Equivalent requirements for goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities

Lars Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving to approve the government's proposal for amendments to the Local Government Act regarding the Committee on the Constitution's report KU7 Equal requirements on goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities.

The proposal we have to take a position on today is that the goals and guidelines that currently apply to activities carried out by private actors shall also apply to activities conducted under municipal and regional management, with the objective that all these groups shall be given equivalent conditions and terms to carry out their activities.

The government claims, and we Sverigedemokrater agree, that even though there is a current regulatory framework in the Local Government Act that regulates the monitoring of the own activities in municipalities and regions, the parameter that formulates guidelines for the own activities, similar to the current regulatory framework for the private actors, is lacking.

Similarly, the Sweden Democrats agree with the government's assessment that this likely and hopefully leads to an increased focus on quality for our citizens, who deserve to feel secure that the follow-up work for municipalities and regions is equivalent to that performed by private actors. The regulatory framework only includes those matters that the municipal council has decided that private actors shall be able to perform, which is naturally fully reasonable.

Finally, the Sweden Democrats, in line with the government, consider that an approval of this proposal only to a very small extent implies an increased administrative burden, and it implies a negligible restriction of local self-government. It is more important to establish equal conditions for all actors. Therefore, I move for approval of the government's proposal.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats have noted that several referral bodies, in their responses regarding the bill, have highlighted the fundamental differences between municipalities and regions and a private company.

Just as Lars Andersson pointed out in his speech, the overall purpose of the proposal seems to be to achieve some kind of competition neutrality between the municipalities and private operators.

One can reason around this with aggravating circumstances. The municipal level is subject to more mandatory legislation, while companies are subject to more private law legislation.

The municipalities also have a completely different type of oversight and ownership. They also have a social responsibility that ensures they follow up on their own activities very much continuously and in very many different ways.

From the perspective of how we Social Democrats reason, we would like to ask whether the same goals and guidelines in the program for, for example, supervision should apply to both activities in public hands and activities in private hands.

Do Lars Andersson and the Sverigedemokraterna not see the risk that municipalities and regions will be forced to build up alternative administrative channels in order to thereby provide a supervision that they in many respects already do? It could become an additional administrative requirement to maintain the program that one is now forced to adopt based on this proposal.

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

Lars Andersson (SD)

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

It has been said, as we have all read, that it will entail a certain increased administrative burden but that this is very small. I have not conducted the investigations myself, naturally, but must rely on the experts who have familiarized themselves with the area and assessed that the extra administrative burden is very small. Had I been an expert in the area, I might have had a different attitude, but I have no reason at all to question that decision.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The question of expertise has been frequently occurring during the preceding six hours here. It is definitely not what I am requesting from Lars Andersson, but rather a political assessment.

I think the question is also important in the part about accountability. Here, it is the municipal council that is to adopt a program with goals and guidelines for both its own operations and the operations carried out in private hands. At the same time, the boards have a very large responsibility for their operations and also formulate various types of operational goals and internal control plans.

I would like to ask Lars Andersson if he sees any issues regarding accountability when the municipal council is to indirectly instruct the boards in this way on how they should conduct their supervision.

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

Lars Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the follow-up question.

I see no major problem in that, no. I still sit in the municipal council myself and have done so for a number of terms. I have spoken with my colleagues there about this very proposal, and I simply do not share the member's perception. We have reached different conclusions, and that is simply something to respect.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! My question is based a bit on what was raised in the previous exchange. There is talk that there should be equivalent goals and guidelines for private and municipal activities. I wonder a bit how the reasoning is from the Sweden Democrats' side, given how municipal activity functions. In my world, there are somewhat different conditions and possibilities to do this for those who run activities. A private business owner, for example, has as their main purpose to make a profit, and a municipal provider is not allowed to make a profit. It is regulated in law. Then I wonder a bit how the reasoning has been in those cases.

It is also said that introducing this involves a very small administrative burden. How has that been reasoned? I come from a municipality that does not even have 10,000 inhabitants in the entire municipality. We have very few private operators of activities that are municipally funded. If the municipal activity is to follow the goals and guidelines that apply to private operators, it will become a quite large administrative burden for them.

At the same time, the Sweden Democrats and the government do not intend to send more money to finance this. But they would very much like to place that burden on the municipalities.

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

Lars Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, the member for the question!

I am not, as I explained in the previous exchange, an expert at assessing how much the administrative burden will increase. The Government has, however, concluded that it should be a negligible extra administrative burden, and that is what I must rely on.

Member of Parliament Gonzalez explains that in his world, it looks the way it does in his way. In my world, as we both know, it looks in a completely different way. That outsourcing of activities I see almost as a self-evident matter, and that they should then be given equal both opportunities and obligations to carry out their activities is also for me a self-evident matter. We are not for nationalizing everything and everyone all the time. It is an ideological difference between the member of parliament and me.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! So we have finally received an answer to the question of why this type of legislation is being carried out. It is to facilitate the privatization of municipal and public activities. That is what Lars Andersson just said from the rostrum.

It is said that one cannot judge how much the administrative burden would increase. Now, it is still Lars Andersson and the other Sweden Democrats in this chamber who will vote through the proposal, and then I think it would still be appropriate that one reflected on what consequences it will have for municipalities. I do not think I will need to remind that a majority of Sweden's municipalities have fewer than 20,000 inhabitants. It will result in an enormous increased administrative burden for all those municipalities.

If you come from Södertälje, you might not think it is particularly problematic, but there are a few tens of thousands more people living in that municipality. Then perhaps you have the conditions to do these things.

I still think that we in this chamber should represent the whole of Sweden. When half of the country consists of municipalities with fewer than 20,000 inhabitants, one should take that into account when making decisions.

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

Lars Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you again for the follow-up question.

As I pointed out last time: The massive administrative burden that Member Gonzalez envisions, he can demonstrate just as little as I can demonstrate that it is a negligible administrative burden. It is something that the investigation has concluded. Otherwise, it probably would not have submitted this proposal.

I absolutely support that we put out to tender and provide equivalent goals and guidelines to everyone. I rely on the fact that the groundwork has been done and that it will not become the enormous administrative burden that the member envisions. I simply disagree.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on the Constitution's report number 7, Equal requirements for goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities. I would first like to move for the rejection of the bill and for the approval of the reservation.

One should not use foreign words when one has an adequate domestic Swedish vocabulary, Gunnar Sträng is claimed to have said at some point. Regarding this proposition, I have not found any adequate Swedish expression to describe what I now wish to express, so therefore I must describe this bill as a solution in search of a problem. It is indeed very difficult to see which gaps, deficiencies, or weaknesses this legislation is intended to plug or remedy.

In the current situation, the municipality is obliged to adopt a program with goals and guidelines for municipal affairs performed by private operators. Sverigedemokraterna and the government now want to change this and omit it for both the municipality and the private operators.

In the proposition, it is explained that the intention is, among other things, to attempt to achieve so-called competition neutrality between the actors. This may sound perfectly well-intentioned, but it is interesting that we are expected to pretend that a municipality and a private actor have the same mandate. They do not. One is a democratically governed organization with statutory obligations, the other a private entity that answers to its owners. This does not, of course, mean that both cannot perform similar or the same types of services, but it is problematic that the right-wing parties so often want to try to equate democratically governed organizations with private actors.

Mr. Speaker! The report we are now debating also shows the difference that exists between the municipal and regional levels and the private operators, namely that the management of private operators in this context stems from a contractual relationship between the municipality and the private actor.

It should be said in the government's favor that in the bill it is conceded that goals and guidelines will not always be able to overlap due to that very difference, but it is nevertheless hoped that this will lead to them being treated "as equally as possible".

But unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, a municipality or region is governed by political decisions and ambitions that can go well beyond this program. This can be through various forms of initiatives or solutions expressed in the budget or, for that matter, in other assignments. These decisions do not affect the private operators in that way. They should not either, because they are two distinct types of entities.

My point is rather to point out what many referral bodies have highlighted: that it is an unnecessary, non-purposeful proposal whose utility is not really seen. It should be said that some referral bodies are absolutely positive, such as Svenskt Näringsliv, Almega, and certain municipalities governed by the center-right.

But if we are now to listen to something that resembles expertise, or as close to it as possible, we can note that SKR emphasizes in its referral response that this will lead to increased administration and also problems with delimitation. The government is, in fact, not at all clear about what is expected to be achieved with the proposal, other than competition neutrality. Therefore, it is probably not an overly uncertain guess that SKR will have some work ahead of it with guidance and management materials for both municipalities and regions so that they can implement the law.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I want to remind – I believe I have done so twice earlier in this speaker's chair – of the seminar that KU organized on March 6 this year to mark that the Instrument of Government turns 50 years old. In an earlier debate on municipal and regional issues, I highlighted the portal paragraph in the Instrument of Government. It reads: "All public power in Sweden derives from the people. Swedish democracy is based on free formation of opinion and on universal and equal suffrage. It is realized through a representative and parliamentary system of government and through municipal self-government."

Speaking of municipal self-government, the Council on Legislation states the following in its opinion on this proposal: In the referral to the Council on Legislation, it is noted that the proposal, which entails a new obligation for municipalities and regions, constitutes a restriction of municipal self-government. According to Chapter 14, Section 3 of the Instrument of Government, a restriction of municipal self-government should not exceed what is necessary in view of the purposes that have prompted it. However, it does not appear from the referral to the Council on Legislation that the proposed legislative changes are necessary to achieve equivalent conditions for private operators and municipalities and regions. According to the Council on Legislation, the proposal therefore constitutes an impermissible restriction of municipal self-government. The Council on Legislation therefore rejects the proposal.

Swedish popular government is thus realized, among other things, through municipal self-government. What is being realized through this bill seems mostly to be further steps towards marketization, privatization, and reduced democratic control over our important welfare activities. Therefore, the Riksdag should reject the bill.

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would first like to express my approval of the Committee on the Constitution's proposal in the report on equal requirements for goals and guidelines for the execution of municipal activities and the rejection of the reservations.

The referral deals with a bill concerning equivalent requirements for goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities. This means that the municipalities shall adopt goals and guidelines for all activities, regardless of whether they are carried out under the municipality's auspices or in private hands. The purpose is that equivalent conditions shall prevail for private and public activities.

According to Chapter 5, Section 3 of the Local Government Act, municipal councils and regions shall adopt a program with goals and guidelines for such municipal affairs as are carried out by private providers. The program shall specify how the council's goals and guidelines shall be followed up and how public scrutiny shall be ensured. The purpose of the provisions is to clarify the municipalities' and regions' responsibility to systematically follow up and monitor the activities of private providers.

In this bill, it is proposed that the obligation shall also apply to the activities that municipalities and regions operate in their own capacity.

Mr. Speaker! A majority of the referral bodies approve or have no comments on the content of the bill. Among other things, it is stated that the proposal promotes equality in municipal activities, regardless of the form of operation, and that it will not entail any significant consequences for the municipality's finances or administration, as it gives municipalities and regions a large scope to decide for themselves at what level the management and follow-up should be placed.

Furthermore, it is argued that the proposal does not restrict municipal self-government to any significant extent, especially since it does not affect the municipality's discretion over the level of follow-up. It is argued that the proposal promotes the quality work of the municipalities and regions and that it contributes to ensuring that citizens' legitimate expectations of good quality are met even for activities in their own management.

The Competition Authority considers that the proposal can contribute to creating better opportunities for municipalities and regions to carry out strategic work in monitoring and controlling their operations.

Mr. Speaker! It is important to understand that activities financed by municipalities and regions in this regard should be treated as equally as possible, regardless of whether the activity is conducted by municipalities and regions in their own capacity or by private providers. In that case, one can increase the focus on quality through developed competition neutrality between the different providers.

From a citizen's perspective, it is important that citizens can expect municipalities and regions to carry out an equivalent follow-up work. In this way, citizens' access to services of good quality is increased.

Mr. Speaker! I believe that equivalent requirements for goals and guidelines should apply to all providers of municipal activities.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! I have a actually quite simple question for Lars Engsund. I will read directly from the government's proposition and can perhaps get an answer based on that.

The proposal is thus assessed, for example, to have no significance for crime and crime prevention work, for public services in different parts of the country, for the possibility of achieving the integration policy goals, or for the working conditions, competitiveness, or other terms for small companies in relation to larger companies. The proposal is also assessed not to entail any effects for employment, the environment, or society in general. Furthermore, the proposal affects women and men in the same way and is assessed not to entail any economic or other effects for equality between women and men.

What is the point of the proposal, really, if one listens to the government?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! An important point is, among other things, that the municipalities are required to review their operations and are given the opportunity to keep track of what is implemented both in their own capacity and by private contractors. This is something that many of the referral bodies have pointed out as a good thing.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is not quite correct that one would be given a greater opportunity to control one's own operations. The Sweden Democrats just noted that this is a step towards making further privatizations of operations. That is why this proposal is being presented. That consent we just heard. That is what it is about.

It will be the opposite; it will become harder for the municipalities to handle the various follow-ups that are already being done today. The municipalities do follow-ups of their goals and their management. That is what municipalities deal with. But this is because one wants to equate private operations with public ones.

But to begin with, those activities do not have the same goals. Private activity usually has the purpose of making a profit. And as we have already stated in this speaker's chair, the public sector may not operate for profit. Then each must understand that it is impossible to have the same goals and governance for these two activities.

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! The Left Party is not known for being the most market-liberal party in this chamber.

But again: Having equal conditions for private actors and municipal actors gives the municipalities a good overview of the operations, and they can be evaluated based on equivalent requirements, goals, and guidelines.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is not common for us to have exchanges of remarks in the KU's debates. It is fun and interesting that we can, in a good way, actually discuss how we view the municipal level in relation to different regulatory frameworks concerning private actors.

Lars Engsund mentioned, exactly as it stands in the bill and in the majority's proposal in the committee's report, that the proposal shall render in equivalent conditions. Lars Engsund mentioned the question of public access. I think there is an interesting aspect, namely that as I perceive the proposal, it becomes mandatory for the municipalities to use the program for their own operations and for private operators. When it comes to public access, the program only targets the private operators because the public is guaranteed access through the principle of public access.

But there are other perspectives missing in the government's proposal and in the committee report, namely that it is not only the principle of public access that guarantees citizens' insight. An important element is the municipal audit, which examines the operations and is independent and autonomous. I am myself the chairman of the municipal council back home in Kramfors, and I know that the audits can many times be a spotlight on the boards. But they will not hit the private operators as directly as they do towards the own operations. From the perspective of public insight, I would like to ask Lars Engsund how he and the M see the question of whether there is an equal insight for the public when it comes to the municipalities and the private operators. Can one speak of an equal insight?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Of course it is as the member knows, that the principle of public access applies to the municipal operations. For private actors, there is usually an agreement between the municipality and the company in question. It is clear that there are, of course, limitations in that part. It is permitted – absolutely.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I appreciate that Lars Engsund is clear, but we will naturally not reach a complete consensus on these issues in this exchange of remarks. Rather, it is as I said in my previous remark, namely that it is important that the differences are made clear.

I would still like to take the opportunity in my final remark to ask a question regarding the Council on Legislation. Lars Engsund stated in his speech that he does not believe the proposal would entail any major administrative burden or extra work for the municipalities and regions. Just as I pointed out in my speech, SKR has pointed out that the proposal could become an administrative burden, and the Council on Legislation says that it entails an impermissible restriction of municipal self-government. Does this give rise to any reflections from Lars Engsund and the Moderaterna?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! The whole point of the bill is to give the municipal council increased control and better insight into the entire operation, regardless of whether it is municipal or private. It is important.

I note the Council on Legislation's comments. At the same time, one can listen to the referral bodies, and a majority of them have been positive towards the proposal. They do not see the problem with a restriction of municipal self-government. This is clearly evident from the referral bodies.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! We can observe that the government's compliance with the Council on Legislation's recommendations is not what one would wish for in general.

What we are addressing today is a government proposition titled something as harmless as Equal requirements for goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities. One might think that is reasonable and correct when hearing the title. The content of the proposal, however, is something completely different. The government's proposal is claimed to be about improving public scrutiny of public activities and that governance should become better. The truth, however, is something else.

At its core, the proposal is about further raking the arena for more privatizations and more profit interests in our jointly funded welfare. When private interests, whose primary goal is to make money, such as Almega and Svenskt Näringsliv, are entirely positive about the proposal, while Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner and LO see major problems, it is important to prick up one's ears and reflect. Who is it that one is actually doing this for?

Today, healthcare is in crisis. Thousands of jobs are threatened after notices as a consequence of the government's unwillingness to compensate the regions for the cost increases that followed the inflation crisis. Healthcare in Sweden is being put on a starvation diet because the government parties and the Sverigedemokraterna choose to lower taxes. This occurs despite the fact that an overwhelming majority of the Swedish people would rather increase taxes, as long as it would mean that the money went to welfare.

The government and the Sweden Democrats seem to live in a parallel universe, where the will of the people is to be set aside in favor of ideological principles and back-scratching of their business associates.

For it is still so, Mr. Speaker, that no less than two weeks ago we stood in this chamber and debated corruption and revolving doors between politics and the business sector. It seems undeniably that this government is a court supplier to the business sector, in order to undermine publicly managed activities in favor of private interests.

The proposition is a poorly substantiated proposal whose purpose is to make it more difficult for municipalities and regions to conduct and control their operations. They simply intend to compare apples and pears in order to thereby justify further privatization of our common assets, so that a small few can cut gold with a pocketknife.

The right-wing government is not alone in acting this way. We see the patterns. The right-wing government in my home county of Gävleborg has, for example, commissioned an investigation whose proposal is that all publicly run health centers should instead be privatized. That is how one acts when one does not understand that the public sector and the private business sector have two completely different purposes for why they act in society.

Mr. Speaker! We in the Left Party are not against private business activity. On the contrary, there are certain areas where it is the best form of operation. But it should be beyond any reasonable doubt after the last 30 years of market experiments that publicly funded welfare is not such an activity. There are simply not many arguments for it being beneficial for society as a whole. On the contrary, experience shows that it breaks down functioning systems and creates inequality. It has also opened up for criminal gangs and actors to have been able to nestle themselves in and use our tax funds for criminal activity. That, Mr. Speaker, is not in the public interest.

Why is it done this way? It is something that I can, of course, only speculate about. But consider how it has emerged that all four of the parties in the government base have been prepared to create advanced arrangements to avoid disclosing anonymous donors to their respective parties. And we have clear admissions from, for example, Sverigedemokraterna, that they changed their minds regarding profits in welfare after a business lunch from Svenskt Näringsliv. There are ministers and secretaries of state who are handpicked from the private sector.

Where the loyalties of the governing parties lie is therefore somewhat shrouded in mystery, but it is probably not an unreasonable assumption that they definitely do not primarily lie with the Swedish people.

With this, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of the reservation and thus rejection of the bill.

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I listened to Samuel Gonzalez Westling's speech and was somewhat surprised because we are here to debate equivalent requirements for goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities, but I heard a May Day speech.

I recoiled at at least one question. Gonzalez Westling is not known to be a market liberal and certainly wants to nationalize most of what exists, but he simultaneously pointed out that there are certain activities that are suitable for private actors. In that case, I would like to know which those activities would be.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is true that we are debating a government bill on the fact that there should be equivalent requirements on goals and guidelines for providers of municipal activities. But the reason for this is, in the highest degree, reasonable for us to debate here. We find ourselves in this chamber to discuss different types of legislative proposals and why one wants to implement them.

Of course, the government does not write out that it wants its friends to earn more money from public activities and tax funds. That would not be particularly smart because the Swedish people would not appreciate it. But we are here to highlight the fact that this is precisely the government's intention.

Let me pose a counter-question to Lars Engsund: What does Lars Engsund think municipalities should occupy themselves with if it is now private activity that is to do everything?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Municipalities should primarily focus on civic service. That is why they exist. They must ensure that the municipal residents have an adequate level of service that, to the greatest extent possible, is equivalent throughout the country.

I note that Gonzalez Westling does not answer my question. Which activities, for example within municipalities, would be suitable for private actors? Please answer that!

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! I think the activities that municipalities and regions engage in today are quite appropriate for municipalities and regions to engage in. I do not think it is reasonable for private business interests to run schools in order to make money. I do not think that one should make money on healthcare or on the fact that people are old and sick. I do not think that one should make money on the fact that people have needs for support from society. I think that society should engage in ensuring that all of this exists for all people.

It is interesting that Lars Engsund says that the municipalities should provide equivalent service to everyone in Sweden, because that is not how it looks today. The government refuses to compensate the municipalities for the cost increases resulting from the inflation crisis.

It looks different across the country, and I hope that Lars Engsund is aware of that. The difference in tax rate can be as much as 6 kronor depending on which municipality one lives in, and it is not about getting better service in the municipalities with the highest tax rate. I live in such a municipality. It is not mismanaged in any way, but the conditions for conducting operations are poor because the government has chosen not to compensate the municipality as the state's requirements have increased. This bill is yet another example of this because it contains additional things that the municipalities shall engage in without being compensated with a single penny.

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

Gudrun Brunegård (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Here in Sweden, we are concerned that there should be equality and fair conditions, and with today's decision, an important step is taken to fulfill that ambition. When a municipal or regional council decides on goals and guidelines for such publicly funded activities performed by private providers, these goals and guidelines shall also apply to the municipality's or region's corresponding activities in its own management. It may seem obvious, but it has not been so previously.

A program with goals and guidelines for such municipal matters performed by private operators shall, according to the Local Government Act, be adopted for each mandate period. The purpose is to clarify the municipality's or region's responsibility to follow up and monitor the private operator. Private operators can look very different. It can be a company, a single natural person, an idea-based organization, or a cooperative association.

Even though the Local Government Act already describes the responsibility of municipalities and regions to follow up on their own activities, there has been a lack of regulation regarding the obligation to formulate guidelines for their own activities. The Government considers it important that activities financed by municipalities and regions are treated as equally as possible, regardless of whether the activity is carried out by the municipality or region itself or by private providers. It is a way to increase the focus on quality through developed competition neutrality between the different providers. It is obviously equally important that the municipality or region carries out an equivalent follow-up work. It increases the individual citizen's access to services of good quality.

The proposal also includes that the municipal or regional council shall adopt overarching guidelines for what level of insight the public shall have into the private operators' activities regarding the relevant activity – this is because the principle of public access does not cover private operators, but the public nevertheless has a right to some insight into public activities.

The goals, guidelines and quality indicators that are developed shall apply both to the municipality's or region's own operations and to privately performed such operations. The follow-up may consist of collecting information on the operations' results, analyzing the results, providing feedback to the relevant units and demanding accountability if the goals are not met. That process shall be as similar as possible regardless of who performs the operation. Good economic management shall also be guiding, and the program can very well be revised or updated more than once per mandate period if it should be judged necessary.

Mr. Speaker! With this, I move for approval of the committee's proposal and rejection of the reservation.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Mr. Speaker! In my home municipality, Kungsbacka, there has been something called municipal challenge rights for some years. This means that companies and others who believe they can offer the same activities as those currently organized by the municipality, but at a lower price, with better quality, or in some other way more advantageously, have the opportunity to have it reviewed. This is part of a municipal policy that aims to put as much of the municipality's activities as possible out to tender. For the sake of transparency, it should be said that Kungsbacka has been governed by a Moderate-led alliance for very many years.

I will return to this, but first a few words about the bill that we are here to discuss.

Mr. Speaker! Municipal councils and regional councils already have a duty today to adopt programs with goals and guidelines for activities carried out by private providers. The program shall specify how the goals and guidelines are to be followed up and how the public shall be granted access. The duty aims to clarify the responsibility of municipalities and regions to systematically monitor the activities of private providers. It is now proposed that this duty, that is, to adopt a program with goals and guidelines, shall also cover the activities that municipalities and regions carry out in their own capacity.

The Minister for Civil Affairs has stated in a press release that it is important for the government that, as far as possible, equal conditions prevail for all municipal activities, regardless of whether they are carried out by a private provider or in-house. This shall increase transparency and thus contribute to competition on equal terms. It shall also, according to the same press release, contribute to increasing the quality in all activities regardless of provider, though it is somewhat unclear how.

From the Green Party's side, we believe that welfare services cannot be handled like any ordinary market. In relation to welfare services, we are citizens, not primarily customers or consumers. The resources we have should be used so that the services have high quality and are performed with high social, ecological, and economic requirements, regardless of whose management they are performed and provided under. But, among other things, the fact that governance, responsibility, and mandates differ between municipal and private operations makes us say no to the proposal as it stands. While the mandate in the municipality or region is to deliver the best services possible within given budget frameworks, there is, in addition to that, a requirement for a surplus in the private operation.

This, Mr. Speaker, one must always remember. There is a difference between municipal and private activity.

I also want to raise another aspect here. Municipally delivered services within the welfare sector are managed by an administration which, in turn, is politically governed by a committee. Those who work within, for example, a residential facility are employed by the administration, and there is a clear and accessible organization for responsibility. The committee is responsible for ensuring that decisions made from the outside are carried out. For the auditing of the operations in the committee, the municipal audit office is available with elected and professional auditors. For the outsourced operations in private hands, there are several steps, and it becomes more complicated regarding accountability.

One must remember that those politically engaged in committees in all essential matters are lay politicians who, on a voluntary basis and in their own time, contribute to the municipality's activities.

Mr. Speaker! The Council on Legislation has commented on the proposal and, if I may say so, is moderately impressed. The purpose of the bill, say the Council on Legislation's experienced lawyers, is therefore to create equal conditions for private operators and municipalities and regions as far as possible. The Council on Legislation notes that there are already provisions in the Local Government Act that regulate municipalities' and regions' responsibilities to both adopt goals and guidelines and to follow up on their own operations.

It does not appear that the current arrangement involves any particular problems regarding equal conditions for private operators and municipalities and regions.

The advantage of the proposal seems then actually only to be that there is a document, a program, where goals and guidelines for both private operators and municipalities and regions have been gathered. The Council on Legislation writes that it therefore looks as if the proposal only implies increased administration for municipalities and regions without any actual purpose or any improvement being achieved.

Since the law then entails a new obligation for municipalities and regions, it also constitutes a restriction of municipal self-government. According to the Instrument of Government, a restriction of municipal self-government should not exceed what is necessary in view of the purposes that have prompted it. According to the Council on Legislation, the proposal therefore entails an impermissible restriction of municipal self-government.

Mr. Speaker! We do not believe there are grounds to make the legislative changes that the government proposes. It is not expedient for municipalities and regions to be covered by the same goals and guidelines as private operators, as these are activities that differ when it comes to governance, mandate, and responsibility.

We also consider, just like the Council on Legislation, that the proposal is unnecessary, as there are already provisions in the Local Government Act that regulate municipalities' and regions' responsibility to both adopt goals and guidelines and to monitor their own activities. The proposal risks leading to increased administration and increased costs in a situation where many municipalities and regions already have a strained economy. Furthermore, it entails a disproportionate and possibly also impermissible restriction of local self-government.

I therefore move for approval of the reservation.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 7.)

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