Response to interpellation 2022/23:118 on hate and threats at libraries

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! Lawen Redar has asked me how I will act to ensure that the principle of arm's length distance is respected at national, regional, and municipal levels. I have also been asked what I intend to do to counter hate and threats directed at cultural activities such as libraries and individual art and culture practitioners.

Regarding the respect for the principle of arm's length, there should be no doubt that the government stands behind this. The principle is a self-evident starting point for the government as well as in the Tidö Agreement. In my role as Minister for Culture, I will therefore continue to work for the protection of the principle.

According to the Libraries Act (2013:801), the libraries in the public library system shall work for the development of the democratic society by contributing to the dissemination of knowledge and free formation of opinion. The libraries shall also promote the status of literature as well as the interest in education, enlightenment, schooling, and research. It also follows from the Act that library activities shall be available to everyone. The Libraries Act is therefore extremely important for making the libraries' mission visible.

Hate and threats directed at art and culture workers are, of course, also something very serious. In the national cultural policy goals, it is established that culture shall be a dynamic, challenging, and unbound force with freedom of expression as the foundation. The cultural policy goals are in turn an important cornerstone and a good starting point in my work as Minister for Culture, but also for the agencies operating within the cultural area. The Swedish Arts Council, for example, has a mandate to monitor artists' vulnerability to threats, violence, and harassment. In addition, the Agency for Cultural Analysis contributes, among other things, with reports and other types of documentation that make it possible to follow the developments and keep the work to achieve the national cultural policy goals alive.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! This interpellation debate is prompted by a series of cultural policy events that have taken place over the recent years and continued as recently as last autumn.

I would like to begin by thanking the Minister for Culture for the answers to my three questions, but I am not entirely satisfied, because what the Minister for Culture expresses here, both in speech and in writing, actually lacks compliance and anchoring in reality.

My first question to the Minister for Culture was how the Minister will act to ensure that the principle of arm's-length distance is upheld and respected at national, regional, and municipal levels. To the question, the Minister for Culture answers here that there should be no doubt that the government stands behind the principle and that this has been clarified in the Tidö Agreement, which is an agreement between M, KD, L and SD. However, I ask the question precisely because I feel doubt and great concern regarding whether the principle will be complied with with this government and its coalition parties.

The principle of arm's length between politics and operations is a central and important part of the Swedish administrative tradition, not least within the area of cultural policy. Arm's length is about maintaining a balance between the political ambitions of popular sovereignty and the subject matter and professional expertise found in the various public administrative areas.

The principle of administration is based on the idea that those who hold political power should not be able to use their position of power to exploit public funds to influence people's worldview and form political opinion. Behind the principle lies an authoritarian history of Nazis, fascists, and communists who devoted great resources to glorifying their own exercise of power. Ideologically, it was about cultivating the population to support a certain worldview and view of humanity.

According to the report from the trade union Diks, we know how it turned out in Sölvesborg last autumn; it states that public employees working with cultural issues are afraid of not being able to perform their work based on professional ethical principles. The report is a clear reference to what happened to the former administrative head Sofia Lenninger, who became impossible in the Sverigedemokraterna's Sölvesborg. The then Sverigedemokratiska government wanted to limit books in languages other than Swedish, and Lenninger, who defended the principles of the library acts, lost her job.

Not long after that incident, the Sverigedemokraterna Norrköpings stadsmuseum exhibition was reported to the police. This led to the museum removing one of the images that caused the report for a period of time. The image was later returned, but it is important to point out that it restricted the operations and the exhibition.

This autumn, the Sweden Democrats in several municipalities have reported and demanded that popular story times at libraries be stopped. The story times, which have been ongoing since 2017, are now met with hatred and threats to such an extent that guards have had to be hired as a security measure.

In municipality after municipality during the autumn, cultural heads have had to remind local representatives of the principle of arm's length distance. Here are examples of how one acts through closure, police reports, and exclusion to reduce the possibilities for the culture one does not want to see and strengthen the culture that promotes the opinions and the social perception one has oneself. Even in the Tidö Agreement, which is intended to guarantee the principle of arm's length distance, it now appears that a reporting obligation shall apply to municipal and state activities such as libraries and museums.

My question is therefore: How does the Minister for Culture view this reality that has occurred as recently as this autumn? How will she work to uphold the principle of arm's length distance? Will there be concrete measures to guarantee compliance with the principle at national, regional, and municipal levels?

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer to Lawen Redar's urgent interpellation!

We are talking here about the principle of arm's-length distance and about the art being free - a completely fundamental principle, not least for the growth of democratic countries in Europe, and also a principle that has guided Sweden's cultural policy for decades.

It is completely obvious that the wording in the Tidö Agreement regarding arm's length distance is not shared by the parties in the government base, and it is also one of the reasons for the interpellation and one of the reasons why I also want to ask the Minister for Culture how she intends to act to both strengthen and safeguard the principle of arm's length distance and the freedom of the arts in practice.

I think it is pleasing that the Minister for Culture so clearly expressed that what we have seen happening in Trelleborg, Kalmar, and Gävleborg, when it comes to wanting to ban story times and getting involved and expressing opinions on how a Lucia in a Lucia procession should be, is an overstep of the principle. There, the Minister for Culture was clear, and I thank him for that.

But I was myself in a debate with the Sweden Democrats' party secretary before Christmas, and he, for his part, was very clear that he did not perceive that this was an overstep of the principle and that, for the Sweden Democrats' part, there naturally must be an opportunity to step in and express an opinion and influence the content of cultural expressions if it is tax-financed.

This, Mr. Speaker, is a completely new interpretation of the principle of arm's-length distance, an interpretation that many within the cultural sector, among others, are now becoming very concerned about. The question is therefore: How does the Minister for Culture intend to act so that there will be a consensus within the government base on this issue? What more can be done to strengthen the principle of arm's-length distance? Does the Minister for Culture share the Sverigedemokraternas party secretary's opinion and statement that there is no conflict within the government base regarding this interpretation?

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

Jonas Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! This interpellation is neither submitted by nor directed at a Sverigedemokrat, but as we hear, it concerns the Sverigedemokraterna to the highest degree. We are mentioned several times in the interpellation, and therefore I stand here in the speaker's chair now.

The Social Democrats and their various branches in the public debate repeatedly and in a very obvious way attempt in different ways to use the Sweden Democrats as a whipping boy against the government parties when it comes to cultural policy.

It is very clear when it comes to the issue of tax-funded drag queen performances for small children. One can imagine that the Social Democrats are doing this because they want to divert attention away from how poorly they themselves have managed the cultural policy while in government.

In the interpellation, one can note how the Socialdemokraterna and Lawen Redar insinuate and almost say outright that the Sverigedemokraterna's criticism of the drag queen segments has led to the threats she speaks of. It is extremely dishonest. This is fear propaganda from the Socialdemokraterna aimed at silencing and intimidating those who participate in the debate.

Let us not be deceived by these Social Democratic smokescreens! The Sweden Democrats have not opposed the concept of arm's length in cultural policy. It is part of the Tidö Agreement, and we stand by it. There are, however, limits where one as an elected politician must speak out when it comes to how the taxpayers' money is utilized.

Let us take an example. Many parties have criticized that various state grants have turned out to go to, for example, Islamism or other extremism. In those cases, one has been able to criticize the individual elements in cultural policy. Can one question such details in parts of cultural policy when one considers that a line has been crossed, yes, then I mean that one must also be able to talk about it when it comes to the cases with the drag queen hours.

The principle of arm's length distance is an important principle, but there are also other values and principles to take into account as a responsible elected politician. How does Lawen Redar think one should act as an elected politician if the principle of arm's length distance collides with other important values and principles, for example, putting the children's best interests first?

It is hardly the case that these drag queen story hours have come primarily for the children, rather it is about there being adults who want to break norms. Furthermore, it takes place in a sexualized setting, which is evidenced, among other things, by the names of the drag queens who have been involved in the story hours in Sweden. They call themselves things like – excuse the language, Mr. Speaker, but I quote – "Miss Shameless Winehorn" and "Busty Lady".

So that is how it sounds in connection with these story times.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like, by reason of the interpellation, to put forward two things.

One matter concerns the first question of the interpellation and its implication that municipalities are not allowed to terminate or change parts of their activities, which is what the question practically implies.

Here I want to emphasize municipal self-government, which is entrenched in both the Instrument of Government and the Local Government Act. It naturally stands above any guiding principles, such as those established in the Tidö Agreement. One can certainly work to ensure that the principle is respected at all parliamentary levels, as requested in the interpellation, but in the main text of the interpellation, measures appear to be requested against the municipalities' ability to make their own decisions, as in this case with the drag queen hours. The Social Democrats' will would mean an unfortunate development of precisely the relationship between the state and local politics.

Mr. Speaker! The second matter is the following wording in the interpellation: "This autumn, the story hours have been criticized by the Sweden Democrats' representatives at the local level, which has also been supported by national representatives. The attention has led to the story hours being subjected to serious threats where guards have had to be hired." The follow-up question is: How do we counter hate and threats?

The question itself is constantly relevant, but we absolutely cannot accept that, without any serious evidence, one links the potential threats and the potential hatred to the fully reasonable criticism that our representatives have raised at the local level. With that logic, one could link all the hatred, all the violence, and all the threats that Sweden Democrat representatives have endured throughout the ages to Social Democrats who have questioned our policy – before they have followed it, that is to say.

I consider that these two perspectives are important to highlight.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! I just want to make sure that I heard correctly just now.

I sat here in the bench and listened to the debate, and I had not planned to participate in it until Jonas Andersson requested the floor - and equated being a trans person with being a terrorist.

That was what I heard Jonas Andersson say! If I have misunderstood or heard incorrectly, I think Jonas Andersson should use his next post to clarify what he actually means. It can't be that he equated being a trans person with being a terrorist, can it?

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

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to use this contribution to try to clarify myself, because the questioner felt that I was unclear in the message I had delivered in my main speech. I will make another attempt and see if I can be clearer this time.

Initially, I want to emphasize that my starting point is that every individual party that is part of the Tidö Agreement and is part of the government takes responsibility for ensuring that the agreement is respected and fulfilled. When it comes to respect for the principle of arm's length, I can again clarify that I, in my role as Minister for Culture, and this entire government stand behind the principle and that we will actively defend it.

As Minister for Culture, it is my task to highlight and make visible the value of the principle. I do this, among other things, by participating in the debate, and I am grateful that I have been given the opportunity to do so via the questioner. It also occurs in dialogue with cultural policy representatives at different levels and other actors where I repeatedly raise the importance of the principle and emphasize its value. The mandate period has just begun, and there will be many opportunities to do this ahead.

The government's mandate period has recently begun, and I will return to concrete measures that we will implement during the coming period. The starting point will naturally be the national cultural policy goals but also the priorities presented in the government statement on 18 October. At the same time, it should be noted that the government has worked actively with the ongoing management during the beginning of the mandate period. We recently made a decision, for example, on the regulatory letters for the state agencies within the cultural area, and soon the annual agency dialogues will also take place, which will provide a good opportunity and possibility for the government and me to obtain information that can also contribute to the management moving forward.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to start by thanking the Minister for Culture for saying, on all the occasions I have raised the criticism that has been voiced publicly, that the principle applies to Sweden. It is an incredibly important marking, and it makes me more satisfied to hear that the Minister for Culture is prepared to take measures so that the principle shall be upheld. I look forward to taking part in the measures that will come next. These are issues I will monitor.

I then turn to Jonas Andersson, who considered that one cannot submit interpellations directed at the Sweden Democrats. Parts of my previous speech concerned the extremely strange constellation we have ended up in here. The Sweden Democrats are a party that has a lot to say in the Tidö Agreement, but it is not possible to scrutinize and question what the party has to say with the help of the tools that we members of the Swedish Riksdag have at our disposal, given that the party de facto stands outside the government. The only way to debate and discuss how the party conducts itself politically and how the party intends to drive forward the policy is to present the views via the Minister for Culture. Then, of course, we will meet in other debates regarding the budget and in legislative matters. But with the tool of interpellations that the Riksdag has at its disposal, it is not possible to meet the Sweden Democrats. It is possibly because one also does not want to take political responsibility.

Since it was stated that a representative cannot say that certain activities cannot be carried out because they are not economically justified or because they counteract democratic society. Of course, there are differences. The principle of arm's length distance is not about economic phenomena or that one cannot put one's foot down because an activity contradicts democratic principles.

Then I pose the following question to Jonas Andersson: Why is the government not criticized for the fact that there is not already legislation in place regarding democratic conditions for civil society, for popular education, for all activities within culture, to promote democratic activities? But now the government has withdrawn the bill, so we are waiting to see where this will land.

My other two questions, Mr. Speaker, concerned hate and threats directed at cultural activities and art and culture workers. What we see today is that three out of five journalists state that they have at some point been subjected to harassment as well as threats and hate in connection with their professional activities. According to Svensk Scenkonst, the hate and threats against actors, playwrights, and others active within the performing arts have increased significantly. Threats, harassment, and violence against library staff is, according to the union Dik, a common problem. At every third museum, staff have been threatened by visitors, not least regarding exhibitions that have been criticized politically.

Some of the examples I highlighted in my previous speech, I think, still deserve some attention. When the head of culture and libraries, Sofia Lenninger, was dismissed and took a stand against the Sweden Democrats, she had to endure an enormous storm of hate. When the exhibition at Norrköping City Museum was reported to the police, they had to endure a storm of hate. When the Drag Queen Story Hour was to be banned according to SD, the cultural creators received hate and threats to such an extent that guards have had to ensure that the activity can be carried out without anyone being harmed.

I want to be clear that I am not directing criticism at individual Sverigedemokrater, but I see what happens when Sverigedemokraterna politically take a stand against an organization that has every right to carry out cultural activities. It is then met with hate and threats.

Some examples were raised regarding how hate and threats are addressed by different authorities. Here, measures need to be taken so that art and cultural activities can be conducted and art and culture creators can feel safe in their professional practice. In the long run, it is about the development of the democratic society. What does the Minister intend to do to strengthen the conditions so that no one is subjected to hate and threats in connection with professional practice and in connection with conducting cultural activities?

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! There are times when one must be allowed to speak out, as we just heard from Jonas Andersson, Sverigedemokraterna, in the debate. There are times when one must be allowed to speak out - against hbtqi persons and against a popular story hour with drag queens at a library. It is frightening.

The rhetoric we hear from the Sweden Democrats is extremely close to the rhetoric we have heard from other countries, including from Russia and Putin. Several similar verbal attacks from politics and a norm shift regarding how one can speak about hbtqi-persons ultimately resulted in the landing of the anti-gay propaganda laws in 2013. It is obvious that this is where the Sweden Democrats draw their inspiration.

Mr. Speaker! The greatest threat to our children is not a drag queen who dresses up in makeup and glitter and reads a fairy tale in a library, but it is that young people do not dare to come out. It is young people who belong to the most vulnerable groups in society, who are suffering the worst and who are subjected to hate and threats. There, Mr. Speaker, we have a societal problem that I believe this government and the Sverigedemokraterna can tackle immediately.

My question to the Minister for Culture concerns the fact that the responsibility for this development now lies with the government. Do you mark against this type of action and statements from the coalition partner, or will you let it stand? Do the government parties stand up for the rights of LGBTQI persons?

My second question concerns the principle of arm's length. I am pleased when the Minister for Culture says that she will return with proposals on how the principle of arm's length can be strengthened. At the same time, the coalition partner, Sverigedemokraterna, is now expressing an unwillingness to step in and support the municipal level and work with the principle of arm's length there. There is a proposal to establish a knowledge function for the municipal level – is the Minister for Culture prepared to fight for it to be established?

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

Jonas Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thought I would start by commenting on Linus Sköld's speech. It was a rather strange speech where he brought up words like terrorist and trans person, which I did not mention at all in my speech earlier. I recommend that Linus Sköld goes back and looks at my speech. He will then see that I did not use these words. I took up examples of when one as an elected politician may need to intervene when things go over the line. That was what I spoke about. What Linus Sköld took up simply had nothing to do with the matter.

The democratic conditions, which Lawen Redar raised, are naturally an important issue, where we from the Sweden Democrats' side have long been pressing. There will be proposals regarding this on the Riksdag's table, so I can give the Social Democrats a pleasing announcement. Of course, we shall address the important issue. Here, we have also been driving, not least.

When it comes to the principle of arm's length and the governance of culture, the criticism in the public debate has been heavy regarding how the previous red-green governments restricted artistic freedom during their time in power. The problem became clearly evident, not least from the report *Så fri är konsten* (How free is art) from the Agency for Cultural Analysis, which was released a couple of years ago. According to the report, it was clear that equality and diversity requirements and such, which the Socialdemokraterna and the red-greens stood behind, led to restricted artistic freedom, among other things in the film sector.

So, Lawen Redar, how do your own social democratic, left-leaning, identity-political initiatives, with equality and diversity requirements, quotas and so on, go together with arm's length distance in cultural policy? Please answer that!

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! From what I have heard in the debate, I can at least state with pleasure that even though there is some confusion regarding the facts, all parties agree that hate and threats shall be countered.

But from what I have heard, a follow-up question also arises for the Social Democrats and the interpellator. If reasonable criticism and questioning of a municipality's activities, in this case fairy tale hours with drag queens, is equated with an anti-democratic stance and prompts an interpellation about threats and hate, it would be very interesting to know how the public in the Social Democrats' world is to change how tax money is used, within culture, for example, if not through politics. Then one must provide alternatives.

Then it was an interesting speech from the Social Democrats' Linus Sköld. I never thought I would have to explain this to a social democrat: Not all Muslims are actually Islamists, and not all Islamists are terrorists either. It was the word Islamist that was used by Jonas Andersson, if I remember correctly, not terrorist. Nor are all drag queens trans people, so the comparison that Linus Sköld highlighted is completely incorrect.

I also want to emphasize that there can clearly be a number of different situations where it is inappropriate for tax money to go to something that falls within the scope of tax-funded culture. In those cases, one must dare to speak out without it becoming a debate about democracy, threats, and hate.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! We will have to let the question of exactly which word was used be decided when the minutes from this debate are released. I recall that extremism was the term that was used.

Well, the point is this. Jonas Andersson said that what he wanted to express was when, as an elected politician, one can intervene and thus abandon the principle of arm's length distance. He mentioned the examples of extremism and drag queens in libraries. It is thus in those two instances.

I think that this is actually an expression of the Sweden Democrats' way of seeing education and culture as a tool to create the Swedish nation as they want it to be. This is truly worrying. This is actually what Jonas Andersson is trying to say. Cultural expressions that the Sweden Democrats do not agree with and do not like can, therefore, be intervened against.

I think that this is the point of Jonas Andersson's speech. And so it had the unfortunate consequence of sounding as if he equated trans people with terrorists.

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

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would finally like to extend a big thank you to Lawen Redar for this interpellation. There are certainly reasons to discuss this issue further and to let it be an open and unbound discussion. I can state that we both stand for a free and unbound cultural life and that this is a self-evident part of a democratic society.

I also perceive that we are in complete agreement that hate and threats against cultural actors and cultural activities are both serious and reprehensible. There, I believe we politicians have a great responsibility to make visible, condemn, and also act against hate and threats in all instances, especially against those groups that work hard to uphold our democratic values. That includes cultural creators, journalists, and also politicians.

It is important to keep the work of achieving the national cultural policy goals alive. By discussing this issue here in the Riksdag today, we contribute, not least, to continuing to keep that work alive. For this, I truly want to say thank you!

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to the Minister for Culture and to all participants in this debate! I think it was exciting from many different aspects.

The view on cultural freedom and the principle of arm's length distance is indeed something we share. I see, however, that we have a government base that frequently works with this issue.

The last thing done by former Minister for Culture Amanda Lind was to initiate the investigation. The Social Democratic Minister for Culture struck out some parts in the regulatory letters. But there was also a request in the Agency for Cultural Analysis report to further develop the work to achieve knowledge-enhancing measures at regional and municipal levels. It is my absolute request that the Minister for Culture takes up the mantle, because it will be needed in the cooperation framework with the Sweden Democrats that the Minister for Culture is involved with. They state there, and also here today, that they have no problem whatsoever with the fact that they have local representatives, or national representatives for that part, who think it is of importance to strike out activities that actually promote democratic exchange and knowledge acquisition and which reach the children and young people who need to have access to reading and to cultural activities very close to them, in their town and at their local public library.

The second question concerns the possibilities for art and culture creators to carry out their work without being met with storms of hatred and threats. It is a work that must continue. One of the initiatives that the Social Democratic government took was to look at the criminal liability, that is, to strengthen the conditions, primarily for journalists, to be able to scrutinize and carry out their work because they hold such a socially important function. Here, this government could take measures to further review the conditions also for art and culture creators.

My request to the Minister is to at least continue with what has been said here today about coming forward with initiatives. We will with great curiosity and commitment take part in the work that the Minister for Culture intends to continue with. But I remain critical of the coalition party that is the basis for this government and which unfortunately works in the opposite direction.

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

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think it is fine that we can find such an agreement and, as I mentioned earlier, see the importance of being able to cooperate but also discuss from different perspectives in these important issues.

Heat and hatred are something we can never accept towards anyone in society. It is extra important when it is directed towards art and culture workers of various kinds.

It is also why we establish in the cultural policy goals that culture shall be a dynamic, challenging and unbound force with freedom of expression as the foundation. I think we should all carry those closing words with us in this interpellation debate, because I believe they will be important for us in many social issues ahead. To link the unbound force that lies in culture to freedom of expression, I believe is important for all of us to uphold.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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