Response to interpellation 2022/23:131 on welfare in municipalities and regions in northern Sweden
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns welfare in the municipalities and regions of northern Sweden. S argues that the government's policy constitutes a double blow to welfare, that the equalization system does not fully compensate for structural differences 1 and that more resources are needed to create equal conditions 2. S also believes that the special conditions regarding electricity price subsidies must be taken into account 2. KD argues that municipalities and regions are responsible for their own finances and must work innovatively 3. KD believes that the government is acting decisively through quick decisions on electricity price subsidies 4 and that the supplement for 2023 is significant for meeting the welfare mandate 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me if I intend to make cuts in welfare in municipalities and regions in northern Sweden.
The Government shares the assessment that the municipal sector's economic situation will be challenging in the coming years. A combination of measures will be needed to safeguard and strengthen welfare.
Through municipal self-government, municipalities and regions are responsible for their finances and their operations, which means that municipalities and regions themselves decide on economic priorities and any efficiency measures in their own operations. As with many households and companies, it is a matter of taking measures to be able to achieve a balanced economy. Municipalities and regions need to continue to work innovatively, streamline their operations, and develop them according to new conditions. Not least, there is potential in new digital solutions. The State has a responsibility to create good conditions for the municipal sector.
Electricity prices have been very high during November and December, especially in December when electricity prices in large parts of Sweden were higher than they had ever been before during a single month. The government has therefore tasked Svenska kraftnät to apply to the Energy Markets Inspectorate to use the so-called bottleneck revenues for measures that compensate for the high electricity prices that affected households. The new support also applies to households in northern Sweden and is planned to be paid out during the spring of 2023. This measure will result in a strengthening of households' finances, and it indirectly reduces the economic burden for the municipalities.
In the budget for 2023, as we heard during the previous interpellation debate, approximately one-third of the reform space was allocated to the municipal sector. The general government grant was permanently increased by 6 billion kronor compared to previous years. Through the municipal economic equalization system, the general government grants are distributed so that they compensate for differences in tax capacity and for cost differences resulting from structural factors, for example, long distances and differences in heating costs.
Furthermore, 300 million kronor will be allocated this year to the development of primary care in rural areas within the agreement with SKR on Good and Close Care 2023.
The Government also decided in December 2022 to give a coordinator a continued assignment until even June 2023 to promote the coordination of the work with measures of importance for the business sector's sustainable transition and the societal transformation resulting from the emergence of new industries in Norrbotten and Västerbotten counties.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin by saying why the interpellation was written and why I think it is important to debate welfare in specifically northern Sweden. I see it as the fact that the government's policy constitutes a double blow against municipalities and regions in northern Sweden.
The Swedish welfare model is important. Welfare is crucial for society and for people. It is about receiving secure care when one gets older, about receiving a good education and a good start in life, as well as about receiving care according to need. Therefore, we in the Social Democrats prioritized welfare in our budget proposal. We allocated twice as much money to welfare as the government, with the support of the Sverigedemokraterna, does.
Continued investments are needed. Municipalities and regions face great challenges ahead. They face challenges both in the fact itself that there are more elderly people and in that investments and other things need to be made. But it is also the case that that which affects the whole society also affects municipalities and regions, such as raised interest rates and higher inflation. When one then provides insufficient resources to welfare, which we believe the government and Sverigedemokraterna are doing, it affects welfare in all of Sweden.
The northern parts of our country are, however, particularly affected, for one reason: When the government presented its thoughts and plans for the electricity price support, there was no electricity price support for northern Sweden, that is to say, the part of Sweden located north of the Dalälven. In addition to households not receiving the electricity price support, municipalities and regions in northern Sweden would also not receive any compensation for the high electricity bills they have.
That would mean that municipalities and regions will find it even harder to manage to provide a good welfare, and that is what I mean by that this is a double blow to welfare in northern Sweden. It is an unreasonable stance, and it has created enormous anger and disappointment. It is 1.2 million people who are being left behind.
We still do not know how it will turn out with the electricity support - it seems that the government has changed its mind and that electricity support to households is now to be given even in the northern parts of Sweden. It will possibly be distributed from the end of February. Just as the Minister says in his answer, it will indirectly reduce the burdens for the municipalities. They may not need to pay out supply support in the same way, which indirectly reduces the burdens.
We still know nothing about the support to the companies and thus also the Swedish welfare. The municipalities know nothing. We have not received any notification, and municipalities and regions do not know either what will apply. It is not quite clear yet.
Even though I know that the electricity price support is not a responsibility specifically for the Minister for Civil Affairs - it is the Minister for Enterprise that has that responsibility - one is still in the same government. Now there is a chance to give a statement.
Will there be more - enough - resources for the welfare system?
Can municipalities and regions count on receiving support for the high electricity costs they now have, just like everyone else?
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Now there might be a bit of double-counting considering the previous interpellation debate, as the debates touch more or less on the same subject, even though the previous one concerned all of Sweden and the interpellante now focuses on the northern parts of Sweden.
The government makes no distinction between northern or southern Sweden in these matters, rather we see that welfare should function in all of Sweden. The increases in both general and targeted government grants are not distributed differently between southern and northern Sweden, but it is handled in the cost and tax equalization system where resources are distributed depending on what structural conditions the municipalities have. We know that many municipalities in northern Sweden receive support through the tax equalization system we have.
The system is also being investigated right now, I can say. This is being done, among other things, because the socioeconomic factors need to be strengthened even further, but the tax equalization system is being reviewed very broadly. We will have to see how it will affect individual municipalities.
Lindh focuses a lot on the issue of the electricity price support. Just as Lindh himself said, it is not my area of responsibility, but it lies on the desk of the Minister for Energy and Business, Ebba Busch. I actually have to refer to her if that specific debate is to be deepened. But it is quite clear that there will also be an electricity price support for northern Sweden to compensate for high electricity prices during November and December.
Eva Lindh knows, just like everyone else, why we compensated before the second electricity price support and why electricity price support 1 only went to electricity price area 3 and 4. It was because the electricity prices were so much higher in these parts than in area 1 and 2. The electricity prices were sometimes three or four times higher on a monthly basis in electricity price area 3 and 4 than in electricity price area 1 and 2. We set a reference price of 75 öre per kilowatt-hour, and that was what we started from. The price was indeed far above this certain months in electricity price area 3 and 4 but not in electricity price area 1 and 2, and that was why the support went there. It was not to discriminate against any part of the country but so that one would receive compensation for high electricity prices; that was what this was about.
When we in the government then saw that electricity prices increased very much in the northern parts of Sweden, we made a quick decision and were able to announce early this year that households in northern Sweden would also receive electricity price support, which I think was very good. It will be distributed. I am not updated on the exact date for this, but it will be distributed. The first support is to begin being distributed as early as this Monday.
Will we provide enough support? Enough is a rather subjective concept, as people can have different opinions on what is enough. The government has shown that it takes the municipal sector seriously by allocating one-third of the reform space to increased state grants, both general and targeted, to municipalities and regions to give them the conditions to fulfill the incredibly important welfare mandate and provide a bearable and caring everyday life for people who need society's support. If the government makes the assessment that increased resources are needed, increased resources will also be provided.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I actually believe - or rather, I know - that people living in northern Sweden do not feel they are being treated equally. One may have different opinions on whether this is right or wrong and whether the importance of the price not being as high then, but the anger and frustration that exists in the northern parts of Sweden is enormous. I just want to say that.
The challenges in the municipalities and regions are very large and of varying character. The smallest municipalities in terms of population generally have the toughest challenges. Many of them are also located in the northern parts of Sweden.
We Social Democrats have prioritized that all of Sweden should live and grow. It naturally concerns creating equal conditions for all municipalities and regions, from south to north, and about being able to have a good welfare.
During the previous parliamentary term, the Riksdag did indeed decide on a new cost equalization. It takes greater account of the societal development that has occurred in recent years, with an older population and increased urbanization. Overall, it can be said that after this reinforcement and what we decided then, greater account is taken of sparse settlement and socioeconomic factors.
Greater consideration is taken, but there is no fair or exact equalization, even though the equalization system exists and one equalizes to a large extent. We know that. Now that we have an investigation into the equalization system, we see that it is actually the case that many municipalities do not receive resources according to the increased uncontrollable factors that one should be compensated for. People talk about this, but we see that it is not so.
The Minister stated in his response that the municipal economic equalization system distributes state grants so that they compensate for differences in tax capacity due to structural factors, but that is not quite correct. Yes, it equalizes, but it does not equalize the differences fully.
Even though the question of what the electricity price support should look like is a question for the Minister for Energy, the Minister for Civil Affairs is responsible for the conditions for municipalities and regions. An announcement to the municipalities and regions in northern Sweden should be able to be given, so that they can be confident and secure that they can receive support for the increased electricity prices that they have actually had during this period.
We in Sweden do not benefit from us drifting apart. The redistribution is a step to ensure an equal welfare throughout our long country. It is a question of justice. Regardless of who one is, one should be secure that one receives good healthcare, a good education, and good care. It is, as I said, about a Sweden where the whole country shall live and grow - including the northern parts.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! It could also be that the Social Democrats are trying to pull the wool over people's eyes. Had we provided correct facts that households in southern Sweden have paid four times higher electricity prices, and sometimes perhaps even more than that, than households in the northern parts of Sweden, I believe there would have been an understanding that the electricity price support is higher for the southern parts than for the northern parts. It is no stranger than that the housing allowance becomes higher if the rent is higher – you do not give the same housing allowance to everyone regardless of what rent they have. Grants are given based on the needs and costs that exist.
The electricity price support shall compensate for high electricity prices. It is obvious that households that have paid a higher electricity price per kilowatt-hour will be compensated in a different way than households that have not paid for this.
It is clear that the agitation becomes very great if one goes around and listens to Social Democrats who spread an image that this should be something discriminatory towards certain people living in northern Sweden. Then I understand that people become upset. Unfortunately, I think that the Social Democrats sometimes tend to spread disinformation, or information that does not give the right picture. I think this is very unfortunate.
What the previous government managed to achieve was a general electricity price subsidy of 2,000 kronor. Electricity price subsidy 1, which will be paid out starting Monday, can provide up to 16,000 kronor to the most affected households. There is, therefore, a big difference between the electricity price subsidy that the Socialdemokraterna managed to deliver and that which this government has succeeded with.
I am fully aware that the tax equalization system does not fully compensate for the structural differences that exist. When we now increase the general state grants by 6 billion kronor, many municipalities in the north will, proportionally per inhabitant, receive more of these 6 billion than other parts of Sweden. That was my point. I have never said that it compensates fully, because it does not – it will be impossible to find a system that does. I will receive the tax equalization committee's report next year with interest. We will also issue some additional directives to further sharpen the investigation.
I know that there are very many small municipalities; many of them are concentrated in the inland of Norrland. I was just a few weeks ago in Västerbotten and took the opportunity to visit Bjurholm Municipality, which is Sweden's smallest municipality with barely 2,800 inhabitants. It was an exciting and rewarding visit with an incredibly committed political leadership and civil service leadership. Despite the challenges that this small municipality faces, one dares to invest in a completely new building, or property, which shall house both school premises and an elderly housing facility and, if I remember correctly, sports, in order to restructure the property portfolio and create a more efficient economy. It was wonderful to see how a small municipality nevertheless dares to make these investments, and one does it because one sees that in the long run it will generate lower costs for properties – speaking of taking measures that in the long run create a better and more efficient economy. I think it was inspiring.
I cannot help but ask, given the debate that is taking place and the arguments being put forward: Have the Social Democrats put forward a new proposal that the state grants should compensate the northern parts a little extra? I have never seen such a proposal. But it sounds like that in this debate, so it is no wonder that people become disappointed at times.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I shall try to break this down. The Social Democrats naturally have an influence on the public debate, but we have not been the cause of the anger in the northern parts of Sweden. We hear it and listen to it, but it is the people who live there who are upset about not receiving any support at all. They are not saying that they should get exactly the same amount, but at least some support because at certain times they have had high electricity prices, at least for one month, as high as in southern Sweden.
They are also upset about the promises made before the election regarding, for example, fuels.
There is, therefore, a number of things people are upset about, and it is nothing the Social Democrats have made up. But we hear what people are saying, and we hear their upset and concern.
More resources are needed. We have not said that we will give any specific resources, but we want to provide sufficient resources for the welfare. What then are sufficient resources? Yes, resources enough to manage to provide the welfare that people need. We want to build the society stronger by creating more equal conditions for the entire municipal sector and putting welfare first, even in northern Sweden so that all of Sweden counts. Then investments in welfare are needed across all of Sweden.
However, one also needs to take into account the special circumstances that the northern parts have regarding precisely the electricity price support and the concern that exists over it.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Support is coming to the northern parts of Sweden. When electricity prices also increased in the northern parts of Sweden, the government quickly made a decision so that the northern parts, electricity price areas 1 and 2, would also receive support. Support for November and December, when electricity prices skyrocketed even in northern Sweden, will be distributed shortly. The government is delivering, therefore.
The government is also listening. We are not, I was about to say, snowed in at the Government Offices and holding our ears. We listen. We travel and talk to people and know that there is upset in the northern parts of Sweden.
But when we explain the large electricity price differences between northern and southern Sweden, an understanding also emerges as to why the first electricity price support went to precisely electricity price areas 3 and 4. But when electricity prices in northern Sweden increased, the government quickly decided to also provide support to households in electricity price areas 1 and 2. So, it is an action-oriented government acting.
The Government's assessment is that the supplement for 2023 that we are providing to the municipal sector is significant and will help the municipalities manage the important welfare mandate they have. Should the Government see that the forecasts will worsen ahead and make an assessment that these resources will not be sufficient, we will return. There is a possibility to do so in the year-end budget and, above all, when we present the autumn budget for the coming years.
The government is on alert, and there are economic conditions thanks to Sweden's strong economy. We will present a budget that does not drive up inflation, but ensuring the welfare in municipalities and regions is an important issue for the government.
I also thank you for the debate.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.