Response to interpellation 2022/23:129 on free admission and the Nationalmuseum
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 2 M considers that the free admission reform was underfunded and did not reach enough people, and that the state should not finance visits primarily for Stockholmers and tourists as the museums are responsible for their own finances 1 2. 3 M considers that adults and regular visitors should reasonably pay for their tickets and prioritizes free admission for children and young people under 19 years 3 4. 5 6 S argues that free admission is a successful initiative that has lowered the thresholds for families with children and inexperienced visitors 5 6. 6 7 S considers that cultural heritage should be freely accessible to promote education and democracy 7 8. 7 S argues that the government and SD prioritize tax cuts for high-income earners over welfare and free admission 7. S criticizes that reduced appropriations mean that museums risk closing several days a week.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! Louise Thunström has asked me how I intend to promote the accessibility of our shared museum collections and our cultural heritage. Furthermore, Louise Thunström has asked me if I intend to take any measures in view of the Nationalmuseum's changed circumstances.
I would like to emphasize initially that culture, cultural heritage, and knowledge of our common history form the basis of our collective identity and have an important role to play when it comes to education, integration, and democracy. Encounters with the common cultural heritage increase our understanding of one another and in this way also create cohesion.
The museums are socially important institutions. They contribute to society and its development by promoting knowledge, cultural experiences, and free formation of opinion. The museums provide schools and civil society with further opportunities for learning and co-creation. It is therefore important that the museums are accessible and work actively to broaden their target groups and reach new visitors, even if the government no longer subsidizes museum visits for everyone.
The Swedish National Audit Office stated in 2019 in the report Free admission to state museums that the reform has affected the museums' ability to carry out their main missions and changed the conditions for the museums to finance their operations, which in the long run may pose risks to the quality of the museums' activities. In the report, the Swedish National Audit Office further points out that the free admission reform has created financial difficulties for certain museums.
Against the background of, among other things, the National Audit Office's report, the government's assessment is that the reform has long been underfunded and that it simply would not have been a reasonable prioritization of tax revenue to extend and even strengthen the reform at a time when Sweden's economy is so strained.
To answer the question of how I intend to promote accessibility to our shared museum collections and our cultural heritage, I would like to return to the introduction and again emphasize the government's view on the importance of culture and knowledge of our shared cultural heritage, also regarding social processes such as education, integration, and democracy. The government therefore prioritizes continuing to enable the younger audience's access to this by maintaining free admission for children and young people under 19 years of age.
Regarding Nationalmuseum's changed circumstances, the Ministry of Culture monitors their and the other state museums' finances closely throughout the year. The Ministry of Culture also maintains a dialogue with representatives for all museums. The state museums that were included in the free admission reform, including Nationalmuseum, have always had the opportunity to charge admission fees for temporary exhibitions, which means that most are equipped to charge. The museums have also been aware that the reform is time-limited and that it would expire at the turn of the year 2022/23 and have therefore had the opportunity to prepare for a change.
Nationalmuseum, like other agencies, has the government responsible for its operations and organization within existing financial frameworks. The conditions for that work are provided in instructions and annual regulation letters.
The Government considers it important to follow up and analyze the consequences of the abolition of the free entry reform. In order to obtain a comprehensive picture and a knowledge base regarding the consequences, the Government has also tasked the museums that have had free entry to report on the development of their work in expanding their target groups. I truly look forward to taking part in that basis.
I have full confidence that the state museums, based on the current conditions, will continue their fine and strategic work of offering high-quality exhibitions and also reaching new target groups.
Louise Thunström (S)
Madam Speaker! The Social Democratic government introduced free admission to the state museums for the first time in 2005. The ambition was to make our jointly owned museum collections accessible to more people. This reform was successful; the museums' visitor numbers increased significantly. The bourgeois government that took office in 2006 then abolished the free admission, and the number of visitors fell.
In 2016, the Social Democratic-led government once again introduced free admission to 18 state museums, and once again it became a successful initiative. In the budget that the right-wing conservatives have now decided on, however, this is being abolished once again.
Madam Speaker! This is happening at a time when culture is still suffering from the aftermath of the pandemic and when inflation, electricity prices, and recession are changing people's living conditions and behaviors. A museum visit is definitely nothing that is prioritized among the country's families with children or retirees this winter. Furthermore, the museums have been doubly punished in the right-conservative budget, because even the restart support for culture has disappeared.
For new and inexperienced visiting groups, for families with children, and for those who do not have the financial means to prioritize a museum visit, the free entry reform has made a difference. The thresholds have been lowered. The possibility of slipping into a museum - if only for a short time, to return in the near future for another visit - is something that has been appreciated and which has enabled more visits, especially by inexperienced museum visitors.
The Government's and the Sweden Democrats' abolition of free admission to state museums has also meant that the museums have now been forced to take powerful measures. Nationalmuseum announced before Christmas that they are forced to remain closed for an additional day a week and that planned exhibitions are being postponed. This applies, among other things, to the regional activities in Östersund.
In light of what has been stated, I would like to ask the Minister for Culture once again how she intends to more concretely promote accessibility to our common cultural heritage in the tough times we are currently in. The Minister for Culture and I agree that culture is very important. Does the Minister intend to take any concrete measures in light of the changed circumstances for Nationalmuseum and other museums?
Lawen Redar (S)
Madam Speaker! In connection with the right-conservative government's budget presentation, the Minister for Culture commented on the reintroduction of entrance fees at state museums by saying that she is used to museums selling tickets. She also said that she does not mind this – on the contrary. At the same time, the Minister for Culture has asserted in a number of interviews that she is passionate about a well-functioning integration, where Swedish culture has an important role.
There is talk of burning for this, but a second later the rug is pulled out from under that which, in reality, lowers thresholds, promotes integration, and enables knowledge and education about Swedish history and the Swedish art and cultural heritage.
According to the National Audit Office's review, the introduction of free admission has meant that they have succeeded in reaching visitors who otherwise would never have visited the museum activities. The museums have also been able to work actively to ensure that museum-savvy groups find their way to the activities and their exhibitions.
We who are frequent visitors of state museums know that the composition of the audience has changed since free admission was introduced. Now young people are sitting and discussing what it is that they see. Now groups who perhaps do not necessarily move around in central Stockholm are on site to discuss. What is this story actually about? What kind of custom is it? What kind of culture is it?
That the museums are now building up entrance systems and barriers and are about to begin ticket checks counteracts the entire ambition to lower thresholds and make Swedish culture accessible. While the Minister for Culture defends this with the argument that children and young people can continue to visit museums free of charge, we Social Democrats know that there will be a significant loss of visitors. Children usually visit museums with their parents or with school staff; they rarely go to museums by themselves.
This reform is about making it easier for families with children, regardless of economic conditions, to participate together in cultural activities, education, and knowledge about Swedish society.
The state museums now expect a loss of visitors of a full 30 percent, while culture is still suffering from the aftermath of the pandemic. Inflation, increased electricity prices and an impending recession are also changing people's living conditions, which means that one might not have the means to spend whatever it may be - perhaps over a hundred kronor - to be able to get in and see the museums' exhibitions and activities.
This means that the museums also cannot compensate for the costs incurred by having free admission. Now the situation is such that one is supposed to set up cash registers and have an entrance fee, but due to inflation and the difficult economic situation for families with children, actually not enough families with children or adults will visit the museum activities. This has forced Nationalmuseum to remain closed more days than one.
There is no compensation policy for what is now being criticized in the rostrum or for the current economic situation. We will therefore have a development where the museums close their operations not just one but several days a week.
I am extremely concerned about the ambition that the Minister for Culture says they have. One wants to strengthen Swedish integration and reach out to those groups who perhaps stand furthest away from Swedish culture, but what is being done with this type of removal of free admission is to limit the conditions for those people who stand furthest away from the culture and its activities. It is they who could primarily be promoted by gaining access to these. One makes access to the activities impossible.
The Culture Minister's government has chosen to prioritize that over 12 billion shall go towards ensuring that high-income earners avoid the state income tax. They are letting families with children pay for this right-wing policy. Why is that prioritization being made?
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! I want to say once again that the free entry reform was already planned by the previous government to expire at the turn of the year. Support for not extending this reform can be found, among other things, in reports and evaluations that have been made of the reform. I have previously mentioned the Swedish National Audit Office's report on free entry, where it appears that the reform has changed the conditions for the museums to finance their operations. It appears from the report that the reform has even created financial difficulties for some museums. The museums have not received a compensation level that has matched the number of visitors.
We have also looked at visitor statistics at the central authorities that have been compiled by the Agency for Cultural Analysis. The statistics show that the state museums attract visitors from all over the country and also international visitors, but that there is a tendency that the museums located in Stockholm also have a predominant number of visitors from the surrounding area. Let me take Nationalmuseum as an example. Here, the statistics show that 70 percent of the visitors during 2021 were from the city of Stockholm, Stockholm County, and other countries.
The Government's assessment is therefore that the free admission reform was not only underfunded and that the museums did not receive adequate compensation from the state for having free admission, but also that the reform did not reach a sufficiently large part of the population.
It is simply not reasonable, in light of the economic situation Sweden finds itself in, that the state should finance free museum visits primarily for Stockholmers and foreign tourists.
The museums choose to handle this in different ways. I am entirely certain that our nine agencies, which together operate 23 different state museums, make wise choices and take wise decisions based on their financial frameworks. I can assure the members that the Ministry of Culture monitors all agencies' finances throughout the year and that we also have continuous conversations with their representatives.
But again: The difficult economic situation that Sweden finds itself in, we find ourselves in together as a whole society, including the cultural life. We must adapt to the conditions that prevail.
It is the management of each authority that is responsible for the operations before the government and who must ensure that the authority also manages the state's funds. I therefore have no specific comment on the fact that the Nationalmuseum chooses to be closed two days a week. It is not up to me as a minister to comment on individual authorities' decisions. If a head of an authority decides to keep a museum closed for one or more days, I assume that it is a well-founded and necessary decision. The authorities must prioritize themselves and arrive at the best solutions. There are also examples of museums that introduce free admission on certain days as a result of this. There are, therefore, different ways to handle this.
Louise Thunström (S)
Madam Speaker! I do not share the Minister for Culture's analysis of the National Audit Office's report. It is not about whether free admission is good or bad, but about in what way the state has followed up on the reform and created the conditions for the museums to implement it.
In addition to the state museums in Stockholm, we have the Marinmuseum in Karlskrona, the Järnvägsmuseet in Gävle, Skoklosters slott in Håbo municipality, the Världskulturmuseet in Gothenburg, and the Flygvapenmuseum in Linköping. But yes, most state museums are located in Stockholm, which also constitutes a reflection of our historical development. With its 2.4 million inhabitants in the county and 15.2 million guest nights in hotels and hostels, it is of course also the most densely populated region in the country.
It is possible that foreign tourists benefit, but it is primarily Swedish tourists who visit Stockholm and can then take part in the collections that are common to the country.
Madam Speaker! Our shared cultural heritage belongs to all of us and should be free and accessible to everyone. This is the Social Democrats' fundamental starting point in the discussion on free admission. We live in a time when culture is becoming increasingly important, and the museums' important mission to promote cultural experiences, knowledge, and free formation of opinion cannot be emphasized enough. For us Social Democrats, a strong driving force is to increase the education of the population through culture in order to achieve a democratic society. Enlightened and educated people can take power into their own hands and refuse to accept a subordinate structure.
We Social Democrats believe that the state's museums, our jointly owned institutions of knowledge, should be open and inviting operations for everyone. The museums shall, based on their subject areas, promote knowledge, cultural experiences, and free formation of opinion. This is part of our common cultural heritage in Sweden that people should have access to for democratic reasons. With free admission, we lower the thresholds for more visitors and for new groups, and with free admission, we also speak of the fact that the cultural heritage is owned by all of us.
Politics is about subsidizing, prioritizing, and investing in what one believes is good for a society. The current government and the Sweden Democrats prioritize lower taxes for those who earn the most. The Social Democrats, instead, prioritize more money for welfare, free admission to state museums, and more money for the municipalities' cultural schools.
In what way have the right-wing parties created fair access to the culture they claim to guard so warmly?
Lawen Redar (S)
Madam Speaker! This must nevertheless be considered a failure for the Minister for Culture. One withdraws 100 million, crumbs in a large state budget, and it has had the consequence that the museums face a difficult economic situation and risk being forced to close operations several days a week. Museums usually stay closed on Mondays, but now it may also be Tuesday and Wednesday. The accessibility of art and cultural heritage is limited as a result of not being able to keep open.
Families with children will not prioritize buying museum tickets, as it is not possible in the current economic situation. The Minister for Culture expressed this well: It is a tough time, and then one must prioritize.
I can state that 12 billion was prioritized so that high-income earners would avoid the state income tax of 20 percent. This expenditure prioritization was one of the largest the right-wing parties put forward in the budget. In relation to that, 100 million is nothing, but it would have enabled the conversations we want to take place in society and enabled newly arrived people to take part in Swedish art and culture as well as Swedish customs that have built up one of the world's most democratic societies.
Making art, culture, and Swedish cultural heritage accessible should be a high priority for a Minister for Culture. We should rather debate what we can do to promote free admission to more museums.
In the Social Democratic culture policy program, it appears that we want to develop this discussion to also include the county museums and look at the conditions for taking the reform further. In our current shadow budget, we have also had to prioritize, but we have allocated 100 million to maintain free admission to state museums.
I regret that current policy means that one is closing down this opportunity, raising the thresholds and making it impossible for more people to take part in Swedish art and culture and, above all, the Swedish cultural heritage.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! It is important to follow up and analyze the consequences of the free entry reform and of its cessation. The Agency for Cultural Analysis will during the spring publish an in-depth study on the reform, and I look forward to taking part in it.
The government has also tasked all museum authorities to report on the development of their work to expand target groups and reach new visitors. This will provide the government with a valuable knowledge base for future decision-making processes.
We see the work of reaching new target groups as a priority and as something decoupled from the issue of free entry.
To the Social Democratic members, it almost sounds as if the government is going to close all our museums forever. That is not the case. We preserve free entry for children and young people and children's and young people's opportunity and right to take part in our cultural heritage. We think that, given the economic situation in Sweden, it is reasonable that adults purchase their own museum ticket. I want to be clear about that.
What I see, however, is that there are actually both more and stronger obstacles than the entrance fee for museum visits for those who are unfamiliar. Our state museums have many high-quality exhibitions that will continue to attract many visitors regardless of whether it is free entry or not. I am convinced of that. But I believe it is extremely important that we work on enabling openness even for new and unfamiliar museum visitors. I believe that we need to be innovative there, and I am convinced that our agencies will be able to come back both with proposals and with how they implement the new steering regarding new target groups in their operations. I look forward to taking part in that.
It is important for the government to pursue an economic policy that is sustainable. But it is also important for the government to safeguard, above all, the younger audience's access to the museums. Free admission is maintained for children and young people under 19 years of age, which enables school visits and naturally makes it easier for families to visit our collections together.
Again: The proposal is therefore not that we should close our museums, which one can easily get the impression of, but the proposal is that we think that, given the economic situation in Sweden today, it is reasonable that adults and, above all, regular museum visitors pay for their own ticket.
Louise Thunström (S)
Madam Speaker! The debate surrounding the free entry reform appears to highlight old and rather deep ideological differences.
The traditional museum, as it developed in Europe, was originally an institution that was directly designed to restrict access for all those who did not belong to the privileged class.
We Social Democrats want the initiative for free admission to our museums to be made permanent and strengthened so that, in the long term, it will also apply to the regional museums.
Does it really have to be that the museums are to become an exclusive place for a few again, instead of an open place for everyone?
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! I am, as I have said, the Minister for Culture in a government that takes responsibility for Sweden in economically difficult times. This means making tough but necessary prioritizations, and one such prioritization was the decision not to extend the reform with free entry for adults but to choose to prioritize children and young people.
I am also the Minister for Culture in a government that safeguards our museums and the citizens' access to them. Our museums contribute to society and its development by promoting knowledge, cultural experiences, and free formation of opinion. In Section 7 of the Museums Act, it states that "exhibitions and other public activities at a museum shall be accessible to all and adapted to the users' different circumstances." Accessible to all – therefore, it is of utmost importance that all museums work on expanding their target groups and reaching new visitors. It is also of the greatest importance that the museums themselves decide in what way this shall be done. No one knows it better than the museum profession. I have full confidence that the museums concerned will manage to adapt to the changed economic conditions, and I look forward to following their continued important work in making our cultural heritage accessible to old and new visitors.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.