Response to interpellation 2023/24:102 on Gotland's civil defense
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns Gotland's civil defense and resource allocation. M considers Gotland to be strategically important 1 and that the government is increasing the contributions to crisis preparedness by 100 million kronor annually 1. M argues that Gotland receives the highest contribution per inhabitant 1 and that the state has a financing responsibility, but that municipalities and regions also have an extensive responsibility 2. S considers Gotland's geographical location to be strategic and that the hospitals require resources to transition during a crisis. S considers the resources to be insufficient and that healthcare is underfunded 3. S argues that per capita-driven resource allocation does not give strategically important areas the priority they need 4. S considers that the state must take a more comprehensive overall responsibility than municipalities and regions can do themselves. S argues that the civil defense risks failing to meet the standard because the resources are insufficient 5 6. M argues that Gotland cannot bear the responsibility alone 7 and that peacetime crisis preparedness is a municipal and regional responsibility 7.
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 Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me whether Gotland, with its decisive security policy position, can contribute to the strengthened civil defense that is desired and, if not, how I will act to guarantee Gotland's civil defense.
Let me begin by thanking the interpellor for the commitment to the issue and for having asked a very important question. Gotland is strategically very important for the defense of Sweden and for the Baltic Sea region as a whole.
In the current security situation, the pace of the reinforcement of civil defense needs to increase. The Government therefore proposes further measures regarding 2024. One of the proposals in the budget bill is that the grants to the municipalities' and regions' work with crisis preparedness and civil defense shall increase by 100 million kronor annually from and including 2024, in addition to the increase of 50 million kronor resulting from previous decisions. This investment means that the grants to the municipalities' and regions' work with crisis preparedness and civil defense during 2024 will collectively increase by approximately 25 percent to a total of 754 million kronor per year.
It should also be emphasized that the latest changes in the cost equalization within the municipal economic equalization system entered into force in 2020 and resulted in a large increase in the outcome for just Gotland. Even though no specific factor was introduced, structural conditions that can cause higher costs, for example regarding transport, are taken into account in an improved way through the changes. Gotland receives the highest grant measured in kronor per inhabitant in the equalization system for regions.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer. We have received a new security policy situation in Sweden. It affects us all. Many who for a long time have not thought about the importance of military and civil defense have had to rethink. Our entire society is affected.
Certain parts of the country are naturally affected more than others. Gotland's geographical location is strategic not only for Sweden's defense but for the entire Western world's defense. Gotland also has a long history of strategic importance for Sweden's defense. The island is strategically located in the Baltic Sea and has been of great importance for protecting the country against potential threats from the east.
All this also means that it is still necessary to build up and strengthen not only the military defense but also the civil defense to ensure protection and security for the inhabitants but also for Sweden. Sweden's civil preparedness is about local communities' ability to prevent and manage war and ensure the most important societal functions.
Then our hospitals are very important. The hospitals play a decisive role. If we end up in a crisis, war, or other emergency situation, which we do not hope for, the hospitals are incredibly crucial. It is a matter of not only having the ability to manage care in the usual, normal situation but also being able to adapt. It requires a lot of knowledge, competence, and above all, resources.
For Gotland, this responsibility is a very great challenge. Gotland is an island, which means large additional costs. It is not as easy. We cannot send a land ambulance to Gotland, and it plays a major role that it is an island.
The Minister says that Gotland gets more. It is, of course, about how we distribute the state grants that we already have. But what is happening now is that all regions and all municipalities receive too few resources. If we only distribute what is too little, it means that all regions face a major challenge ahead to manage both ordinary healthcare and the civil preparedness that we expect to exist, even on Gotland.
Civil defense runs the risk of not measuring up if it does not receive the resources required. The Government responds that a number of millions are being added. But if more than that is lacking, this will be like putting a bandage on a severely bleeding wound. The Government now says that they are sending resources to Gotland and elsewhere to increase civil defense, but there has been too little compensation and insufficient resources. In that case, this will not be enough.
That is also the reason why we are asking these questions to the Minister. How can we guarantee that people on Gotland, but also in other areas in Sweden, can manage the civil defense that we want and wish for them to manage?
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! I want to begin by expressing joy that we are debating Gotland's civil defense in the chamber of the Riksdag today. Earlier this autumn, I submitted a written question to the Minister regarding Gotland's civil defense. I received then approximately the same answer that the Minister read out just now. It is an answer, Madam Speaker, which in summary amounts to that we in Gotland should sit still in the boat and be happy with what we have received. I consider it an unreasonable stance, if the Bohlin government means business with that civil defense is to be strengthened. We are in complete agreement that this is to happen. But the demands placed on Gotland are unacceptably high in an exceptional time.
I want to be clear. It is very welcome that Gotland's geographical location is being highlighted and that the Minister also uses a term such as a factor, as well as that the Armed Forces have been located on Gotland in recent years and are growing steadily there. Sweden's total defense, however, is based on identifying vulnerabilities and eliminating them or at least making them smaller. In Gotland's case, the vulnerability increases with the ongoing healthcare crisis.
Madam Speaker! The costs of providing welfare in Sweden's only island region are steadily increasing. In the part specifically concerning healthcare, it is currently a matter of 275 million kronor in underfunding. It is true that a certain equalization comes to Gotland, as the Minister says, but it is obviously not a question of full compensation for the island. This means that Gotlandic healthcare is consistently underfunded in large real terms. Gotland is Sweden's smallest healthcare region with an all too small population and high additional costs. Furthermore, Gotland has an unreasonably heavy responsibility in the event of crisis or war.
This underfunding of the larger model is a fact, Madam Speaker, at the same time as the Armed Forces are distressingly clear that the responsibility for securing healthcare capacity rests heavily on the regions. It says for itself that the equation does not add up. Gotland has additional costs for maternity care and laboratory capacity, but given our geographical location, we also account for managing emergency care ourselves. Delivering basic security that rests on some overcapacity is what Gotlandic healthcare struggles with every day. But it is also a cost, a risk, and a challenge that the government must take far more seriously than what can be discerned in the Minister's answer here today. All the time one does not do so, one carelessly and with reckless courage neglects the civil defense that one says one wants to build up.
Therefore, I ask: With what resources does the Minister mean that the civil defense capacity shall be built? Does the Minister feel secure that a strategically important part of Sweden does not have better conditions to build common strength?
Marcus Wennerström (S)
Madam Speaker! "The total defense is to be regarded as a collective utility and therefore the financing of the specific preparedness costs should largely be carried out via the state budget." So it says in Motståndskraft.
Yesterday, ÖB was here in the chamber. His words were clear. The most important thing that civil defense can create for the military is a functioning society. It is about schools and preschools. It is about nursing homes and home care. But municipalities are much more, and the situation is much more complex.
When the Minister emphasizes the importance and the seriousness of the situation on social media, he is completely right. But likes and shares will not stop an antagonist from the east. Per capita-driven resource allocation does not give strategically important areas the priority they need.
If we scratch the surface of what the Armed Forces request or demand from municipalities, we see that it is about much more than securing daily operations. It is about protecting critical infrastructure to be able to withstand or at least hinder military attacks. It is about making analyses and restructuring organizations to enable host nation support. It is also about building command centers in locations with higher security that hinder or make it impossible to use in everyday life. Just one measure within one of these areas can cost significantly more than what the municipality receives in support from the state. And the state funds furthermore may not be used for investments.
That is where reality becomes quite clear, because then responsible politicians in our municipalities face the question of prioritizing for the state. Then they are forced to prioritize away healthcare in everyday life, cut back on staff in schools, and raise tax rates, district heating prices, and water and sewage fees. The equalization grant that the Minister refers to, Madam Speaker, is namely not intended to be used for reserve power, staging areas for NATO forces or, for that matter, unreasonably high protection levels from a civilian perspective.
The funding for crisis preparedness and civil defense must explicitly not be used for investments. It should, in principle, only be used for planning, reporting, training, and analysis. But mere knowledge of our vulnerabilities will not save us. Properly scheduled war games will not create the conditions for host nation support. One-way reporting from municipalities to the state does not assure the soldier in the field that their loved ones are safe in the care of society.
Madam Speaker! Politics is said to be about priorities. I therefore wonder if the Minister does not truly see that the situation has progressed so far that it is really starting to be time to prioritize. I wonder if the Minister does not see that the conditions for civil defense are governed by military needs to a much greater extent than the answer suggests. I wonder if the Minister does not see a need for a resource allocation that more clearly originates from the need, given how the defense of the country is intended to function.
Does the Minister mean it seriously when he says that the time for planning is short? Does the Minister mean it seriously when he says that the defense of Gotland is a collective good? Then I at least expect that he does not content himself with stating this but also pushes for necessary decisions to be made.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin by repeating what I started by saying, namely that I greatly appreciate the commitment from the Members of Parliament in this matter. What I perhaps appreciate less is that one tries to make a rhetorical point that there would be any difference in the level of ambition between our respective parties in this matter. If one looks at the Social Democrats' budget motion, one can observe that the appropriations for this within expenditure area 6 are identical to the government's. There is, therefore, no other level of economic ambition from the Social Democrats' side.
I believe and hope that the defense preparation that is currently working takes the same steps also in the proposals regarding civil defense. It would be good if we could raise the bar together, most preferably in an eight-party agreement. Just as the members emphasize, the situation is indeed very serious.
One also mixes up the cards a bit in this discussion because, on one hand, some want to make it a general discussion about investments in welfare and, on the other hand, some want to make it a discussion directed towards civil defense. As the members surely know, the state has a financing responsibility when it comes to civil defense and the work for an increased state of readiness. But municipalities and regions also have a very far-reaching responsibility in these matters.
It is problematic that we have outdated legislation in this area and that the investigation commissioned by the previous Social Democratic government was not completed. It is problematic, because we lost important time. One of the first things this government did was to appoint a new investigation to seriously clarify the distribution of responsibility between state, municipality, and region. But at the same time as we do that, we also ensure that we carry out substantial investments in this area, which municipalities and regions will share.
To just mention one more thing - in the budget bill for 2023, the regions were allocated an additional 400 million kronor, among other things to strengthen the healthcare's work with civil defense, as well as an additional 400 million kronor for supply preparedness regarding pharmaceuticals. These are investments that this government has made.
This government has also, once and for all, addressed the issue of a reserve port on Gotland, a need that has been known for a very long time but which the previous government failed to make progress on during an eight-year period.
It also concerns the third power cable to Gotland - which Gotland, as we all know, has a very great need of in order to ensure robustness and redundancy. But nothing happened during the previous eight years.
I therefore welcome a high level of ambition. But I oppose rhetoric that is not compatible with what the Social Democrats present in their budget motions.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I turn against the Minister calling this rhetorical figures. It is not. We are seriously concerned. We want to strengthen civil defense because we see that there is a need for it.
What we are trying to point out in this interpellation to the Minister and in this debate is that these things are connected, just as my colleagues have shown. If we do not provide sufficient resources to, for example, the hospitals and they therefore cannot manage what they are supposed to – it is a healthcare crisis in Sweden – it means that they do not have the resources to do what they are supposed to do for civil defense. If one uses resources to do what one is supposed to do, one can, as Marcus spoke about, take resources from the other. This is connected. If one does not receive sufficient resources to manage the welfare, for example healthcare, it means that there is a risk that one will not also manage either to solve the healthcare crisis or to do what needs to be done for civil defense.
I was invited by my colleague Hanna Westerén to visit Gotland and was there earlier this autumn. It was truly educational. I have read all the reports and everything there is to read about the island factor that Gotland has developed. It is very interesting reading and a good basis for understanding Gotland's unique situation. But when you get there and see with your own eyes, it is clear that it makes a difference. When you are there, you can really feel it in your body - perhaps not exactly as all Gotlanders do - and see and understand that they have greater challenges than many other regions, in one way: You are an island region, with all the difficulties and challenges that it entails.
Furthermore, we are security-politically vulnerable, and there is a great responsibility on us to handle this together with Gotland – to strengthen both the military and the civil defense. This means something special when it concerns Gotland. Therefore, we need to prepare; this is the question at hand.
I do not quite think we have received an answer from the Minister. The Minister refers to the millions that have nevertheless been spent on increasing civil defense. But our point is that it matters if you do not fund the regions sufficiently, and that is where the Social Democrats do things differently. We fund the regions with twice as much, and that will have an impact; they have to do with each other.
From the perspective of the Defence Forces, one is crystal clear – we can agree on that – regarding the regions' responsibility to secure healthcare capacity. One is also clear that Gotland has an entirely special security policy challenge and also a special security policy responsibility.
I therefore ask the Minister again: Does he believe that Gotland can take on this responsibility? Can we be confident in that? Or is there something else that the Minister considers needs to be done to ensure that Gotland can provide the security policy safety that Sweden and the entire Western world need?
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! As has been said earlier, Sweden is in its most critical security policy situation since the Second World War. Sweden is rearming, and that it must happen is indisputable. To then handle life-critical healthcare in this way is astonishing. I also note that the Minister mentions the previous cost equalization but not at all the ongoing investigation. It is probably a signal in itself that even that door is closed.
Madam Speaker! I want to particularly emphasize a sentence in Eva Lindh's interpellation: "The civil defense risks failing to meet the requirements in the event of a crisis or war." It is so simple and so serious. The price of the government that the Minister represents not prioritizing Gotland, despite the island's strategic location, is high. In a terrible scenario where major war rages in Europe, Gotland, with its strategic location, with Sweden's smallest healthcare headquarters, stands with the responsibility to deliver healthcare for the needs of the total defense. With what resources shall that capacity be built?
It goes without saying that the millions for the entire country's crisis preparedness that the Minister refers to are deeply insufficient for municipalities and regions with vastly different circumstances to be able to deliver on the mission that will fall upon them in the total defense of the Realm of Sweden. I therefore wonder if it really is so simple and so bad that Gotland's civil defense is up to Gotland to provide for, despite Gotland's strategic position. The Minister's reasoning regarding the resource issue suggests that is exactly the case. If not, it is high time to prioritize differently. Everything else risks becoming extremely costly for all of us in the event of crisis or war.
Marcus Wennerström (S)
Madam Speaker! I find it a bit difficult to know exactly where to begin. There was talk of rhetorical points, and at the same time, the Minister chooses to cast a fog where he talks about things that do not belong.
We are here to talk about the principle question. Civil defense is a part of the total defense that the Supreme Commander, who spoke in the rostrum here in the chamber, approximately 25 hours ago, said must have a functioning society and a functioning welfare. Then we shall separate what is state, regional, and municipal. It is the Council of State's solution to the resource shortage. It is a system, and we have a Sweden to defend.
I will not even go into the fact that it was a Social Democratic government that resumed the defense buildup in 2015. Sure—one might think that it is slow-moving, and so on. But we do not need to rewrite history, because no matter how we turn and twist it, we will end up at the conclusion that we disagree. What we have here and now is a problem that needs to be solved.
The questions from all of us to the Minister are simple: Is Gotland prioritized? Should we prioritize certain parts of the country differently because they have different conditions? Then one can inject as many millions as one wants in per capita grants, but it will not help Gotland's specific situation. We are not saying that we are adding an amount of extra funds - we are indeed doing that - to healthcare which will save everyday operations, but we are wondering if time has passed so far that the Minister sees that it needs to be prioritized among the resources that exist. Not to prioritize is also a prioritization.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! Can Gotland alone bear the responsibility? The answer to that question is naturally no. Gotland, in its capacity as a municipality and region, naturally cannot alone bear the total defense of Gotland. It is among other reasons why this government is taking measures to move forward in the issue of reserve port and extra power supply for Gotland. What was my point when I mentioned the per capita comparison is that Gotland has an extra distribution, that is to say, Gotland has the highest distribution per capita.
Marcus Wennerström asks if this is my solution. I am therefore explaining what the responsibilities look like, namely that there is a municipal, regional, and state responsibility. My point is that it does not function well enough. The responsibilities are not sufficiently clearly defined. Just as the Members of Parliament know when they return to the question of the general state grants, Sweden has extensive municipal and regional self-government. This naturally places very large demands on responsibility for all those who are regionally and municipally active to prioritize.
The peacetime crisis preparedness and the basic level of civil defense is today a municipal and a regional responsibility. In that case, it is naturally very important that that responsibility is taken. If the Social Democrats want to open up to reducing the general state grants and have clearer earmarked state grants for the reconstruction of the civil defense, I am absolutely prepared to have that discussion. We have appointed an inquiry that looks at exactly that question. The structural inquiry that the previous government appointed and received a report from failed to handle the question of the municipal and regional responsibility for the civil defense. This is a problem, and it has caused us to lose many important years.
Let me return to the original question. Does the government consider that the defense of Gotland is up to the people of Gotland themselves? No, of course not. That is why we have, among other things, the development initiative on Gotland for total defense, that is why the government is taking measures and steps to establish a reserve port, and that is why the government is taking measures and steps for additional power supply. Finally, it is why the government has initiated fast-tracks to reactivate civil service. These are issues where the previous government never made any progress.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Let me use my two minutes to at least try to summarize our views. We have a new security policy situation, and that is what we agree on. Everyone sees that we need to take a greater responsibility for the military and civil defense.
Gotland has a particularly vulnerable and challenging security policy position, and we must take a collective responsibility. That is the point. When it comes to total defense, the state must naturally take an overall greater responsibility than the municipalities or regions do individually. But together, we have a collective responsibility. And we Social Democrats want to emphasize that that responsibility shall be taken together. It is not only up to Gotland as a region to take responsibility, but we shall do it together.
What does the state need to do so that we can together manage to take responsibility for the security policy challenge and take responsibility for civil defense? Yes, it is that the state supports and helps, and we shall do it together. Then resources are needed, and priorities need to be made. A plan is needed, and it is missing.
We have received an answer, but we do not think we have been heard regarding our concern or received an answer to the original question. But I hope that the Minister can still reassure us.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! It is good to hear that we are fundamentally in agreement that Gotland is an indispensable part of Sweden, that Gotland has a special military-strategic importance, and that the defense of Gotland is a matter for all of Sweden.
Just because the defense of Gotland is a matter for all of Sweden, it is very important to look at the results and the evaluation of the special development initiative for total defense that the military region and the county administrative board have carried out on Gotland. There, it is noted that a number of the major issues that are important for building a strong total defense on Gotland are such as are national matters. This concerns, for example, communications, electricity supply, and robustness-enhancing measures in society at large.
Mainland Sweden shall therefore help to defend Gotland also by being robust and by supplying Gotland with essential necessities. It is therefore concerning that we, for example, have not yet reached a conclusion on the reserve port issue. Had the previous government worked more proactively, that issue might have been resolved now. I hope that we will be able to solve it within not too long a period of time. That Gotland receives its third power supply cable is, of course, also very important.
Then I look forward to Carl Fredrik Graf's investigation on the municipal and regional responsibility for peacetime preparedness and for civil defense during high alert. It is a very pressing issue when it comes to clarifying the responsibility once and for all.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.