things differently when it comes to women. Their role within crime, and particularly the criminal gangs, differs in part from that of men. It is even more common that these women are both perpetrators and victims. This is not rare among men and boys either, but the girls and women have very often been exposed to traumatic experiences, such as sexual abuse. Their bodies are also used within crime. They can also commit "ordinary" crimes, such as transporting weapons, explosives, and money, but it is also about the extra fact that they can be decoys and even function as commodities between criminal men.

The picture is multifaceted. It can involve very many different entry points into crime. Brå has conducted interesting studies and interviews with girls and women. There are those who have made the active choice themselves to step into the criminal arena, but many have done so because of family, a romantic relationship – or a so-called romantic relationship, perhaps we should say many times – or a friendship.

The situation can then be different for these girls and women, and they also face other difficulties when they try to leave the criminal arena. Deciding to leave this can be very complicated, especially if one has children together with a criminally active person. We must find both the right resources and the right competence to handle this. Exit programs adapted for women are therefore necessary.

I would also like to comment on the prisons. More and more prison places were needed, even for women, unfortunately in all security categories. Even among the most dangerous, there are now women.

Women are, of course, just like the men, affected by the over-occupancies – several have mentioned this. This implies major problems, which I think we must warn against. It concerns work environment problems for the staff, which can become very stressful. It can mean a risk of violence directed at the employees but also that the staff must intervene in violence situations between inmates. When two people share a cell, a violent situation can quickly escalate, perhaps without the staff having time to react and intervene as one would wish.

The possibilities of leaving a life of crime are affected. The new constructions are not expected to change this with double-layering; they are still planning for permanent double-layering. This unfortunately risks having negative consequences. I have so far primarily spoken about that which concerns the staff, but it is also about the inmates' problems. In the worst case, this can also lead to very serious violence – we have already seen tendencies toward it.

Seko demands that action be taken for double-layering and that it should be the norm, and that there should be zero tolerance for solitary work in client-facing situations. The requirement is that there should always be at least one colleague within both earshot and sight. From the Left Party's side, we see Seko's demands as reasonable in order for a minimum level to be maintained regarding the working environment within the criminal justice system and believe that the government should act for this.

One can also feel a great concern for the correctional system as a whole, and I see a concern for a backlash. If we draw out the consequences of these clouds of concern, which everyone agrees exist, there is a risk that those who should come out better off after a period of correctional detention in an institution will instead come out worse off. It is about not having enough premises, and one is now straining to the limit to convert premises that were intended for employment, education, or treatment but are now instead becoming cells or living quarters.

This also means that recidivism prevention activities are affected and perhaps cannot be carried out in the same way at all. The stay is therefore much less about care and much more about detention – under difficult circumstances. There, I truly agree with what has been said earlier here in the rostrum: That building up something that makes it possible for the inmate to leave the facility with hopes of being free from their drug addiction and being educated to be able to get a job is, of course, extremely important.

We also have problems when it comes to recruiting staff, even though there are many who want to enter the criminal justice system and many who already work there who are incredibly committed. There I also agree with previous speakers: It is easy to find such people. But it is also very important that the committed and perhaps newly hired receive a truly relevant education and that it is not shortened as it is today.

I also want to mention the open prisons. An expansion is also taking place there, and it may come a bit later because we are limiting the possibilities for earlier release. But we would also need to look at this. I wish I could hear more people say what we heard in a debate not so long ago: that the Tidö parties would now want to invest just as much, crown for crown, in preventive activities as they do in repressive activities.

I believe we also must look at how we create a protection that becomes long-term relevant. We can have alternative forms that involve both control and a lighter pressure and that provide greater opportunities for rehabilitation, for example, care with an ankle monitor. There, the opportunities to protect any women and children who may be near the criminal person will also increase. We must absolutely secure the freedom and safety for them.

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

Ingemar Kihlström (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin this late debate by moving for the approval of the committee's proposed decision. This means, therefore, the rejection of all motions within the area of criminal justice.

Madam Speaker! While the police and prosecutors stand on the front line in the fight against crime, the correctional services are perhaps our most important effort to prevent crimes from recurring. The correctional services' mission is twofold. It is partly about protecting society by keeping convicted criminals deprived of liberty, and partly about providing the conditions for those who are detained to leave crime behind. Repression and rehabilitation must go hand in hand.

But the reality today is still worrying. Recidivism remains at around 30 percent, according to the latest figures from the Swedish Crime Prevention Council. Among young people, the situation is even more alarming. There, a large proportion of gang criminals reoffend. This is not worthy of a society that wants to break the grip of crime. And it is a failure, both for the individual and for society.

Madam Speaker! The Prison and Probation Service has been under severe pressure for a long time. Overcrowding, lack of space in remand centers and prisons, as well as insufficient resources, have caused the agency to practically be on its knees. This has had consequences.

Important relapse prevention measures have been sidelined. Programs such as the twelve-step program against substance abuse and activities such as the monastery activities at Kumlaanstalten have been discontinued. This occurred under previous governments, which were unable to meet the developments in time. The result was a correctional system where the opportunities to break a criminal lifestyle pattern were worsened.

Madam Speaker! The current government and the coalition partners have taken responsibility for reversing the development. The correctional services have been provided with significantly increased resources. The expansion of prison and detention facilities is now occurring at a pace we have not seen before.

About fifty construction projects are underway, and the goal is to triple the capacity within a ten-year period. As a complementary measure, Sweden will now also rent prison places abroad, in Estonia. It is a welcome change that the Christian Democrats have argued for and pushed for over many years.

Naturally, there needs to be a major focus on continued expansion. I know that there are several municipalities that are ready to be a site for a new construction, and we should continue to push forward the development.

At the same time, we are also intensifying the work so that more foreign nationals convicted of crimes in Sweden shall serve their sentences in their home countries or be deported after serving their sentence. Here, the government is taking greater responsibility than previous governments have succeeded in doing.

Madam Speaker! These measures are crucial for restoring the rule of law, but they are not sufficient in themselves. If we are to reduce crime in the long run, we must also break the cycle of recidivism. A long prison sentence can in itself have a crime-preventing effect, but it would be a waste of both time and resources if the time in the institution was not also used to prepare and motivate the inmate for a life without criminality.

It is naturally a matter of finding knowledge and motivation and seeking a life without crime. It may be a path to a profession. It requires active and purposeful work. It requires clarity regarding right and wrong. And it requires an anchoring in the values that our society rests on. Recidivism prevention programs and work are important parts of the correctional service's work.

Madam Speaker! Abuse is one of the single greatest drivers behind crime. Up to 70 percent of those detained have some form of drug problem. Without effective treatment programs, we risk people repeatedly returning to the same destructive patterns. Targeted programs are needed to counteract drug addiction.

For us Christian Democrats, it is natural that, for example, the twelve-step program is reintroduced broadly within the Prison and Probation Service. It was a method that showed good results and truly gave people a real chance to break their addiction and thereby also their connection to crime.

Madam Speaker! Man does not live by bread alone. There is also an existential dimension in every person's life. It concerns questions of meaning, responsibility, guilt, and reconciliation. Here, spiritual care within the Prison and Probation Service plays an important role.

Under the leadership of Sveriges kristna råd, around 180 employees at Nav, the Committee for Spiritual Care, meet with the inmates in conversation, worship services, and guidance regarding ethical and existential questions. The Director General of the Prison and Probation Service has himself described how these meetings can become the beginning of a decisive change in a person's life. These are not peripheral interventions. They are central parts of the work to break crime. It is therefore important that Nav's activities receive both resources and premises in the expansion that is currently underway.

Madam Speaker! Another concrete example is the one I mentioned earlier, namely the monastery activities at Kumlaanstalten. There, inmates were given opportunities for silence, reflection, and personal development. It was an activity that helped people to pause, think, and reconsider their life choices. That type of rehabilitation goes deeper than mere behavioral change. It is about reconnecting with fundamental values regarding right and wrong, responsibility, and human dignity.

We Christian Democrats therefore believe that this type of activity should be reintroduced in some way and, naturally, be given the opportunity to be developed at more institutions as capacity is built up.

Madam Speaker! The Prison and Probation Service should not only be a place where people are detained until the sentence is served. It should be an institution that embodies the values of the rule of law: respect for the law, the individual's responsibility for their actions, and an opportunity to return to society as a law-abiding citizen.

But criminal policy does not end at the walls. We also need harsher sentences for serious crimes. We need to have more police, but we also need stronger crime prevention work. This government has begun this paradigm shift, where all these parts are interconnected.

Madam Speaker! We must dare to speak plainly about the causes of crime. When young people are drawn into gang criminality, it is not solely about socioeconomic factors. It is about values, norms, and personal responsibility. When children are used to commit serious violent crimes, we cannot be content with talking about structures. We must also talk about right and wrong. To deny that is to turn a blind eye to reality.

That is why we Christian Democrats emphasize the importance of the family and the importance of clear norms and a society that holds together. The government has strengthened parental responsibility, expanded parental support programs, developed integration policy, and worked to give schools and social services better tools. It is also why we believe that moral reflection, existential guidance, and functioning treatment programs should be a natural part of the correctional services' mandate. Those who do not understand the importance of values will also not fully understand how we combat crime.

Madam Speaker! Today's debate shows that challenges still remain. The lack of space must continue to be built away. The work on preventing recidivism must be further strengthened. But the direction is clear. This government is expanding the capacity. We are sharpening the policy, and we are strengthening the content of the correctional services' work with a major focus on recidivism prevention. That is how we both create safety here and now and reduce crime in the long run.

With this, Madam Speaker, I wish to once again urge approval of the committee's proposal, which means the rejection of all motion requests.

(Applause)

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

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Madam Speaker! Sweden faces a prison crisis of great magnitude if we do not get a government that manages to build more detention and prison places than the current government does. If we invest in the police and the prosecutors who, with more resources, ensure that more are convicted, if we toughen the sentences and if we postpone parole and furthermore do this in a time of increased crime – then we must have a government that manages to govern, lead, and deliver throughout the entire justice chain.

The Prison and Probation Service takes over in the chain of justice either after a detention or after a final judgment. The crime prevention work has failed, but the law enforcement work has succeeded. Police and prosecutors have presented the evidence they found to the courts. Witnesses have testified, and crime victims have spoken out. It is time to serve one's sentence, one's penalty, in an institution and in probation.

The Prison and Probation Service's vision is "better out." Whether it concerns short or long prison sentences, the goal must be that the sentence marks the end of the convicted criminal's path, a life without recidivism. It must therefore be an activity with measures and interventions that we know are effective and impactful – and not just slogans.

The Prison and Probation Service also needs to be an operation with high security for both employees and inmates. But the picture that the Prison and Probation Service provides is not a picture with the best conditions for that. The Prison and Probation Service states in its annual report for 2025 that the increase in the number of inmates, the lack of space, the relatively large proportion of new employees, and the increase in the number of clients with links to organized crime collectively had a major impact on the occupational environment risks during 2025.

That is why it is welcome that the government presented one of the Safety Commission's proposals – that it shall be possible to serve prison sentences of up to one and a half years with an ankle monitor instead of, as before, six months. It makes a difference in terms of both the risk of recidivism and the serious situation in the country's correctional facilities.

The authority, the Prison and Probation Service, is responsible for its own local supply. But it is the government that leads its authorities. I am very concerned that powder kegs are being created in the country's prisons, where the correctional care that the inmates need is set aside in order to solely manage – these are the Prison and Probation Service's own words – basic safety. It could mean that our institutions become a path even further into criminality instead of a way out.

I also have great confidence in the Prison and Probation Service – this has been expressed by others. But I am seriously concerned about the situation. Sweden can do more than this.

The Prison and Probation Service, Specialfastigheter, and the government need to present a sustainable plan for a prison system worthy of its name. I do not think we here in the Riksdag should decide exactly where the new facilities and prisons should be built. But I know that I and many others with me have visited and had contacts with municipalities in the country that are ready for establishments. It is difficult for both the municipalities and for us parties to get clear information. It is largely different figures every time information is received. In such an important issue, the government, authorities, and specific coordinators need to be clearer. In the meantime, more crimes were committed. More people are being prosecuted, and the capacity of the prisons is being seriously challenged.

I would like to take this opportunity to mention that Centerpartiet supports the proposal to rent places in Estonia.

Madam Speaker! We can return to the Trygghetsberedningen. It was, therefore, a unanimous parliamentary investigation. The commission proposed, for example, that Kriminalvården should receive a clarified health and medical care mandate in its agency instructions and that the mandate should be given a special state funding. The purpose of the proposal was to make treatment available to more inmates.

They would be given a mandate to provide healthcare that has an effect on the risk of recidivism. The purpose would be to have such healthcare for all clients. Socialstyrelsen would be tasked with developing general guidelines for care specifically for those deprived of liberty in order to strengthen a coherent care chain.

But the government says no to all of this. I have rarely heard a member from the government parties almost boast about slow processing and that good proposals remain in the bureaucratic drawer. These are good proposals that were developed in unity. They were referred and ready a year and a half ago. They need to be placed on the Riksdag's table.

The government does not even want to stand behind motions for a national goal for reduced recidivism and that resources should be directed towards functioning recidivism-preventing measures. It is such that one is astonished.

The Sweden Democrats spoke earlier in the debate. The member is not remaining in the chamber. But the member said that the goal for them was that too few are in prison. The goal was that more should be in prison. The Centre Party thinks that too many are committing crimes. We want fewer to commit crimes. There is a difference in focus between our parties. We are for harsher sentences, but we are also for intensified crime prevention work.

With that, I move for the approval of reservation number 1.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is very ungrateful for me to come last, because now practically everything I had intended to say has been said by previous speakers. But I intend to repeat a little bit. I also want to say something about the Security Preparedness Board.

It was a broad investigation that was to assist the government with a basis for the design of a knowledge-based and broadly anchored crime policy. All parties participated. The preparation submitted three reports to the government. These have been out for consultation. We stood behind the proposals then. We still do, and we want the government to proceed with these proposals. They are anchored in research and experience, and it is a strength that they have broad support in the Riksdag.

Particularly urgent proposals concern, for example, improved accessibility to relapse prevention health and medical care, strengthened cooperation for young offenders, and measures to improve the inmates' opportunities to establish themselves on the labor market.

I think – just like my name, who just spoke here – that among other things this debate has been clarifying when it comes to seeing what the difference is in terms of focus. I think that the government very often emphasizes punishment. More people should be locked up and so on. There is talk of harsher sentences, stricter sentences and expansion.

Naturally, the Green Party does not advocate – and I do not believe any other party does either – that convicted persons should be released early or whatever it was that was said by a previous speaker. We do, however, think it is important to place more focus on preventive measures and to conduct a criminal justice system that leads to a reduced risk of recidivism. What we want to achieve with our criminal justice policy is that fewer crimes shall be committed. That is, so to speak, the overarching purpose – not that more people should be punished more severely. Punishment must, of course, be imposed when crimes have been committed. But the greatest focus must lie on ensuring that crimes are not committed.

Madam Speaker! I also intended to mention something about women's specific situation. Recently, the increased number of women and also girls committing criminal acts has been noted, and there is reason to assume that this is a situation that will continue. An increased focus from the political side is therefore justified.

We received a very good presentation in the committee some time ago from a report author from Brå, who had produced a report that dealt precisely with girls and women in criminal networks. Brå had seen there that there were both similarities and differences between women and girls, and boys and men, regarding how one is involved in criminal networks.

Brå considers it important that these circumstances are taken into account both by the authorities working against organized crime and by the organizations that are to offer help and support to girls and women in criminal environments. Otherwise, there is a risk that the interventions will not be accurate, because, among other things, gender plays a role in how people respond to different measures that they may be subject to.

Brå's report shows, they write in their summary, that social relations and an early normalization of crime are often girls' and women's path into criminal environments. At the same time, it appears that their initial circumstances, for example home conditions, school, and various forms of vulnerability, also play a significant role in how and why relationships are initiated with male friends and boyfriends who are involved in criminal networks.

Many of the interviewed girls and women in the report have an upbringing where new layers of difficulties successively build upon previous ones, for example, parents' substance abuse problems, poorer economic conditions, exposure to violence in the home, and their own mental ill-health. Many also have school failures behind them.

Boys and men involved in criminal networks often have an interest in involving their female friends, for example to get help with storing and transporting drugs, while at the same time many of the girls and women also want to earn money and show loyalty to their friends. It is also common to enter into a romantic relationship with an older, network-involved guy who belongs to the criminal network's higher circles. In that way, one enters into criminality oneself.

Knowledge of women's specific conditions must be further improved, and society must take responsibility to ensure there are the right resources and the right competence to manage the situation and enable women to get out of the criminal environment in a safe, adapted, and effective way. Among other things, a defector program adapted for women must be established.

We have previously spoken about the overcrowding within the correctional services. This also applies to the women's prisons, and there is, of course, a risk that it will become even worse here when the number of inmates increases further as a result of all the government's reforms. It is therefore important that the situation for women is highlighted specifically, especially ahead of the planned expansion of the number of prison places.

The government should take a holistic approach to the issue of a more equal criminal justice system and conduct an investigation into women's situation and needs in the criminal justice system in order to create the conditions for an equal criminal justice system.

I had intended to move for approval of reservation 1, but that was just done, so I choose instead to move for approval of reservation 8, which concerns the last thing I spoke about – an investigation into women's specific situation.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(The decision was to be taken on 16 April.)

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