The Parliament's methods of work
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
S wants the committee's proposal to be approved and the motions regarding a committee for data and digitalization as well as steering documents for the language to be rejected 1. S considers that existing committees can handle digitalization and that the language act is sufficient 1. SD wants the reservation regarding the Swedish language to be approved 2. SD considers that the current regulatory framework is insufficient and that steering documents are needed to preserve the language's uniqueness 2. V wants the reservation to limit the number of vice-chairpersons to be approved to avoid cost increases 3. V wants lower fees and stricter rules for overnight accommodations 3. V considers that the Riksdag must adapt to digitalization and AI 3. V wants more people to be able to run and be elected as members of parliament 3. V considers it important to have good conditions for acting as a member 3. V appreciates the stenographers' work 3. V does not share SD's concern regarding the language 3.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Mr. Speaker! The Riksdag's ways of working are based on respect and trust for the meaning of the mandate to be elected by the people. The individual member's conditions for carrying out the mandate are of the utmost importance for how our democracy and parliamentarism function.
In a time when international measurements show that democracy is in decline, it is, as I see it, important that questions about just the everyday practical political work can be brought forward for public scrutiny and in this way hopefully contribute to creating engagement for increased participation in the democratic work.
In the Instrument of Government, Chapter 1, Section 1, it is established that all public power in Sweden derives from the people. It appears that Swedish democracy is based on free formation of opinion and on universal and equal suffrage and that this is realized through a representative and parliamentary system of government and through local self-government - so far the formulations of the Instrument of Government.
In order for legislative processes, preparations, and the free formation of opinion to function in practice, the methods of work are crucial. Each one as an elected representative also has a task to take most seriously and to fulfill their obligations in the best possible way. The methods of work shall, in turn, be clear and be able to be understood and followed by every citizen. They can be based on well-developed practice and experience but also need to contain a formal basis to start from.
The Committee on the Constitution handles issues concerning the Riksdag's methods of work. The report the committee submits to the Chamber today contains about thirty motions from the general motion period 2023/24 on these issues. Barely 20 of them are treated in so-called simplified form, as they have been subject to preparation even earlier during the parliamentary term.
Mr. Speaker! I would like to vote in favor of the committee's proposal and thereby reject the motions. I would also like to take this opportunity to account for some of the matters and comment on some of the considerations that have led to the decisions.
A committee motion from Vänsterpartiet contains a request for a declaration that the number of vice chairs in the committees be regulated in the parliamentary rules. In this context, we refer to the current provisions on how committees are appointed. The committees and the EU Committee elect, all according to Chapter 12, Section 16 of the parliamentary rules, within themselves a chair and one or more vice chairs. The election is made by acclamation or, if any member so requests, by secret ballot. From a commentary on the parliamentary rules, it also appears that the chair positions are in practice distributed through agreements between the party groups prior to the decisions in the committees and in the EU Committee. If the chair is drawn from a government party, a vice chair is appointed from the opposition and vice versa.
In previous treatments of motions similar to the one that Vänsterpartiet is now raising, KU has rejected the motion proposals. The committee is also not prepared this time to stand behind such a proposal and rejects the motion proposal.
Mr. Speaker! In another motion, from Markus Selin, Socialdemokraterna, a notice is requested to investigate the establishment of a committee in the Riksdag for the management of data and digitalization. If we look at the Instrument of Government, it is prescribed there that the Riksdag shall appoint a Committee on the Constitution and a Committee on Finance. According to Chapter 7, Section 2 of the Parliamentary Procedure, a Committee on Taxation is also included as a requirement. In the supplementary provisions, there is also an enumeration of the 15 committees that are elected for each parliamentary term.
If the motion proposal can be supplemented by that questions regarding data and digitalization are highly topical issues. Similar to many other subject areas, these are however questions that cannot be restricted within a certain subject area but almost immediately affect all areas of society, where competence and knowledge can be worth considering. From security perspectives, the Committee on Defence's competence in this context is highly relevant, and in questions regarding personal privacy versus publicity, it is not possible to bypass the KU's constitutional aspects. The Committee therefore maintains its previous assessment that there are no grounds to take any initiative for changes in the committee organization.
In a motion submitted by Malin Björk, Centerpartiet, a review is requested of the possibilities for elected representatives to combine the mandate with work and family life, with a focus not least on, as I understand it, expanded opportunities for digital participation in meetings in the Riksdag.
In this matter, it can be said that a number of reforms over the years have focused precisely on promoting the combination of parenthood and the parliamentary mandate. Not least, the free childcare that a member has access to for their or their children up to the age of twelve can be mentioned. There is also the possibility of parental leave.
When it comes to remote participation, it can be stated that the Instrument of Government confirms that the Riksdag's meetings shall be held in Stockholm. There are suitable premises here, and the conditions are the same for everyone. The security aspect, both digitally and physically, is also important to emphasize.
The work of the Riksdag during the corona pandemic, where several committees held remote meetings, has been the subject of a follow-up by the parliamentarilly composed committee, which submitted its report in November 2021. There, a number of advantages and disadvantages of remote participation are reported. The Committee on the Constitution then underlined the importance of physical meetings for constructive and trust-based deliberations and conversations between members and simultaneously reminded that the possibility of remote participation is only relevant in extraordinary situations, such as the one that prevailed during the corona pandemic.
In this context, it can also be mentioned that the Riksdag Board in October 2023 decided to convene a parliamentary committee with a mandate to conduct a review of the support for the parliamentary decision-making process and the membership in the Riksdag, as well as other issues within the Riksdag's work and the members' conditions. The committee's work is ongoing and will be finalized no later than March 31, 2025. That work should not be anticipated, which is why the motions are rejected.
Mr. Speaker! The report also contains motions on issues regarding flags in the plenary hall, the program at the opening of the Riksdag, the possibility of half portions in the dining hall to reduce food waste, as well as a proposal for an announcement, from Matheus Enholm, Sverigedemokraterna, to produce special guidance documents for the Riksdag's internal and external language use. The mover believes that in this way he can preserve the Swedish language's characteristics and linguistic tradition.
Based on this, I want to refer to the Language Act. Swedish is, according to the Language Act, the main language in Sweden. According to the law, Swedish is the common language of society, to which all residents in Sweden shall have access. Swedish shall be able to be used within all areas of society, and the public has a special responsibility to ensure that Swedish is used and developed. Swedish shall be the language used in courts, administrative authorities, and other bodies within public activities.
The Riksdag, on its part, has its own writing councils for both general and Riksdag-specific language issues. The Riksdag's writing councils are primarily based on the Authorities' writing rules, the Swedish Academy's word list, and recommendations from the Riksdag's language officers. The advice and recommendations provided are based on science and experience and are intended to contribute to uniformity and increased clarity.
However, it is a fact that language changes over time. It is enough to read literature from the present and the past - including parliamentary protocols and other materials - to gain an insight into the language's mutability. Foreign influences are also part of the language's development.
In the parliamentary environment, there is no doubt about the position of the Swedish language. On the other hand, as a customer or guest in various shops or restaurants in the country, one may occasionally wonder about the prevalence of English. The Swedish Language Council might also be something for the private business sector to consider.
In this case, the advice and recommendations that already apply to the Riksdag's work and our authorities may perhaps serve as inspiration. Therefore, I believe that the motion should be dismissed.
Victoria Tiblom (SD)
Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on the Constitution's report number 14, Parliamentary procedures. I move for approval of reservation number 3 regarding the Swedish language in the Riksdag.
The Committee on the Constitution has stated in the report that it is of great importance that the Swedish language is cherished, used and developed as a literary language, an everyday language and an official language. In practice, the regulatory framework we have to work from in this area is not sufficient to ensure such an objective.
The use of language in public activities is regulated in the Language Act. In Section 10, the following is stated: The language in courts, administrative authorities, and other bodies performing tasks in public activities is Swedish. In Section 12, it is stated that authorities have a special responsibility to ensure that Swedish terminology within their various professional fields is available, used, and developed.
After that, the guidance ends.
In practice, the language in the Riksdag relies heavily on the content of the Swedish Academy's dictionary, which we just heard a member mention, which is updated and developed continuously. One concern with the current solution is that more and more loanwords, especially from English, are making their way into the Swedish Academy's dictionary. Often, a Swedish equivalent is missing. I mean that without a regulatory framework with guidelines that safeguard the Swedish language, there is an imminent risk that our language will eventually be replaced by loanwords.
Mr. Speaker! In order to preserve and ensure our linguistic heritage, it is therefore of great importance that the position of the language is strengthened in society and, above all, in the Riksdag. Our goal must be to use and preserve a rich Swedish language and to pass it on to future generations. As an institution, the Riksdag has a unique opportunity to take advantage of and influence this important issue. The Riksdag Board can and should design governing documents for all internal and external communication as well as review how the uniqueness of the Swedish language can be preserved. The Language Act is, in that sense, not sufficient. A governing document is needed to complement the existing regulatory framework. When it comes to presenting such a basis, the Riksdag can advantageously draw inspiration from the Icelandic language model.
Mr. Speaker! From an objective-oriented perspective, the amendment must be considered reasonable and necessary in order to preserve something as valuable for our cultural and national heritage as the Swedish language actually is.
If we stop considering our own language as part of our cultural heritage, our identity and our origin, it is given that the language in its current form will not endure. With a rich language, we can instead provide future generations with better conditions and avoid loanwords replacing the Swedish ones.
Jessica Wetterling (V)
Mr. Speaker! Just as previous speakers have stated, we are talking about the report titled Riksdagens arbetsformer.
Mr. Speaker! What are we actually doing here? How do we ensure that the Riksdag functions in the best possible way, and what should the work look like in the future? What conditions do we have? What conditions should apply for members of Parliament and others who work in this parliament?
The answer, perhaps at least partially, is in this committee report. It touches on everything from the elected representatives' working conditions to how we should sit and which flags should hang in this chamber. Sometimes it is even about where the Speaker should live. It is, to say the least, high and low that is touched upon in this committee report. Sometimes one can marvel at the wealth of ideas among the members regarding their own everyday lives.
One can see that the work has truly changed over the last decades - from two chambers to one and from fluid voting occasions to fixed times. Several other adjustments have also been made, as previous speakers have touched upon, to enable more citizens in Sweden to run for office and gain the trust to be a member of the Riksdag, for example through childcare.
Mr. Speaker! I want to move for approval of reservation 1, which concerns the fact that the Riksdag's committees should not be able to elect an unlimited number of vice chairs in a committee. During the previous parliamentary term, many committees chose to appoint more than one vice chair. Since this is a mandate that also entitles one to an extra fee, it became an unexpected and unnecessary cost increase for the Riksdag of approximately 1.5 million per year. Even though this has not occurred in the same way during this parliamentary term, we believe it is an unfortunate loophole that should be closed. Unfortunately, it seems that only we in Vänsterpartiet see this problem and want to stop this risk of waste of taxpayers' money.
Mr. Speaker! Another proposal that we in Vänsterpartiet are pushing for is the proposal on lowered fees, because we consider it important that we as members do not live in a completely different economic reality than the reality that those we represent live in. But this is one of the motions that is being simplified this year. Just as previous speakers have pointed out, we have such an arrangement in our working methods. But I still want to say this. It is something that Vänsterpartiet motions for every year. It is also therefore subject to simplified treatment.
Over the last 20 years, the members of parliament's salaries have risen sharply. It is now 75,500 kronor per month. Furthermore, several other tax changes have been implemented in recent years that have benefited high-income earners, such as us members of parliament. That too has provided several thousand extra per month.
Mr. Speaker! We also believe that the regulations concerning compensation for overnight accommodation should be tightened.
I want to say something about the work that is actually taking place right now. Last year, the Speaker's Office decided to appoint an inquiry, involving all parties, whose task is to conduct a review of the support for the parliamentary decision-making process and the membership in the Riksdag, as well as certain other issues regarding the conditions for members of Parliament. I have the privilege of representing my party in the inquiry. It will be exciting to see what we come up with and how it will be received by the other members, the administration, and the public. I can, however, state that we have worked well so far and had several good discussions, and that we are all keen that there should continue to be good conditions to act as a member of Parliament during the time – for the vast majority, it is a short time – that one has the privilege of being one.
During the last decades or the last few years, we have seen an ever faster development of our society. We see a digitalization. We see AI. We also see that we can draw many lessons from how we were forced to change our work because of a pandemic. The Riksdag obviously needs to adapt to the reality that is around us. It is obviously also important that we in different ways are even more accessible and adapt this activity so that as many as possible have the opportunity to run and be elected as members of the Riksdag.
Finally, Mr. Speaker! What we do here in the chamber is documented in very many different ways, thanks to digitalization. We have excellent stenographers, who often ensure that what we say in this chamber becomes richer. It becomes a richer language and more comprehensible for many outside the chamber. Your efforts are, of course, very much appreciated, as you notice, especially when one, like I, starts babbling a little bit.
The working methods of the Riksdag
I do not quite share the Sweden Democrats' great concern, but one thing I still want to say about the language. I was here in the chamber at one occasion during the last parliamentary term when it was question time. A member asked a question in the dialect Älvdalska. It was actually very clarifying for me. I did not understand a single word, and the member was also told to speak Swedish - which he actually did.
This is a question that is not addressed in this report, but that Älvdalska should be a language is a question that Vänsterpartiet is pursuing.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.