Resilience and Action - a national strategy against organized crime

Katja Nyberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating a national strategy against organized crime.

Sweden has, in a few decades, gone from being one of the world's safest and least corrupt countries to being a country where gang crime and organized crime are becoming increasingly prominent.

The police assess that organized crime turns over 100-150 billion kronor annually. We have gang crime with recurring shootings and explosions, and more and more innocent people are forced to risk their lives in the gangs' settlements.

But it is not completely pitch black. Sweden is still one of the world's least corrupt countries and ranks sixth in the world today when measuring which countries have the least corruption. Looking at the countries in the EU, Sweden holds third place, a position we have had for the last ten years. Only Denmark and Finland have been and are better in the EU.

That Sweden and the Nordic countries rank highest in the world when it comes to the absence of corruption does not surprise me. The Nordic countries are some of the world's most homogeneous countries with great trust in each other, authorities, the state, and our democratic system.

The large immigration to Sweden is, however, beginning to change this. We have received very many people from countries where there is not the same trust in authorities, in the state, or in democratic society.

Madam Speaker! Corruption can take many forms. It can range from criminal networks using government employees for their activities and fraud with assistance payments where assistance companies are suspected of having infiltrated Försäkringskassan, to different groups trying to infiltrate political parties or a clan leader promising away a lot of votes to a single political party in exchange for some form of consideration.

Our welfare system is largely trust-based and is based on information from the applicant. The total extent of incorrect payments from the state welfare systems is estimated to amount to approximately 20 billion kronor.

The Economic Governance Authority estimates that approximately 90 percent of the incorrect payments have been caused by the applicants, but it is unknown to what extent organized crime lies behind these incorrect payments.

Regardless of what corruption is caused by, the issue must be taken most seriously. We have a responsibility to ensure that we reverse this negative trend.

A significant measure to counteract incorrect payments and crimes against the welfare systems was the establishment of the Payment Authority on 1 January 2024. The authority shall administer a system with transaction accounts that make payments from certain state agencies and perform data analyses and audits in order to prevent, deter, and detect incorrect payments.

Madam Speaker! Criminals are dependent on individuals who, in their profession, make administrative decisions or issue certificates. This can lead to criminals attempting to infiltrate authorities. The influence does not need to be explicit or clear; it can be a matter of more subtle influence. The purpose may be to induce an official to make a certain decision or to refrain from making a decision, which can lead to self-censorship and to the development of a culture of silence.

The problems already exist today within the Police Authority but also encompass the business sector, for example, employees at banks and brokerage firms as well as auditing and law firms. There are also examples of so-called insiders in Swedish ports who create vulnerabilities and enable smuggling in maritime traffic.

Unauthorized and improper influence, infiltration, and corruption must be countered if they gain a foothold in Sweden.

Municipalities, regions and authorities need to be given increased support in public procurement through better conditions to audit suppliers in order to reduce the risk that companies with links to organized crime are awarded contracts.

Awareness and knowledge of the problems need to increase and measures must be implemented to defend and uphold the values that form the foundation of a well-functioning society.

In Sweden, there is currently a labor shortage in many sectors. There are and will continue to be large recruitment needs in both public and private operations, some of which are classified as security-sensitive. One example is the Police Authority, where leaks have had serious consequences when people have been harmed and even murdered.

It is important to maintain sound and careful recruitment processes despite a challenging work situation. All employers must take responsibility to avoid hiring individuals who may be unsuitable for a particular position.

Madam Speaker! In addition to a long series of criminal penalties and increased resources to, among others, the Police Authority and the Swedish Customs, a holistic approach is required where the entire society is mobilized in the fight against crime that threatens the system.

Here, the national strategy against organized crime fulfills a very important function. It is a strategy that clearly points out the direction and specifies how we shall work together against the system-threatening crime - a strategy that the government has developed together with the Sweden Democrats.

The central point is that we work together in state agencies, municipalities, regions, the business sector and civil society. It is a prerequisite for us to succeed in reversing this negative trend.

The strategy has five main goals: to stop criminal careers, to reduce the availability of illegal weapons and explosives, to break up the criminal economy, to build resilience against unauthorized and improper influence, and to ensure reliable identities and an effective information supply. Taken together, it will mean a hard blow against organized crime.

However, I miss a sixth goal. It is no secret that gang crime and organized crime are largely imported. It is a major shortcoming that this is not pointed out in the strategy. It should be a primary goal to significantly reduce immigration to Sweden and increase deportations, with the aim of striking at the groups that try to use Sweden as a transit point for their criminal activities. It should be a primary goal to deport serious criminals, gang criminals, and those who refuse to conform to the norms, values, and laws that apply in Sweden.

An additional way to strengthen civil protection is to introduce a possibility to deport gang criminals who lack Swedish citizenship, even without them having been convicted of a crime. Such a possibility exists today for other system-threatening crime through the Act on Special Control of Certain Foreigners.

Madam Speaker! More crimes must lead to prosecution. Many times, a person's criminal career has begun with less serious crime which has then escalated towards more serious crimes. Society needs to stop this in time. The one who commits a crime shall be held accountable for their actions, which is fundamental to maintaining trust and respect for the justice system.

Unfortunately, there are far too many perpetrators who today escape prosecution, even in cases of truly serious crime. This is not acceptable in a constitutional state like Sweden. Taking another person's life must not result in increased status and a continued criminal career. It must result in prosecution and punishment. Perpetrators must be met with a consequence, continued acts of violence must be prevented, and crime victims and relatives must receive redress.

The Tidö parties are working jointly on a long series of proposals that will hit hard against both gang crime and organized crime. Already implemented and planned legislative changes and increased penalties will make a difference.

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

Lars Isacsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservation number 1 and reservation number 11.

Resilience and Decisiveness is the name of the national strategy and the cross-agency cooperation that the government and SD are presenting. We Social Democrats think it is good and necessary to have a national strategy against organized crime. It is good and necessary to have agency cooperation, but it must also yield results in reality; it is very much about governance.

As a constructive and scrutinizing opposition, we see however that more is required, and I want to highlight here some of the areas that we believe the government and SD overlook or where they do not go far enough.

First - it probably won't come as a news to anyone - we Social Democrats believe that the government and SD are allocating too few resources to reducing new recruitment to gang crime and serious organized crime. It must be possible to do both: be tough on both the crimes and the causes of the crimes. The economic crisis that the municipalities are in now means fewer teachers, fewer social workers and lower support for associations, sports and culture.

Secondly, we believe that more and sharper proposals are needed regarding economic crime, not least regarding companies as tools of crime. A society where heavily criminal individuals can run health centers and own district court premises can well be described as a society with a least naive view on marketization. In a specific statement from the Social Democrats, we have highlighted concrete measures to better address gross organized crime by striking at the criminal economy.

Economic profit is one of the most important drivers for organized crime. Drug trafficking, fraud against the elderly, illegal goods, and various forms of benefit fraud are some examples of crimes that finance the gangs' activities. We have previously proposed a package of measures to tackle economic crime. This includes, among other things, that we want to give Bolagsverket a crime-prevention role and a supervisory responsibility to strengthen the authority's work against organized crime. We further want the audit obligation to be reintroduced and that more crimes should be able to lead to a business ban. Additionally, we believe that Bolagsverket should be able to issue a requirement for personal appearance to prevent gang criminals from using stolen, hijacked, or false identities to start companies.

For the third time, the Tidö parties overlook the part of organized crime that targets and ruthlessly exploits women. The Center Party, in its motion, which we support, has highlighted some areas of serious organized crime that are not new and which affect the most vulnerable. Neither prostitution, sex buying, nor trafficking is mentioned at a single point in the strategy, despite the fact that we know that this, in addition to having a high personal price, also provides large revenues to precisely organized crime and enables other crimes.

The strategy also does not mention fraud against the elderly. This has become a major scourge in our country and a major source of income in the criminal world. The government should include this in the strategy.

In conclusion, I want to say that we in the Social Democrats think a national strategy against organized crime is good and necessary. The content and the analysis are also fundamentally good. What we are opposing is what is missing and what the government and SD do not go far enough on.

The government and SD must begin prioritizing crime prevention work. More funds must be allocated to the municipalities - words are not enough. The recruitment to gang crime must be broken.

Neither sex trafficking, prostitution, nor trafficking are new areas for serious organized crime. These are crimes that affect the most vulnerable and must be included in the government's and SD's strategy.

The criminal economy, which is controlled by and feeds gross organized crime, makes extensive use of companies as tools for crime. Here, the government and SD must abandon their naive view on marketization and go significantly further to make it more difficult and prevent criminals from owning and operating companies.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! It is very pleasing to hear from the Social Democratic Member of Parliament that it is considered that the strategy is both good and necessary. It is only unfortunate that the Social Democrats, during their eight years in power, did not produce any strategy. This is, therefore, the first strategy against organized crime that any government has produced. But the problem is not new. We can remember Stefan Löfven's winged words "We didn't see it coming"; that can be calmly stated.

The opposition is requesting resources for the school. This is, of course, very important. The school is ultimately a municipal responsibility. If we look at the Social Democrats' storefront in Malmö, we see that they have made cuts in the school of 200 million kronor.

How does the Social Democratic member view the actions of party friends out in the municipalities? Perhaps more encouraging words are needed for the municipal politicians in Malmö than for the government in this regard.

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

Lars Isacsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Kärrholm, for the question! The Löfven Government put forward a 64-point program against gang crime, so the fight against gang crime and serious organized crime is not new.

I maintain that I think it is good that there is a national strategy. Then it is up to be proven when it comes to agency cooperation. I may be colored by my time as a municipal councilor; this must also happen. It is a problem that few have a mandate to coordinate, and the agencies have no mandate of their own to allow themselves to be coordinated. But maybe it works this time – I hope so.

Regarding school, it is clear that we see that the underfunding of welfare hits hard when it comes to new recruitment. If Malmö, whose economy I do not have a handle on, is forced to reduce its budget by 200 million, this must be due to something. I do not believe that any municipal politician, regardless of party, says that it is the school they want to save on first, but one is forced to. One must achieve a budget that balances, and then one must save somewhere.

It can only be stated that there is too little money for the public sector and for municipalities and regions. In every budget that you from the Tidö parties have presented, we from the Social Democrats have had twice as much.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! In Malmö, the Social Democrats have prioritized, instead of the school, for example importing a skateboard park from the USA, which has cost many millions. I can personally think that those funds would have done greater good in the school specifically.

Since then, it is important to point out that it is not just about resources. It is also about recognizing the causes of the problems. It is linked to migration, exclusion, criminal gang culture, and gangster culture. We never hear the Social Democrats address the actual causes of crime, but it is constantly claimed to be about socioeconomic factors.

Most recently today, a police chief in Gothenburg testified about how youths from well-off areas actively seek out gang crime. This is ultimately a cultural problem and not a question of socioeconomics.

Then the member mentions the neat 64-point program. At that point, I wish to ask the question: How do you think it went? Activities are not what counts, but the effect. How does the member think the effect was of the eight years in power and the 64-point program, which was therefore not a strategy?

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

Lars Isacsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin with this regarding skateboarding and Malmö. In almost every municipality, approximately 80 percent of the budget goes to elderly care and school. If there is to be something that also makes people want to live and reside in the municipality, the other 20 percent must also suffice for something.

When I was the chairman of the municipal executive board in Avesta, we invested in a skatepark. Few in Avesta probably question it. It is used incredibly much and provides access to leisure activities that are not tied to any association. I find it difficult to see that this would be bad. If such a decision has been made in Malmö, it was probably made on good grounds.

Regarding the causes of the serious and organized crime, one will still not be able to bypass the increased inequality, member Kärrholm. Sweden is the country in the EU where inequality is increasing the most, and the gaps are becoming larger and larger.

Since then, it is clear that we have problems with segregation and with an integration that has not succeeded. We are also self-critical from the Social Democrats. We should have done more and better. It is also why we in our party are currently working on developing a new social analysis and new, concrete reforms. But we cannot escape the fact that it is inequality that is the main villain in the drama.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is acutely threatened by system-threatening crime. Criminal individuals with great capacity for violence intimidate witnesses into silence and infiltrate authorities. In recent days, we have been able to read about serious leaks from the police.

Organized crime should be likened to an aggressive cancer on the body of society. For a long time, the criminal structures have penetrated ever deeper and successively damaged the healthy tissue of society. Now, a treatment of both causes and symptoms is required.

Crime is ultimately explained by the individual's values. The fundamental reason why we have had growing problems with serious organized crime in Sweden is that there are more people who are inclined to engage in such crime and who lack moral barriers. The causes of this development can be found in criminal collusion culture and widespread gangster culture. The latter is not isolated to individual areas of exclusion: the police testify that children from all parts of society seek out gang criminality.

Madam Speaker! The Government is now pursuing policy on a broad front to address the causes. Strict migration, a strong work line, order in schools, focus on parents, and previous measures are some of the important actions.

The youths who today are in the risk zone for serious crime are often known by school, social services, and the police. In order to achieve faster and more intrusive measures against these young people, the government has tasked all relevant authorities with establishing a new structure for systematic cooperation. The possibilities for information sharing between school, social services, and the police shall also be improved.

Parallel to this, an investigation is underway to submit a proposal for an arrangement with youth crime boards according to a Danish model, adapted to Swedish conditions. The Government is also investigating expanded possibilities to detain and incarcerate suspected offenders under 18 years of age.

Secret coercive measures shall also be able to be used against those under 15 years of age who have committed a serious crime. This increases the possibilities to investigate the crime and to reach persons who exploit children for criminal purposes.

An individual's criminal path almost always begins with crime in young years - a crime that gradually escalates and successively becomes more serious. It is therefore very important to break the curve early.

Madam Speaker! Those who commit a serious crime shall be imprisoned. It is primarily about justice, but it also bears repeating that those who are locked up cannot commit crimes and can neither recruit younger people into a criminal network. Therefore, we are now significantly tightening the penalties. We are removing today's bulk discount. We are removing the youth discount entirely for those over 18 years of age. We are adjusting the youth discount for those under 18 years of age. Soon there will be double penalties for gang criminals. Repeated criminality shall lead to harsher sanctions.

This means that, overall, a crime that recently resulted in a one-year prison sentence could soon result in over ten years of imprisonment, without the possibility of early release, and it is a punishment that can be served in a rented prison cell abroad. This will make a difference.

The basic starting point in the determination of the penalty is that the punishment for a crime shall be in proportion to its gravity. Today, however, we treat young people in an unreasonable way both in the assessment of the penalty and in the choice of the sanction. Addressing this is extremely important.

At the same time, the development has moved towards minors increasingly appearing in criminal environments and committing particularly serious crimes. This requires a change, and an important part of the system shift is to completely abolish the youth discount for those over 18 and to reform the youth discount for those under 18. The Government is also considering lowering the age of criminal responsibility. Furthermore, special youth prisons shall be established.

In addition to more and longer prison sentences, more people need to be deported. However, it is not enough for criminals to be sentenced to deportation; the deportation must also be executable. Today, several countries refuse to accept their citizens. Therefore, a developed cooperation at the EU level and increased pressure on the countries concerned are needed.

In order for more criminals to be imprisoned and deported, more crimes need to be solved. For this purpose, the police have received increased appropriations, and last year the police were given expanded opportunities to use secret coercive measures. Soon, the police will also receive increased opportunities to use biometrics. This technology, which can be used to identify persons, has developed rapidly. The list of measures can be long.

Madam Speaker! Locking up more offenders requires more cells. The Prison and Probation Service has therefore received more money to build new prisons and wings faster. Existing facilities also need to be fully utilized. This week, we received the positive news that all cells at the high-security prison Hall now have bunk beds.

In December, the investigation into renting prison places abroad will also be concluded. Furthermore, measures are being taken so that foreign offenders will to a greater extent serve their prison sentences in their home countries. This is extremely important. Approximately 25 percent of all those in Swedish prisons are foreign citizens.

For those who cannot be deported or be locked up for life without ever being released again, it is important to prevent continued crime. The goal is for the punishment to mark the end of the convicted person's criminal path. The Prison and Probation Service's control and support measures are important, and the support for those who defect from criminal networks shall continue to be developed.

Madam Speaker! I could have stood here all evening and told you about much more that is described in the government's strategy and what is now being implemented and planned to be implemented. Let me, however, summarize by stating that the government identifies five important areas:

Measures need to be targeted at individuals to stop criminal careers.

Criminals' access to illegal weapons and explosives needs to decrease.

We must smash the criminal economy.

Society needs to become more robust against unauthorized influence from criminal actors.

It must become harder to cheat with identities, and the authorities' possibilities to exchange information shall be improved.

The national strategy provides a clear direction. Now, concrete and offensive action is required from all actors.

With that, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the Committee on Justice's proposal in the report that the letter be added to the records.

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

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Madam Speaker! I wonder how Member Kärrholm views the fact that the Moderate-led government, in a strategy against organized crime, omits both trafficking and prostitution as well as fraud against the elderly and urges the Parliament to complement this. I wonder if it is the Member's opinion that these crimes are not important for serious organized crime, that they do not involve large sums of money, and that they do not affect the very weakest and most vulnerable.

If the member does not consider it so but sees these crimes as parts of organized crime, how then does the member view the fact that these crimes are not mentioned in the national strategy against organized crime under the goal of dismantling the criminal economy?

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question.

At the beginning of the strategy, it is stated that the strategy is not all-encompassing. It does not describe everything that is done but is intended to summarize the government's policy in a limited space.

Prostitution is extremely important to combat in that women are exploited - human trafficking, trafficking, likewise. The list can be long of very serious crime problems that are linked to organized crime. Fraud against the elderly was mentioned, and we know that systematic fraud is one of the largest sources of income for organized crime. It is also about illegal gambling activities, waste management and so on.

For pedagogical reasons, all of these could be listed. What is significant about this strategy, however, is that it describes in what way organized crime should be combated so that all forms of crime can be countered. That being said, it is obvious that further parts could be clarified and concretized, specifically with a focus on different specific crime problems.

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

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Madam Speaker! The Member of Parliament says that the list can be as long as it wants. I believe it is quite generally accepted that what we are talking about when it comes to serious organized crime is drugs, weapons, labor, human trafficking, environmental crimes, fraud, welfare crimes, and gambling. I believe we have a pretty good grip on that.

National strategies are very good. We welcome them and think they are good tools. But if they do not even have the ambition to be comprehensive and omit things that both we and, I perceive, the member consider to be important parts, there is a risk that they are reduced to merely advanced press releases.

We think that this should have been included. Elderly fraud, human trafficking and prostitution are a plague for those affected, mostly women but also many men. I return anyway to the fact that it is remarkable that this is omitted in a national strategy.

I agree with what the member concluded with. The five goals are important. But when one has the goal of breaking up the criminal economy and does not include this but instead says that it is about exemplification, I am questioning that. I wonder if the member agrees with that.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! I would like to highlight one thing that is perhaps the most important for combating the type of serious crime that the member here is raising, namely that we imprison serious offenders significantly longer.

There is one thing common to the people who are convicted of the crimes mentioned here, and that is that in almost all cases they have been convicted of other crimes previously. We have in Sweden more than 8,000 people who are prosecuted ten times or more - people who are convicted of crimes, serve a sentence, are released, and continue to commit crimes. A core part of the government's strategy is that we tighten the penalties so that we imprison offenders for much longer periods. This will prevent both human trafficking and fraud against the elderly.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! One cannot recruit for gangs when one is in prison - it is, Madam Speaker, "naive" that should go on the record. I do not know how one can make such a claim while simultaneously cheering for double-stacking at Hall and other institutions. One does not even take into account, Madam Speaker, that prison is an absolutely extraordinary recruitment site for criminal gangs, violent extremism, and other things.

This is symptomatic, Madam Speaker. Complete disregard is shown for the negative consequences it has when the prisons are overcrowded and when the correctional services are not given the opportunity to carry out the activities they would need to. This, Madam Speaker, is also dangerous for society in the long run.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! It feels ironic to stand here in the Riksdag and be accused of being naive by a member of the Green Party. All the crime problems we have in Sweden today, with fathers being shot dead in front of their children, are due to the Green Party's totally irresponsible policy. It has caused the problems that both we and the Social Democrats agree are fundamental causes of this crime, such as exclusion and social disorganization.

No one cheers for double sentencing. It is a necessity to protect society against dangerous individuals. The person who is locked up at the high-security prison Hall, for example, for serious weapons offenses or serious extortion, is already—I can assure the members—deeply involved in criminal networks. The person sitting at Hall or Kumla may possibly change criminal networks, but that they belong to a criminal network, I dare to promise.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! Now, not all of Sweden's prisons are high-security prisons, and double-housing does not exist solely at Hall. Fredrik Kärrholm may think it is difficult to be called naive, but nevertheless: When one disregards these entirely obvious risks, one actually has to accept being called that.

I can also remind Fredrik Kärrholm that the last time we had a Moderate Minister of Justice in this country, one got away with six months' imprisonment for aggravated weapons crime. It has been raised in rounds. We have stood behind it every time.

When I worked in local politics in Malmö city, which Fredrik Kärrholm seems to be interested in, we called for action from the government at the time. We wanted to see increased penalties. We wanted those who went onto the streets armed not to be released the same afternoon. But it took until we got an environmentalist and social democratic government for it to actually be put in place.

Madam Speaker! It is good that Fredrik Kärrholm changes his mind, that he does not cheer for the double sentences. But I hope that he can also see the obvious risks with this in the future and that measures are taken and the correctional services are given resources to reduce the risks of recruitment that can occur to gangs and to violent extremism.

Now he has shown that he completely ignores that risk. To claim that there is no such risk is an incredibly categorical statement. It is obviously completely wrong and naive.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! I think we here in the Swedish Riksdag should maintain a slightly higher level of debate than accusing each other of pure inaccuracies. I have never ever cheered for any double-layering. I have said that it is a positive message for solving an acute shortage of space. The alternative is that we have dangerous individuals, who are a threat to honest citizens, at large in society.

That we would not need double-layering is naturally desirable. But now we face two alternatives: that we have dangerous offenders out in society or that we have installed bunk beds in the facilities. In the choice between them, the latter alternative is necessary. It does not mean that any risks are being ignored.

That the Member of Parliament from the Green Party here has the nerve to claim that they have demanded more from the government is astonishing. I do not believe that the Green Party has pushed for almost anything in the government's strategy to take the necessary measures. From the Green Party's side, they instead consistently say that too much is being done, that it is going too fast, and that it is being handled with too much of a heavy hand.

I am, therefore, a bit confounded by the criticism, which I perceive completely lacks any grounding in reality, similar to the Green Party's policy in general.

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the speech, the member - may I still say!

The Chairman mentioned, among other things, that he believes that prisoners should be able to serve their prison sentences abroad. This surprises me to the highest degree.

The correctional services should not only be pure incarceration but should also provide an opportunity to return to society. We must nevertheless hold fast to and believe that such an opportunity should exist. Today, it is largely impossible given how the correctional services function, with overcrowded prisons, which we heard earlier. The staff within the correctional services have a very hard time keeping up.

But if the inmates are to serve their prison sentences abroad, it will be virtually completely impossible to find a way back into Swedish society. They are to be given the opportunity to study, for example, in order to find an alternative means of livelihood and so on.

What is the member actually thinking when he says that inmates should serve their prison sentences abroad?

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! There are two parts to this. One is the 25 percent who do not have Swedish but foreign citizenship. They should, as far as possible, serve their sentences in their home countries. In the normal case, this should be combined with a deportation which means that they cannot return to Sweden.

When it comes to Swedish citizens who can serve a prison sentence in a rented prison cell, the example of Norway, which for a number of years rented 1,000 places in the Netherlands, shows that it works perfectly well to rent prison places abroad and offer cognitive behavioral therapy, for example medication for ADHD and distance studies.

When it comes to life imprisonment and indeterminate detention, there is not a need for that type of intervention to the same extent. In that case, it may be particularly appropriate to rent prison places abroad.

Furthermore, it can hopefully save the taxpayers' money.

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the answer.

I have also studied the example of Norway. My conclusion is completely different. It has not worked particularly well to lease prison places abroad.

Even those detained are human beings. They also have the right to have contact with loved ones. It is incredibly important to have contact with one's children, one's partner and so on, in order to feel well, have the strength to study, and manage to make one's way back into society again. It is an incredibly important factor. But it becomes very difficult if one is to sit in prison in some other country. It also becomes difficult to have contact with and re-enter Swedish society, to simply leave crime.

I believe, therefore, that this issue with prison sentences in other countries is an incredibly bad idea.

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! The member from Vänsterpartiet is, in line with the member from Miljöpartiet, presenting some kind of utopia. It is not utopia that is the alternative.

We have an acute shortage of space. It is a consequence of the Social Democrats, whose government the Left Party supported for eight years, not expanding the criminal justice system to a sufficient extent. This results in a shortage of cells, and people who are dangerous to honest citizens are sentenced to prison but are allowed to be at liberty because there are not enough prison cells.

That is why we install bunk beds, because it is necessary. That is why we need to rent prison cells abroad, because it is necessary - not because it is optimal.

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Madam Speaker! I fully agree that significantly more must be done to deal with organized crime in our country. However, I find that the government's national strategy against organized crime lacks a clear holistic approach. If we are to deal with the problem in the long run, much more must be done in several areas. I also agree that several areas are missing from the strategy.

The most important thing, however, is to strengthen crime prevention work and to stop the new recruitment of young people into gangs. This is something the Left Party has underlined and motioned on in several different contexts.

I intend to focus on the joint reservation we have together with C and MP, regarding the possibility of freeing up more places within the correctional services.

Instead of allocating the resources required for crime prevention measures, the right-wing government chooses the repressive path with harsher sentences, visitation zones, and more secret coercive measures, despite a lack of evidence that these measures are effective in reducing crime. That policy only leads to overcrowded detention centers and institutions. Overcrowded prisons mean that it becomes very difficult to provide the correctional care that is necessary to reintegrate the inmates into society.

For Vänsterpartiet, it is fundamental that we have a good and well-functioning correctional service that is not about the pure incarceration of people but about giving the inmates a way back. Staff within the correctional service testify today that the situation is acute in detention centers and prisons and that they do not have sufficient resources to do their jobs. Our prisons then risk instead becoming breeding grounds for increased crime.

Overcrowding is a major work environment problem that takes a heavy toll on the staff and means that the risks for violent situations increase. Furthermore, the opportunities for the inmates to leave a life of crime are worsened. Overcrowding also affects the possibility of visits, for example by children of inmates, when visiting rooms must be used for other purposes.

One way to alleviate the strained situation within the correctional services with lack of space and overcrowding is to expand the possibility of intensive supervision with electronic control. Allowing those convicted of less serious crime to serve their sentences with ankle monitors to a greater extent than today should also provide better conditions for successful recidivism prevention work.

A prison sentence of at most six months can already today be served at home with intensive supervision using electronic control, a so-called ankle bracelet, if the convicted person wishes and it is judged appropriate. There is very good scientific evidence that interventions in liberty make a big difference. The Swedish probation system is one of the world's most developed.

Punishment executed in community service can be made longer, more intrusive, and designed to be more content-rich and individually tailored. In a prison, the possibilities are limited to personal responsibility. Out in society, the client must manage their own existence and handle the risk situations that previously led to crime. Through execution within community service, the convicted person can take greater responsibility for following the rules of the sentence. This means, among other things, that it is required of the convicted person that they remain drug-free in the environment in which they will also live. In many cases, this means that the drug-freedom persists even after the intensive supervision has ceased. Even the harmful effects that a prison sentence can often have for the individual are thus avoided.

There are also good arguments for expanding community-based care in order to keep the costs for the Prison and Probation Service down in the long run. A client serving their sentence in a prison costs 1 million kronor per year. A client who instead serves their sentence within community-based care costs, as a comparison, approximately 100,000 kronor per year today.

Even though the clients with our proposal will likely need more and more expensive treatment and monitoring interventions than the group currently relevant for intensive monitoring with electronic control, sentences served within community care will become significantly cheaper than in prison and most likely more successful. In other words, with our proposal, the risk of the convicted person returning to crime would decrease, the costs to society would be considerably lower, and a large number of places within the Prison and Probation Service would be freed up.

I vote in favor of reservation 5.

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

Torsten Elofsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the government's report on a national strategy against organized crime. It is, as has already been said here, the first strategy of its kind. I welcome the initiative and vote in favor of the committee's proposals in the report.

Madam Speaker! The proposal focuses on five strategic goals, and I intend to largely dwell on the fourth goal regarding unauthorized and improper influence, which directly or indirectly affects the other goals.

Organized crime is in itself a relatively new phenomenon in our country, but it has now established itself and constitutes a large and serious element in the crime we witness today. Organized crime can be likened to a cancerous tumor in the body of society. If it is not contained and removed, it will spread rapidly and unchecked.

Sweden is in a serious situation with both external and internal threats. Violent crimes in the form of shootings and explosions are the most tangible manifestation, but beneath the surface are strong forces attacking welfare systems, authorities, organizations, and the business sector. Everyone is affected directly or indirectly. Individuals are also heavily affected in the form of elaborate frauds and other crimes.

Madam Speaker! Sweden now has about 60 vulnerable areas, of which around 20 are considered particularly vulnerable. In these areas, parallel societies are created with their own norms and rules far removed from our Swedish values. There, gang crime and criminal networks thrive, which, with their large amount of violence, have a great impact on other residents. There are good forces in all these areas, but they must receive better support from the side of society. The Government and the Riksdag are now enacting a number of laws that provide the conditions for a better and safer existence. There is also a major investment in many areas, and here the proposed strategy constitutes a good platform.

Madam Speaker! The goal of organized crime is to acquire information, knowledge, and influence in order to increase its power and its capital. This can occur in various ways. What has now been highlighted in the media are leaks within the Police Authority, where it has been established that serious criminals have initiated relationships with police officers and police employees where sensitive classified information has been handed over, which has subsequently been used in ongoing gang conflicts. These are pieces of information that may have directly or indirectly been the cause of murders and attempted murders or that have protected serious criminals and hindered the investigation of crimes.

It can be stated that family ties and loyalty to criminal clans in many cases weigh more heavily than loyalty to employers and colleagues, who are sometimes exposed to direct life-threatening danger due to the disloyalty and the leaked information. There is a word for this: betrayal.

Madam Speaker! Organized crime is eating its way into legal activities that fundamentally affect the welfare systems. They also enter industries where they threaten both the environment and serious companies through unhealthy competition. Waste management is an example where they have taken on the task of recycling waste for payment, but instead have simply dumped or buried hazardous waste.

Reports have shown that actors within organized crime and criminal networks use enablers on the inside of an operation. It can involve an already employed person, but there are also cases where well-educated individuals with connections to criminal networks have been planted in an authority, in the financial world, or within other sectors that may be of interest.

Madam Speaker! The trust-based society and the lack of control make us vulnerable. Security-sensitive information is covered by specific requirements in the security protection legislation, but not even that control fully protects the operations. The events and revelations of recent years show that there is an increasing need for background checks even for employments that are not covered by security protection. There are reasons to conduct a review of the legislation so that it allows for effective and serious opportunities for employers to carry out such background checks.

Increased vigilance and educational initiatives will become important elements moving forward. At the same time, we must ensure that public employees who run the risk of being subjected to undue influence in the form of threats or coercion are guaranteed protection that enables them to carry out their work duties and make decisions without such risks. The Swedish Security Service, in a letter to the government, has pointed out that threats are increasing against officials who make decisions in various cases. Säpo believes that decisions should be anonymized and names replaced with job titles, and points out that anonymous decisions protect the state and municipalities against undue influence, self-censorship, corruption, and gang crime.

Madam Speaker! The Government also highlights the need for increased international cooperation. Organized crime and criminal networks have, to a large extent, links to other countries. In several cases, crime is cross-border, which in itself entails requirements for increased international police and legal cooperation. Strengthened cooperation within Europol and Eurojust is necessary. Furthermore, the Government points out that increased efforts are required within the framework of the EU to increase cooperation with the countries outside the EU that today constitute safe countries where serious criminals can live and operate and, to a large extent, plan and control crimes committed in Sweden.

At home, we must work to ensure that persons who lack the right to stay in our country are tracked down and deported. Persons who stay illegally in the country are potentially both victims of and perpetrators within organized crime.

Therefore, members of criminal clans who have established themselves here in Sweden should have their permanent residence permits reviewed and revoked if it turns out that their activities harm Sweden and Swedish interests. The possibility of revoking Swedish citizenship should also be reviewed if there is a dual citizenship.

Tackling organized crime is no quick fix, but we must all recognize the danger. The government does so and simultaneously realizes that it entails pressures in many sectors of society, but it is a task that must be done if we are to regain a safe and secure society.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! Politics is mostly about different goal conflicts and being able to handle the fact that there are different sides to the same coin. One example has been the political discussion on and the measures to simplify entrepreneurship. It has been taken up by many parties and governments over a long period. In different ways, there has been a desire to reduce the regulatory burden, auditing, and the like. Now we have reached a point where it may have become a bit too easy to start a company. Instead, measures have had to be taken to target companies that are facades for various criminal schemes.

Another example is the discussion on secrecy. Right now, an investigation is underway that examines the possibility for different authorities and other bodies to share information. The investigation is to submit a partial report in August.

Recently, it has been on the agenda in politics to problematize secrecy. But one must, Madam Speaker, not forget that secrecy fundamentally exists for a reason - yes, several reasons. To safeguard individual privacy is one thing. It also exists so that information concerning oneself does not fall into the wrong hands. Torsten Elofsson raised here the example of infiltration within the police that has been noticed by Dagens Nyheter.

I therefore want to ask a question to the Christian Democrats: When the proposals to facilitate information sharing and reduce secrecy arrive, will you handle the risks that exist with data becoming available to more people and more authorities?

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

Torsten Elofsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! One must walk a balancing act here to safeguard personal privacy and ensure that classified information does not fall into the wrong hands. That is why, for example, the police have a special unit to handle these matters.

Even though what has emerged is worrying, it is also a sign that the issues are being worked on and that it leads to such things being discovered. But obviously, one must ensure that the information sharing occurs in a good way.

Both authorities, the business community, and other organizations must become more vigilant and better at handling information and making these trade-offs. As I said, one must become better at background checks and ensure that the right people get into the right positions. Rasmus Ling perhaps understands what I mean in this regard.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! I also believe that one must many times work better with background checks. One perhaps must consider going forward whether there should be an intermediate step between being security-cleared, which still applies to relatively few, and having an intermediate level where one more systematically performs such background checks.

In the division that occurs when several authorities are involved, it will necessarily also mean that more people will be involved. If background checks are to be performed on all relevant authorities, it will result in checks of very many people.

I am glad, Madam Speaker, that this has been discovered. What neither I, Torsten Elofsson, nor anyone else knows is how large the dark figure is. What is found in the special investigations at the Swedish Police Authority? What has DN been able to find? How large is the dark figure? We do not know. There is a risk that it is significant.

Madam Speaker! A trade-off really needs to be made. This is not an easy question. We also naturally think that it is important that the authorities can share relevant information, but it is important to do it in a secure way so that one ensures it does not fall into the wrong hands. Hopefully, DN's revelation brings something positive with it so that this is noticed to a greater extent, even in the partial report that is to come. The Government Offices need to consider this seriously and not just see secrecy as something of ill intent.

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

Torsten Elofsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I believe that Rasmus Ling and I are in agreement on these issues.

When authorities or organizations are to share information between each other, the person who holds the data must also ask themselves who should have the information and why. One must become more careful. Information cannot just flow aimlessly between different authorities; instead, one must become more vigilant and reflect on the whole matter.

Regarding Dagens Nyheter's revelation and that there is talk of 514 cases, I presume that it actually concerns illegal data breaches. To what extent it has then been shared with someone outside the organization or if it was only done out of personal interest, I will leave unsaid.

One also points out that it can be established that an unlawful data breach has occurred, but it is not possible to see what has happened with the information that has been obtained. The head of the investigation unit has emphasized that they want better opportunities to follow up on, among other things, secret coercive measures.

We have a very trusting society, but unfortunately, we must move towards becoming more controlling. It is a dull development, but we must acknowledge that it must happen.

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

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Madam Speaker! We have a serious situation in Sweden with grave organized crime on the advance. The criminals are active in more and more industries and areas. They are behind shootings and explosions, where people lose both lives and life's work. They recruit children and young people into crime. They undermine the healthy competition in the market. They infiltrate and acquire enablers within both the public and the private sectors. Most recently, we have with dismay learned the news about this within the Swedish police.

All of this ultimately threatens our democracy. It is important that we, as a country, act forcefully, but our actions need to be legally sound and accurate. We need to protect those who need the collective protection the most.

With that said, the overall approach that the government has taken is good. It is important to have a national strategy for such an issue, and the government's strategy contains many necessary and important measures that the Center Party stands behind.

The government, however, writes that "the strategy does not claim to provide a comprehensive picture of the work against organized crime and the need for reforms", and it is further stated that "crime is changing and adaptable". The latter is a correct observation: crime is changing. But the former is remarkable for a national strategy.

National strategies are, as said, good tools, and the government is presenting quite a few now. But if they do not even have the ambition to be comprehensive but instead omit important parts, they are reduced to advanced press releases, which I have raised in previous exchanges of remarks.

What we see is missing are areas for serious organized crime that are not new at all. They involve large amounts and affect the most vulnerable, but are not mentioned at all. Serious organized crime is more than drugs and weapons, more than the gang shootings and explosions. The serious situation deserves a both broader and deeper focus than this. This strategy came from the government at the end of January this year. Neither prostitution, sex buying, nor trafficking is mentioned at a single point in the strategy, despite that we know that, besides the high personal price, they provide large incomes to precisely that organized crime and also enable other crimes. Weapons and drugs are mentioned, unlike sex buying, over 60 and 30 times respectively in the strategy.

Another area we lack is fraud against the elderly. These frauds have come to be a plague in our country and a major source of income in the criminal world. They create direct economic losses for those affected but also large indirect losses in the form of lost trust in fellow human beings, for the financial system, and for the justice system. But in the strategy, they are not mentioned at all. The banks' role in dealing with them is also not mentioned with a single word, even though an important goal of the measures is to break down the criminal economy. This shows that the government's focus is still more on the perpetrators than on the most vulnerable and affected crime victims.

It is good that the additions have now been made to the committee's report, but that the Prime Minister only invited the banks in February to talk about fraud against the elderly can still be considered a bit late. And a conference on human trafficking during the EU presidency a year ago is not, in my opinion, a reason not to address one of the most serious crimes, namely human trafficking, in such a strategy.

Madam Speaker! I want to highlight some of the motions being addressed in the strategy. We have stood behind both the sentencing increases that have been made and the major resource reinforcements being implemented. But we also propose a way to alleviate the strained situation within the correctional services with space shortages and overcrowding: to expand the possibility for those convicted of less serious crime with a low risk of recidivism to instead serve the sentence with so-called electronic monitoring (ankle bracelets). We must remember that the security at our institutions and for our staff there needs to remain high despite a pressured situation. In that case, this can be a partial solution at the current time.

The use of non-profit associations is pointed out in the strategy as an opportunity for criminal activity. This is true, but it is portrayed in the strategy as if it could be easier to start an association than a company, which I believe many know is not the case. Non-profit association life currently faces great difficulties in terms of, for example, obtaining functioning bank accounts, especially when it concerns young people who want to start associations. Civil society and association life are important actors in countering organized crime and in ensuring that young people can be offered a meaningful leisure time. Nevertheless, we, just like the government, believe that there is a risk that criminal networks exploit associations. This is the balancing act we must perform. Measures to counter the criminals must not lead to unreasonable administrative or cost-driving consequences for associations. This is something the government must continue to take into account.

Madam Speaker! I stand behind all of the Center Party's motions but move for time-saving approval only to reservation 1.

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

Martin Melin (L)

Madam Speaker! We are now debating the government's communication Resilience and Action - a national strategy against organized crime, a communication on how the government wants authorities and society to work to reduce organized crime. This is important and topical and something that for many years has been neglected.

In such a communication, I think it is important that one does not just talk about wanting to do something; there must also be directives for how it is to be done. There is, as I understand it, a very fine line. It is not the politicians who are to manage how authorities shall conduct their operations. The authorities must do that themselves. But it is the government's role to state how they want the operations to function and what results they want. I can give a few examples regarding the police: The government wants crime to decrease, the number of solved investigations, not least of gang crimes, to increase, that there should be more police officers, and that the number of visible police officers in outer service shall increase.

I think that the government can and should set high demands on our authorities, and I think that one can dare to push the boundaries and not just write that one wants something, but also move a bit closer to how one wants it to happen. Sometimes this government does that, and I like that. For example, the government does not just write that the police must work more on crime prevention, but one specifies it: There must be more present police officers in outer service in the vulnerable areas that have high crime and a high proportion of network criminals. These are quite clear directives. Then, of course, it is up to the Police Authority to ensure that it happens.

Madam Speaker! Organized crime in Sweden is a threat to the system. We have heard that for over 20 years now. But passivity and naivety have allowed that type of crime to grow large. Today we see how organized crime turns over tens of billions. We see a welfare crime that has been allowed to work undisturbed. We see how grossly criminal individuals can buy into legal businesses and in that way launder their money. We see how criminals easily use neglected legislation to cheat the state out of money.

We see how everyone younger, even children, are being drawn into organized crime, which over the last ten years has led to Sweden ranking among the highest in Europe, and even in the world, when it comes to shootings and bombings. We see how innocent people are shot and blown up, how relatives are murdered, how young men take over areas and threaten the residents there, and how business owners have to close their shops because they can no longer withstand the threats - all this because of organized crime.

We see how organized crime is taking more and more ground in society and day by day moving forward its positions. It is incomprehensible to me that the politicians who have sat in this house over the last ten years have done nothing about this. I have worked in it, against it and with it, and just like many of my colleagues for many years I have waved my hands and tried to call for politicians' attention, but they have not done anything. It is incomprehensible to me why one does not listen. And the question is why some still today do not listen. Organized crime must be stopped.

Madam Speaker! We also see how criminals are entering important societal functions, how they infiltrate authorities and how they exploit those who work there. We see how they are increasingly using so-called enablers. In recent days, we have been able to read about how criminals have gained access to secret information from the police by using enablers within the police. This is serious. It is truly system-threatening for the justice system.

That serving or prospective police officers or police employees have close private contact with criminals is indefensible, and it must be combated by all means. It is not just about criminals being able to get away or their activities being facilitated. It is also about people dying, that people are murdered. It can even be about police officers dying because interventions are warned about in advance.

The revelations we have seen in recent days show once again how important it is that the admission to and removal from the police training occurs with great precision and by the right personnel. If, during or after the training, suspicions arise that police officers have contact with criminals, it must be taken seriously, regardless of whether the contact occurs through friendship, relationships, or threats, or through economic interests. The police authority, that is, the employer, must not be flat or nonchalant in those situations. The slightest suspicion must be taken seriously. If the suspicions are correct, one must act with determination – the individual must be dismissed from service.

A police officer must always be able to trust a police officer, and the public must always be able to trust that the police stand on the side of the good. There is no place for dirty police officers in the Swedish Police Authority. I believe I speak for 99.9 percent of all police officers on that issue.

The problem with enablers is addressed in the communication Resilience and Action. It reassures me that the government takes this seriously. I now take it for granted that, at the highest political level, conversations are being held with the police leadership on how to deal with these dirty police officers.

Madam Speaker! To stop the progress of organized crime, we all know here that we must stop the new recruitment of criminals.

It must be done now, with force, and the entire society must be involved. The government has begun the work by, among other things, ensuring that schools receive more resources and can better identify those young people who risk falling off track due to lack of schooling or poor school results. The correctional services also receive a substantial increase, and new methods of work within social services are being tested.

The social services is something that we must start talking much more about. The social services has an important function when it comes to preventing young people from being drawn into crime. I hope that we will soon start having as much discussion about the social services and its role in crime prevention work as we have talked about the repressive measures in recent years.

When it comes to the repressive measures, the government has shown that it has acted correctly. The police results speak for themselves there. But now it is time to show the same will and the same results when it comes to crime prevention work. There, the social services have an important role.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! The narcotics area is of central importance. This is also established in the strategy. I agree with what is in the strategy that it is important to make the large seizures, strengthen the customs, and detect them to a greater extent. The seizure that was made in Nynäshamn this week was record-breaking, as an example. It is established that Sweden has also become a transit country for this.

I and Martin Melin have both had the privilege of discussing drugs in a podcast recently, Narkopodden. Martin Melin argued there that tougher penalties for drug offenses, including for minor offenses, should, if I understood him correctly, be introduced.

Martin Melin did not say no to the question of whether it is reasonable to have one's passport confiscated. He argued that instead of fines, one should receive a curfew with an ankle bracelet in the event that one was caught with narcotics. These were statements that punishment has an intrinsic value, or something similar. It may not be exactly quoted, but that was at least the meaning.

Martin Melin also does not want to see any change to the overarching goal of a drug-free society. At the same time, the Liberals as a party have been the party that has been most in favor of changing this and instead focusing on a harm-reduction line. When Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner sent referral opinions recently, the Liberals were alone in saying no to what the majority had come to.

Madam Speaker! My question is: What do the Liberals want in this issue, and what does Marin Melin want?

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

Martin Melin (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Rasmus Ling, for the question!

I will take it in two different stages. In the podcast, it was exactly as Rasmus Lind said, reasoning and a discussion. We talked about things and matters. We came onto this with punishment. What is a punishment?

A person who today is caught with drugs in their system out at a pub, a so-called recreational drug user, may receive their 15,000-20,000 kronor in fines, and then he moves on in life.

A discussion was held about what a punishment is. Is it perhaps more difficult for that person to have an ankle monitor for a month and not be able to go out and party for a month?

The reasoning concerns: What is a punishment? Should punishment be palpable, or should punishment only be financial or incarceration? That was number one.

Number two was about, if one distinguishes between abusers and users, that abusers today must receive care to a much greater extent. I believe I even said that in the podcast. I am, for example, in favor of methadone programs being used and so on to a much greater extent than today.

I know that it is difficult to get into methadone projects. It should increase much more. One must not forget that practically all addicts today who seek care receive care and are offered care. All party-drug users at the pub who are taken in with drugs in their bodies are offered care.

It is not that I am against it or that society, with the laws and rules that exist today, does not offer care. Everyone is offered care. Unfortunately, there are very many who say no to care. Of those who say yes to care, there are unfortunately many who return to substance abuse again. Substance abuse is something that is quite difficult to get out of.

When it comes to my view on drugs, I have worked as a narcotics undercover agent in Stockholm's city center for many years and seen what they do. It only reinforced my view that drugs are not something good.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! We agree that drugs are not good, even if Martin Melin had the argument that they are dangerous and therefore should be banned. That might not work regarding everything here in the world that can be dangerous. That argument is probably not watertight if one takes it a bit further.

We completely agree that it causes damage and so on. But the question is whether the policy we have had has led to anything positive or if the costs and damages have become higher than they could have been with a different policy.

I note that Melin expresses himself differently now than in the episode I listened to. I also note that the Liberals have a completely different argumentation when other representatives have spoken about these issues.

We will have to see what happens. There is now an investigation that has been subject to consultation. In my opinion, there are very many good proposals in it. The investigation was prevented from looking at how the consumption ban has hit, and what effects the criminalization and the successive increased penalties for narcotics possession, which we have had since the end of the 80s and up until as recently as this summer, have had.

I hope, just as several referral bodies have thought, that an investigation can be appointed that can review this without prestige and without having decided in advance what it should conclude. It is an important area. It affects crime, addicts and users. Therefore, it must be handled in a reasonable, adult and mature way.

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

Martin Melin (L)

Madam Speaker! I am also interested in seeing what effect it has had on the abuse, not the use but the abuse, of drugs when even minor drug offenses were criminalized when a person is under the influence of drugs. I am also curious about that.

I remember when that law came. I remember when we within the police received directives to go down to Plattan, Sergels torg, in Stockholm. There we were to take these addicts, bring them to the police station, perform urine tests and prove that they had drugs in their bodies, and then they would receive 1,500 kronor in fines. We thought it was idiotic.

I was also in the middle of it in the 90s when rave culture was popular. Back then, there were many young people who were 18, 19, 20, or 21 years old who were under the influence of ecstasy, which was popular then. Back then, it was very good to have this law in order to be able to show the youth, and above all for the youth's parents, that the child used drugs. It is interesting that many of those children got in touch several years later and said that they were grateful that they got caught, because it made them stop. There, it worked.

But I also understand that if you have a person who has abused heroin for 30 years and who is standing and kneeling down on Plattan, it is clear that it doesn't provide anything to prove that he has drugs in his body. It provides nothing. In that case, it is better to ensure that he gets methadone, that he avoids standing on Plattan and that he gets a bearable life. I am truly the first to sign off on that.

We will probably find a good drug policy together, I hope.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! The Government has established a strategy against organized crime. In some parts, the strategy is good, and the Green Party agrees with some but not others.

I can take a couple of examples of what I think is good; one should be positive first. To follow the money is something that we from Miljöpartiet have long called for and acted upon. A fair amount has been done, but there is still much to do and wish for. Some of the problems that exist are addressed in the letter. Not least, it is important in these contexts that relevant authorities have sufficient resources to be able to manage this. Ekobrottsmyndigheten is one of them.

Counteracting the recruitment and socialization of young people into criminal environments is absolutely crucial. I don't actually believe that what is lacking here is knowledge or will from the government. But unfortunately, it is not prepared to fully follow other countries when it comes to prioritizing this and allocating the resources required so that the young people, often boys, who are in the risk zone are not recruited. What has been done in Denmark with De Aktive Drenge costs money, but it is saved. In every instance where a prison year is avoided, it is about more than 1 million kronor. That requires an adult presence, in school and sometimes also afterwards.

Madam Speaker! We have previously, and also today, spoken about the situation within the Prison and Probation Service, and we will return to that several more times. The situation is not good, to put it mildly. It is bad for the staff and for the inmates and thus also for society as a whole.

Madam Speaker! I see that previous participants in the debate did not have the opportunity to remain in the chamber any longer, so I will not apostrophize for too long. But I can still state that the Moderate Minister for Justice has described double-occupancy in prisons as something positive, even though he would have the opportunity to opt out of it. I also heard that the announcement here today was something quite the opposite. But this is, as said, something that we will return to more times when the Moderates participate.

Madam Speaker! We have a joint reservation in the report, which has already been approved, regarding intensive supervision with electronic ankle bracelets and that this could be done in more cases. This is something that would create more room for the Prison and Probation Service. This is something that the government should comply with, just as alternatives to prison should be relevant in more cases in those situations where it is appropriate, in line with what the management and the Director General of the Prison and Probation Service have called for.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of reservation 2. I believe I have included the other parts in the various exchanges of remarks, so I thank you for today.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 15 May.)

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