The National Audit Office's report on the state's property management
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the National Audit Office's criticism of the government's management of the state's property management and the preservation of cultural heritage. V advocates that the preservation of cultural heritage should be given greater weight and that cultural-historical buildings such as Salsta Castle should not be sold 1. MP criticizes the government's lack of long-term perspective, high rent increases for museums, and argues that the state should use money for culture instead of letting Fastighetsverket accumulate them 2. MP proposes new models for return requirements and rent setting 2. M emphasizes the importance of efficient management and that culture should be financed through open grants, not through hidden subsidies in the form of low rents 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.
Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)
Madam Speaker! Salsta Castle is located in Vattholma in Uppsala Municipality. The castle was, until 1976, the residence of the von Essen family. In the 17th-century castle, one can today see the old surroundings, as the castle is open to the public.
Since 1976, the castle has been owned by the state and managed by Statens fastighetsverk. In 1993, the castle became a state-designated historical building in view of its value as a well-preserved Baroque castle and the site's long history, which stretches back to the 1300s.
But the castle has long been on the State Property Agency's list of possible objects to divest. No kings have lived in the castle, so the State Property Agency does not consider the castle to have a significant connection to the Swedish state's history and development. A couple of years ago, the State Property Agency decided to place the castle on the list of objects to divest. If the castle is sold, furniture and interior furnishings will be taken as these are owned by the Nationalmuseum and would not be included in a sale. The cultural environment would disappear, and the castle would become an empty shell.
A comparison can be made with Venngarn Castle outside Sigtuna, which was sold to the Lewi Pethrus Foundation in 1983. When the castle was sold further to a private entrepreneur, the Nationalmuseum retrieved art and other furnishings from the castle. The Svea Court of Appeal has established that the Nationalmuseum also has ownership rights to a number of fixed furnishings in the castle, such as tiled stoves, open fireplaces, and interior fittings in the unique castle chapel, something which the then-castle owner appealed. In the famous Disasalen, the walls are empty. The eight 17th-century paintings can be seen at the Nationalmuseum.
When the castle and its surroundings were again for sale some twenty years ago, the head of the castle collections department at the Nationalmuseum meant that the state should take the opportunity to buy it back. The state should never have sold Venngarn Castle, he argued, because it was naturally crazy to divest it. The entire dispute shows how complicated it becomes when one sells a cultural heritage site that the state has owned since the 1600s, the head of the department told the media.
The state has only owned Salsta Castle since 1976, but the history of Venngarn shows how complicated it becomes when Statens fastighetsverk sells cultural environments and Nationalmuseum watches over the inventories. Given all the changes of ownership, it is probably good that Nationalmuseum has taken care of the art and the inventories that were at Venngarn – those that didn't manage to be sold, that is.
It is, however, obviously better if our castles get to keep their interiors and their art and that they are open to visitors so that we can all take part in the history. History is not just kings, and it belongs to us all – just as we all jointly own all state castles and properties.
The Swedish National Heritage Board opposes Statens fastighetsverks proposal for sale and argues that Salsta Castle is one of Sweden's most valuable cultural environments and an important part of the narrative of the state's and society's development. The Swedish National Heritage Board assesses that a sale would entail great risks that these values would be lost. It is also argued that the public's access to the site is restricted, which Uppsala municipality has also pointed out in a letter. The Swedish National Heritage Board's opinion will most likely mean that Statens fastighetsverk does not proceed with the sale, but the final word lies with the government.
Madam Speaker! In the matter we are debating today, the National Audit Office directs criticism at the government's management of the extent of the property holdings. This concerns, for example, the so-called divestment list of cultural properties, which has met with extensive criticism. The government's mandate to the National Property Board should therefore be revised so that the preservation of cultural and heritage values is given greater weight. Cultural-historical buildings such as Salsta shall not be sold, and property and inventory shall not be split up.
I vote in favor of the reservation, which also entails a review of the Swedish National Property Board's yield and rental model.
Mats Berglund (MP)
Madam Speaker! The National Audit Office has audited the State Property Agency's management of parts of its property portfolio. This primarily concerns cultural properties and properties where different types of cultural activities are housed.
The report from the Swedish National Audit Office shows that there are a number of deficiencies both at the National Property Board itself and, above all, at the government. According to the report, the Tidö government's management has focused on tasking the National Property Board with selling off parts of the portfolio in order to reduce costs. On the other hand, virtually no management based on the needs of culture has taken place. The Swedish National Audit Office notes that the funds that were nevertheless temporarily allocated on an ad hoc basis during the mandate period will not solve any problems in the long term for the subsidized properties, i.e., those properties that cannot bear their own costs.
The National Audit Office notes that, on the contrary, there is a lack of long-term perspective in the Tidö government's governance. One such example is how the return requirement is to be calculated. This has resulted in the National Property Board now accumulating very large sums in arrears while many tenants, especially cultural activities, are unable to bear the costs of the increased rents.
We have recently been reached by news about announced rent increases. For the World Culture Museums, it is about 57 percent and for Armémuseum it is 60 percent. This means a cost increase for the Ethnographic Museum, for example, of 12.25 million kronor per year and for Armémuseum with 8 million kronor per year. It naturally risks driving the museums away from the premises they are in, even though these have functioned very well. The museums have existed and conducted their activities there for a long time, and the visitors have learned to find their way here.
Now, the World Culture Museums have been tasked by the government to analyze their local situation. In connection with this, I submitted a written question to the Minister for Culture regarding whether the government has any intention whatsoever of acting actively so that the operations in the museums concerned – the Ethnographic Museum, the Museum of East Asian Art, and the Mediterranean Museum – can be preserved and not phased out. I must unfortunately say that the answer was disappointing: no promises and no ambitions. The Minister also had no answer as to what might happen to the collections if they risk being split up in the event that the museums cannot remain in their premises.
This corresponds quite clearly with the government's response to the report from the National Audit Office. The government writes that it agrees in principle entirely with the National Audit Office's criticism but simultaneously states that it will not take any measures; at least, no measures or ambitions to take any measures are presented.
This is completely in line with the Tidregering's culture policy in general, which has consisted of nothing being done except to avoid increasing the appropriations in line with the record-high inflation we have seen.
During the mandate period, one, says one, proposition has been sent from the Ministry of Culture to the Culture Committee. It was about significant cuts to public service. We have received only one single proposition! I believe it is some kind of record for a minister when it comes to sitting on one's hands during an entire mandate period and being unable to produce more sharp proposals on an entire policy area.
Report after report has emerged showing that Swedish cultural life has been significantly weakened during the mandate period. It is primarily small towns and rural areas that are the big losers. But even in the larger cities, the conditions for a vibrant cultural life and the living cultural heritage have been weakened.
Just through the cuts to the student unions, 300 rehearsal rooms and 8,000 performance opportunities have disappeared. The cultural schools are reducing their teaching staff, and the students are getting a poorer selection to choose from. A leisure card, for example, does not help if one still has no place at the cultural school. Nine out of ten folk high schools have been forced to cut staff, the number of courses, or the number of participants. Particularly affected are the cultural educations, which are so important for the competence supply of future cultural creators.
The cultural infrastructure of premises, organizers, voluntary forces, and organizations has been dismantled across the entire country. This is the Tidö government's result after nearly four years. The Swedish National Audit Office's very critical report and the government's non-response to it fit the pattern very clearly.
The other day, the three private financiers of the renovation of the Opera, Ax:son Johnson, Persson and Wallenberg, wrote the following in DN Debatt: It is not strange that less private money reaches culture in Sweden. No one will want to contribute private money to culture if the policy continues to back away in this way.
This morning, an investigation was submitted with proposals to strengthen private funding. We will have to see, but I believe the main thing is that the government must show a greater willingness to fund culture.
Madam Speaker! We need a new cultural policy. We need a policy that embraces culture and sees the value of culture. We need a policy that finances culture and that does not distrust and suspect culture, but instead shows trust and confidence, but also decisiveness.
Miljöpartiet is the leading cultural party in Swedish politics. We have the funding through our budget, we have the proposals in our motions, and we have the ability to act. Our previous green culture ministers have shown this very clearly.
Madam Speaker! Finally: Regarding the National Audit Office's report, the Green Party has a motion in the committee with three clear proposals.
We propose, first of all, a new model for the calculation of the required rate of return for Fastighetsverket so that the money, instead of being accumulated, can be used for culture.
We propose, for the second, a new model for the rental pricing of the cultural properties. We want to test a model where the financing is placed on the landlords, i.e., Statens fastighetsverk, which are tasked with providing suitable premises. The cultural activities can then focus on their cultural mission, and we will move away from the 1980s and 90s new public management where, if one were to translate it into Swedish, the state plays business with itself.
We propose, for the third, a completely new mission for the National Property Board, where the values of culture and cultural heritage are given priority and where it is not just about profit maximization.
In addition to this, I really want to highlight what Ilona Szatmári Waldau from Vänsterpartiet devoted her speech to, namely the divestment list. It should be scrapped, because it contains far too many examples. Ilona mentioned Salsta slott and Sigtuna slott – 17th-century castles that are to be divested! The National Audit Office itself mentions that the list should at least be supplemented with an acquisition list of properties that should be acquired so that they can be protected.
Madam Speaker! I apologize for having exceeded my speaking time slightly, and I move for the approval of the Green Party's and the Left Party's reservation 2 in the committee report.
Adam Reuterskiöld (M)
Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the Committee on Finance's report 31 on the National Audit Office's report on the state's property management. It is an important report, which concerns two things that must function simultaneously in a well-managed state: partly our responsibility to manage our common cultural heritage, and partly our responsibility to manage the taxpayers' money as well as possible. For us Moderates, both parts are self-evident.
The State owns some of Sweden's most significant cultural-historical buildings and environments. These must be cared for and preserved in the long term. I often say that we do not actually own these properties, but rather manage them on behalf of our children. Our task and our goal is to hand them over to the next generation in better condition than when we received them.
At the same time, the state must be characterized by order and tidiness. Every tax krona must be used as effectively as possible, and every cost must be clear and possible to follow up.
The National Audit Office's report points out that the administration has for the most part been conducted efficiently, but that there is potential for improvement regarding long-term management, long-term maintenance, and financing.
We can divide the question into two parts. The first is the State Property Agency's own responsibility. The State Property Agency must, of course, conduct an efficient property management. This means that the agency shall maintain the properties in a professional and long-term manner. It is therefore entirely reasonable to set high requirements for efficiency, cost control, and long-term planning.
To that part of the debate also belongs the question of which properties the state must own and which should be sold to other actors who can manage them in an even better way.
The second part is the question of rents and the relationship between Statens fastighetsverk and the activities that use the premises. It is a fundamentally important issue. Statens fastighetsverks task is to manage properties, not to indirectly subsidize cultural activities.
If the rents are set too low, a number of different problems arise. For the first, it becomes unclear how much resources actually go to different activities. The costs are then hidden in property management instead of being visible openly in the activities' own budgets. For the second, one risks weakening the governance and monitoring of the premises costs. For the third, it becomes less transparent towards the citizens what is actually spent on culture and what is property maintenance.
Madam Speaker! Of course the state should finance culture. But it should happen openly and clearly through political decisions and appropriations, not hidden by expecting Statens fastighetsverk to provide low rents to the organizations. This is a fundamentally important difference, Madam Speaker, and the Moderaterna believe that these two perspectives must be kept separate. Statens fastighetsverk shall be a professional and efficient administrator, and the organizations shall bear their real costs through correct and market-based rents. The calculation models for this should be constantly evaluated.
The government has returned with a number of items that are planned or that may be included in the next budget process. Some of these are precisely the calculation model for return requirements, the financing of properties, and the State Property Agency's management model. This is how we both safeguard the cultural heritage and show respect for the taxpayers' money.
With this, I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.
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.