Response to interpellation 2023/24:170 on the threat of closure of the film archive in Grängesberg
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned the threat of closing the Film Archive in Grängesberg. S argued that the archive is an important part of the local population's handshake with the state and that the closure risks breaking the trust in the state 1. S stated that there is plenty of space and low rent in Grängesberg, and criticized the government's centralization policy which goes against the goal of reducing the focus on Stockholm 1 2 3. L emphasized the importance of state presence throughout the country 4 but underlined that authorities must be able to streamline and coordinate operations to protect the taxpayers' interests 5 6. L argued that the Royal Library is conducting necessary consequence analyses 4 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.
Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Sofie Eriksson has asked me if I have received information regarding where the operations will move after the turn of the year and received information about what the cost will be to build new premises for the Royal Library's archive operations.
Sofie Eriksson has further asked me if I have initiated any analysis of how it affects trust in the state when the handshake with the local community risks being broken by a relocation of the film archive from Grängesberg - excuse my Scanian pronunciation!
Sofie Eriksson has finally asked me what initiatives I intend to take to reduce the focus on Stockholm in politics within my area of responsibility.
Mr. Speaker! I am closely following the Royal Library's work regarding the issue of the Film Archive's location. The agency manages large and growing collections of physical and digital material that must be preserved for the future. The agency needs to continuously review and assess the need for development and change in its operations. Within the framework of this work, the Royal Library has made the assessment that there are preservation, coordination, and efficiency gains in moving the operations in Grängesberg together with the operations in Bålsta or Stockholm.
Before a decision on location is made, the authority shall prepare a consequence analysis in accordance with the Ordinance (2019:202) on the Location of Government Agencies. The analysis shall contain a description of the operational, economic, and personnel consequences of the authority's planned decision, as well as an assessment of the regional consequences within the framework of the authority's areas of responsibility. The analysis shall also state what alternative possibilities exist to develop or rationalize the authority's existing operations in the municipality.
The work to establish the analysis is currently ongoing within the authority. The assessment of the cost implications is not yet complete, and the decision on localization has not yet been made.
The Government considers it important to have a state presence throughout the country. State presence and service throughout the country is important to simplify for individuals and increase the benefit to citizens. Thus, the legitimacy and trust of the state administration are maintained. It remains important to monitor the distribution of state jobs in the country, among other things through the county administrative boards' annual follow-ups.
In the field of education and research, there are government agencies located throughout Sweden. Examples can include the Institute for Space Physics in Kiruna and the Swedish Council for Higher Vocational Education with operations in Hässleholm and Västerås.
Sofie Eriksson (S)
Mr. Speaker! The subject of this debate is the Film Archive in Grängesberg. The archive has existed for about 20 years but is now threatened with closure as early as the turn of the year. The last state jobs in Grängesberg will disappear if this becomes a reality.
Ludvika municipality has invested nearly 10 million kronor in recent years. Completely new premises were completed this year.
The local population has made a deal with the state that is now at risk of being broken. In Grängesberg, there is plenty of room for expansion. Until very recently, the plan was also to move material from other of the Royal Library's sites to Grängesberg.
Mr. Speaker! This is the second time that Mats Persson and I have debated this question. I appreciate that the Minister for Education is taking the time.
Last time, the Minister expressed the opinion that there has been an all-too strong Stockholm focus in politics and that it is important to look at the whole country. I truly share that view.
The reason I submitted a new interpellation is partly because I did not quite receive answers to the questions I asked last time, and partly because new questions have been raised. Where is the operation actually going to move in a little over a month? What will it cost to expand at any of the other locations? And how does it affect trust in the state when one acts this way?
The area where the archive is located has a great cultural-historical value, which was emphasized at a consultation meeting regarding this matter that I attended last week. There are also collaborations with the film industry in general in Dalarna. The properties that Filmarkivet now uses should actually not be used for just anything. Above all, they should not stand empty. It is a perfectly suitable place to preserve cultural-historical material. Furthermore, the rent is not particularly high.
Somewhere it always seems to be further from Stockholm to Grängesberg than the other way around. To streamline always means that one moves from small towns to the larger towns - most often to the Stockholm area. Apparently, that is how one streamlines, at least in the eyes of the state. We do not see the same development if we look at the business sector; that is interesting in itself. How can it be that companies often consider that there are advantages to establishing themselves and investing in smaller towns while the state makes the exact opposite assessment?
Mats Persson emphasizes that he trusts that the Royal Library makes correct assessments. The investigation underlying the paused decision lasted for approximately two months, and after that, there has been approximately one consultation meeting. I am not sure that it is sufficient to assess the consequences of a closure.
We have not been able to take part of any cost calculation, and what is even meant by coordination gains? It actually seems to be that it is really just a matter of it being a bit inconvenient for people from Stockholm to sit on the train and travel to Grängesberg.
I wonder if Mats Persson can provide a brief reasoning on how trust in society, and specifically in Grängesberg and Ludvika municipalities, risks being broken when the state behaves in this manner.
Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Sofie Eriksson for the interpellation.
You and I have in common that our dialects reveal that we do not live directly in this part of Sweden, but some miles from Stockholm. I cannot pronounce Grängesberg as beautifully as you, but I try in my Scanian.
We share the view that there has for a long time been a Stockholm-focus in politics, and for many people it is exactly as Sofie Eriksson describes it: that it is sometimes perceived as being further from the capital to Malmö or Grängesberg than the other way around. It is a perspective we must carry with us and that we need to break. It is also why the government is carrying out work for a high state presence throughout the country, and the authorities are working towards that in different ways.
Against this stands the overarching perspective that the Riksdag should decide on every single agency decision. That would be a strange order. Let me emphasize that it is not what Sofie Eriksson is proposing. But it is all the time about a balance between a high state presence throughout the country and a trust that our agencies conduct their activities with the taxpayers' best interests in mind. It is about getting the maximum possible benefit for the taxpayers with the minimum possible tax money. I have full confidence that our agencies handle this in a wise and good way and that they perform the consequence analyses they are required to do in order to, in this way, produce the best possible basis for the eventual decisions that are to be taken.
Sofie Eriksson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Mats Persson emphasizes that this is a matter of an agency decision that politics should not interfere with. But then perhaps the Minister can explain why the government, in its budget bill, writes that the Film Archive in Grängesberg should be able to be moved to another location.
Let me read a quote: "There is too much Stockholm-focus in Swedish politics. We need to look at the interests of all of Sweden, and we need to break the norm that exists regarding everything being concentrated in the capital, so to speak." It is a spot-on quote from Mats Persson from our previous debate about the Film Archive in Grängesberg.
The Minister for Education says that he is following the issue closely, and that is good. But I wonder what Mats Persson wants in this context? Here is a concrete opportunity to stop an unnecessary closure and to prevent further centralization of state activities to the Stockholm area. One should also remember that the film archive was part of a compensation from the state for the closure of the mine in Grängesberg. People will remember this. One might think that it is not about that many jobs. No, perhaps not for a large city, but in Grängesberg, they are the only ones we have left.
It is tiring to hear Mats Persson comment on my dialect instead of telling what he thinks about the closure.
It seems that as soon as one is to streamline, coordinate, and work smarter and cheaper, it means that one should centralize and move operations to the big city. But the question is whether any analysis has been made of the alternative, to do the opposite and move operations from the big city to Grängesberg. No, that has not been done, I was told when I asked the Royal Library. Has Mats Persson heard anything about that alternative? In Grängesberg, there is plenty of space. There are new premises, which have not yet been inaugurated, with almost twice as much space as in the archive premises they have now. Furthermore, the rent is quite low.
Mr. Speaker! I may have become a little irritated over this matter regarding the dialect, but I am not out to score partisan points on this issue. What is important to me is that the Film Archive in Grängesberg remains.
I am left wondering. Just a year ago, the plan was to move material from Bålsta to Grängesberg. But a few months later, when the premises were finished, one was suddenly supposed to take down the sign and leave. What happened? Did the change of government have anything to do with it? Perhaps.
One reason behind this is the general savings on the authorities, which affects the state presence in many places in the country. In 20 different locations in the country, Skatteverket is laying off almost 100 people who work with population registration. Jordbruksverket and Statens servicecenter are two more of many other examples. The government seems to be pursuing a centralization policy that goes straight against what Mats Persson and I seem to agree on: that centralization is wrong.
My hope is still great. I hope that I am wrong, and I hope that Mats Persson can do something. Do not shut down Filmarkivet in Grängesberg! I can promise that Mats Persson will become a hero in Grängesberg and Ludvika if he sorts this out.
Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)
Mr. Speaker! I will start with the dialect. It was absolutely not my intention to joke about the member's dialect, but the purpose was to point out that neither the member nor I live in Stockholm. I am standing here in front of you with my Scanian with Smålandic elements. Let me emphasize that this really was not directed at the member but a question of finding a jargon. I hope that the Speaker did not perceive it that way either, because that was really not my intention.
When it comes to the issue itself, my view is this: The Royal Library has taken this initiative, and the agency is currently analyzing the cost and operational consequences of a potential decision. No decision has been made yet, and I welcome different actors and individual members of Parliament engaging in the issue so that the agency can produce the best possible basis for a potential decision to move the operations or alternatively keep the operations. I assume that the agency weighs the pros and cons of making a potential change to the operations.
I ask the member to, like, have a bit of patience and let the authority work through the underlying material and assess the consequences that a potential decision on change would have. Right now, nothing else is on the table than that one carries out this investigation.
Once again: It was not my intention to remark on the member's dialect. It would never occur to me.
Sofie Eriksson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the clarification, Mats Persson! I did not interpret it that way, but what I was irritated by was that you spent some time talking about dialects rather than talking about the Film Archive in Grängesberg. But I appreciate your apology.
Mats Persson returns to the point that this is about agency decisions, and that is fundamentally the case. But why does the government then write about the Filmarkivet in Grängesberg in its budget bill? Why does one write in black and white that one makes the assessment that the activity can be moved to another location? Does one not believe that this will affect the agency decision? What is the basis for this assessment, since the budget bill was written before all analyses were finished?
The question is what assessment Mats Persson is making since he signed off on that this should be included in the budget bill.
It does, however, make me happy and positive to hear that I need to have patience. There might, therefore, still be a hope that this closure is stopped. It would be really very good, for many reasons.
This ultimately comes down to what one wants and does not want, because that is what politics is about. Many people in Ludvika municipality, but above all the people of Grängesberg of course, are quite damn disappointed about this right now. It is about principles. One is involved and contributes to Sweden's wealth. The municipality has invested millions of kronor so that the operation remains with us. But now they are taking down the sign, it seems.
Mr. Speaker! I hope that Mats Persson can help us stop this completely unnecessary shutdown.
Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Sofie Eriksson for an excellent interpellation debate. We must follow the question and see what considerations the authority makes and await the potential decisions that may perhaps be taken – that is the level we find ourselves at right now.
It is important with a state presence. At the same time, it is also important that the authorities have the conditions to conduct the operations so that the taxpayers' interests are protected. It is about the perspective of using our tax money in as effective a way as possible while the operations must also provide great benefit for the taxpayers. I am convinced that the authority will have that perspective and make a well-balanced decision.
I thank the interpellator for a pleasant debate.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.