Response to interpellation 2023/24:349 on the situation in women's prisons
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 situation in women's prisons. M argues that the number of women admitted is increasing, that they are often younger with a strong criminal identity 1. M argues that the current shortage of space is due to the expansion starting too late 1, but that future expansion shall meet women's needs. M argues that double occupancy is the new normal 2 and that the purpose of punishment is to demand accountability, provide redress for crime victims, and protect society by locking up dangerous individuals for longer 3. S argues that the occupancy is at a record high, that violence is increasing, and that overcrowding leads to increased mental ill-health 4 5. S argues that a prison in security class 1 for women is needed 4. S argues that crime prevention work is most important to break the negative development 6. SD argues that men should be in prisons for men and women in prisons for women 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.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! [The member] has asked me how I intend to ensure the situation for both inmates and employees at our women's prisons. Furthermore, Anna Wallentheim has asked how I and the government view the growing number of women in Sweden's prisons linked to gang crime and if I intend to take any actions based on our view on the issue.
Even though boys and men are heavily overrepresented in crime statistics, it is clear that girls and women also appear in criminal environments. There are also worrying signs that women's participation within these environments is increasing. Despite this, there is a risk that relevant actors in society do not identify them. This is the background for why the Crime Prevention Council has been given the government's mandate to produce knowledge on gender norms and differences between boys' and men's, as well as girls' and women's, participation in criminal networks and other types of organized crime.
The number of women admitted to the correctional services is increasing. At the country's largest prison for women, Hinseberg, staff observe that the composition of the inmates has changed over recent years. For example, Hinseberg receives more women convicted of violent crimes. The inmates are also younger and often have a strong criminal identity.
The strained capacity situation at all of Kriminalvården's facilities is primarily due to the fact that the expansion began far too late and has not matched the development of crime. The delayed expansion has had a major impact on all facilities and detention centers and has led to a lack of space at facilities for both women and men.
The Prison and Probation Service will need to expand, and many new prison and detention places will be needed. It is a priority issue for the government. Several measures have therefore already been taken. The government has, among other things, allocated funds for continued capacity reinforcement.
The Prison and Probation Service has also been tasked with providing a capacity report based on the needs resulting from the reforms in the Tidö Agreement. The Prison and Probation Service has now presented its assessment of the capacity needs. The report is being prepared in the Government Offices. The Government intends to return with a more precise analysis and plan.
It is the Prison and Probation Service's responsibility to ensure that operations are conducted both efficiently and safely. In that work, the staff is one of the most important assets. The agency has also presented a plan for the competence supply in the coming years.
Everyone who serves a prison sentence has a personal plan for their execution. There, it states what interventions the convicted person needs to avoid recidivism or substance abuse, as well as what preparations must be made for life in freedom. The specific needs that women have must therefore be incorporated into the plan. I know that the Prison and Probation Service continuously develops its work to reduce the risk of recidivism. This applies to all convicted persons, both men and women.
Getting people to break with a criminal lifestyle is one of the most important crime prevention tasks. During our time in opposition, the Riksdag, in a motion, urged the then government to strengthen the correctional services' work in preventing recidivism. The government will work to ensure that Swedish correctional services are effective and well-functioning and that activities are conducted that reduce recidivism.
Anna Wallentheim (S)
Madam Speaker! I may not feel as alert and fresh as the Minister. But I am grateful that we have reached today's final debate and that I am given the opportunity to discuss these issues.
It is a worrying situation we see in our prisons and institutions. It is worrying for the inmates, for the correctional officers, and for society. When it does not function inside our institutions, then the correctional care that we in Sweden should and ought to be able to be proud of does not function either.
In Sweden, we believe in the principle that people, both men and women, should have the opportunity to get a second chance. One should be given the opportunity to get their life back on track and should have the right to serve a sentence and then become a part of society again. We should be proud of that.
But every day, that type of task is becoming increasingly difficult for the correctional services to carry out. It has been a problem for a long time at our facilities for men. Now we see that it is also starting to become a problem at our facilities for women. The lack of space at the country's women's prisons is a growing problem. Last year, the occupancy was at a record high.
At the same time, the convicted women and the climate inside the detention centers, just as the minister mentioned in his answer, have changed drastically in recent years. The women who come to our detention centers belong more and more often to criminal networks.
In my interpellation, I mentioned that the occupancy rate of the women's prisons was around 70 percent just a few years ago. Last year, that rate unfortunately rose to up to 120-130 percent at certain times.
Staff at both the facility in Ystad and Hinseberg, whom I have been in contact with, also state that the clients have changed over the past year. Previously, one primarily had a long history of drug abuse behind them. But now we see more and more often that a clearer majority of the women at our facilities are convicted of violent crimes. Just as the minister mentioned, they are now younger and have a strong criminal identity. Several are also very outward-acting. We know that the average female client is still older than male clients. But the average age at our female facilities is therefore going down.
Madam Speaker! The violence and threats in the Swedish women's prisons are increasing. These are words that have etched themselves into my mind after my visits to both Hinseberg and the prison in Ystad. This is the background to why I have submitted this interpellation.
The staff point out that it is due to the increased overcrowding and the double-occupancy. It is also becoming increasingly difficult for the correctional services to place the women in our institutions because they now also belong to criminal gangs and have gang identities.
Right now, everything indicates that the need for new women's prisons is great and that a security class 1 prison would also be needed for women.
I therefore want to ask the Minister whether the government has taken the women into account when pointing out the increased need for prisons and institutions, or do we have to account for even more? And will we be able to see a security class 1 institution for women in the near future?
Pontus Andersson Garpvall (SD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank Anna Wallentheim for an interesting interpellation.
In the autumn, the Moderaterna submitted a committee initiative in the Social Affairs Committee regarding new gender identity legislation. It is legislation that was drafted by the previous Social Democratic government and which to a large extent affects the work even in the Justice Committee. The committee is to comment on the proposal this week.
In brief, the Moderaternas committee initiative means that it shall become easier to change gender and that the age limit shall be lowered to 16 years. It shall no longer be required to be diagnosed with what is called gender dysphoria, but it shall suffice with a conversation with a doctor or psychologist to change gender.
The parts concerning the Committee on Justice's area of responsibility are amendments to the Prison Act (2010:610) and the Detention Act (2010:611) in the provisions regulating the placement of a detainee together with detainees of the opposite sex.
Today it is stated that a detainee may not be placed so that he or she stays together with detainees of the opposite sex. A detainee may, however, be permitted to stay with detainees of the opposite sex if it is appropriate and the detainees consent to it. The last sentence is proposed to be changed as follows: "Such a placement may, however, be made if there are special reasons for it and if it is otherwise appropriate." This means that the Moderaterna, or actually all parties except for Sverigedemokraterna and Kristdemokraterna, think that the consent part should be removed while simultaneously making it easier to change sex.
When placement in a facility is determined, women and men are placed based on the personal identity number, which changes upon gender reassignment. During placement, no consideration is given to how a person identifies or whether one uses typically male or female attributes.
Around the world, we have seen horrific examples of what can happen when men who consider themselves women are placed in women's prisons. In New Jersey, a woman was moved to a men's ward two years ago after she had impregnated two women. Or I should say he, because a woman cannot possibly impregnate another woman. He was in a women's prison because he considered himself a woman, and therefore his rights took precedence over the women's in the women's prison. There is also a case in Scotland where a man committed two rapes, changed sex to woman, and was placed in a women's prison.
Madam Speaker! Sometimes it feels as if we are living in a sketch. In Sweden, as we have said, we place women and men in institutions based on the personal identity number, and the placement does not take into account how a person identifies themselves. At the same time, one now wants to make it easier to change gender and then remove the consent part.
Does the Minister for Justice think that the proposed changes to the legislation are good? And to return to Anna Wallentheim's and the Social Democrats' question in the interpellation: How do you ensure the safety of those detained in women's prisons when it is now potentially made easier for men who consider themselves women to end up in such institutions?
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Madam Speaker! I had actually not intended to participate in the debate but was mostly here as an observer because this is an issue that concerns one of the largest workplaces in my home municipality, namely the facility in Ystad that Anna Wallentheim mentioned in her speech. Anna and I actually visited that facility together a few months ago.
I want to take this opportunity to describe the very difficult situation that I experienced prevailed at the women's prison in Ystad. Just as Member Wallentheim said, the occupancy was at times far over 100 percent. One had to, for the most part, use every corner of the prison to try to accommodate inmates. It is, of course, a concerning situation.
My perception after the conversations we had with the staff is that there was little interest in this becoming some kind of partisan battle. I do not experience that either in the Minister for Justice's answer. But there are sometimes certain tendencies that these issues should become partisan conflicts and that people should throw various things at one another. It is claimed that someone should have done something a long time ago and suddenly one ends up in the 1980s. Then, indeed, one would have acted.
The important thing is that we resolve this situation, ensure that we have women's prisons of, for example, class 1, as Member Wallentheim highlighted, and also ensure that we expand the women's prisons. It must be a bearable situation for all those who work there, not least in my hometown Ystad. It is, as said, a large employer, and many are employed there or have been employed there in recent years.
I would therefore like to take this opportunity to highlight this issue further and think that the Minister for Justice provides an answer that shows an understanding of the situation. I look forward to hearing the Minister for Justice elaborate on his reasoning on the matter.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for the opportunity to discuss these important issues this evening. I would like to take my starting point in Ystad. I have also visited the women's prison there and spoken with both managers, employees, and inmates. It is a fundamentally fantastically well-functioning operation, but it is naturally affected by the general pressure that exists against the correctional services.
The pressure is, of course, a result of a criminal development that has manifested in a gradually changing character regarding women in detention centers, as Anna Wallentheim pointed out. It is about increasingly younger women, increasingly more serious crimes, increasingly firmer anchoring in criminal environments, and so on. But fundamentally, it is, as said, a very well-functioning operation.
It is quite obvious that when we now lay the foundation for a historic expansion of the prison and probation service, it must meet the needs that exist regarding women. I perceive that the Prison and Probation Service takes this into account to a high degree, even if it has not yet been concretized, for example, by the fact that security class 1 facilities are also to be built. One can say that nothing of what is currently taking place in the process in any way excludes that. It is an assessment that the Prison and Probation Service must make. If it is required, it shall also happen.
I also want to say that the reasons for the pressure are a long series of different things. They have led to the situation one finds oneself in now, which is a combination of the development of crime and insufficient expansion. Other things will also have an impact. We want to tighten the penalties in various respects. The full effect of the increased penalties will only be noticed further ahead in time.
The other day, Dagens Nyheter could report that the clearance rate for crime in Stockholm, when it concerns deadly violence, i.e., the fatal shootings, has risen from 15 percent in 2022 to 70 percent in 2023. It is an enormous success for the justice system in crime fighting. But it is clear that it will also entail an even more tangible pressure on the correctional services when more and more serious criminals are prosecuted, end up in prison, and have to stay there longer. All of this is, however, a desired effect of the measures we are now taking to break the development of crime.
This will mean transformation and change pressures on the correctional services even in a situation where we are expanding historically in terms of the number of places. It is about reassessment of working methods, new priorities, and new rationalizations. There are already far-reaching plans on how digitalization can be used to change the correctional services in different ways. All of this, I believe, is very positive and will provide new opportunities to manage the work of preventing recidivism.
Regarding the question raised by Pontus Andersson Garpvall, I can only state that the correctional services house extremely dangerous individuals, on a daily basis manage the placement of dangerous individuals and engage in differentiation as part of their core activities. This will, of course, also apply to the question that Pontus Andersson Garpvall raised.
Anna Wallentheim (S)
Madam Speaker! I would like to return to a couple of things in the Minister's first contribution which I view very positively, namely the importance of the correctional services continuously developing their work to reduce the risk of recidivism. The Minister pointed out that we are to get people to break the criminal lifestyle and that it is actually one of the most important crime-prevention tasks that the correctional services have.
Being sentenced to a prison term has many dimensions. On one hand, it must be palpable for those who commit serious crimes that society never accepts that type of development or turns a blind eye, and on the other hand, it is about crime victims receiving redress. It is also about us wanting to ensure that time in prison results in one breaking the criminal lifestyle. The Minister is as aware as I am that the latter is unfortunately something that is beginning to be deprioritized because the overcrowding in the facilities leads to increased mental ill-health, longer periods of confinement to handle the practicalities, fewer opportunities for outdoor stays, fewer activities, and fewer opportunities to break the pattern.
A full 65 percent of the employees at Sweden's correctional facilities believe that the correctional services have small chances of fulfilling their mission, according to Seko's report from last year. This is an increase of almost 100 percent compared to the corresponding figures in 2017. In just a few years, the figure has thus increased radically. This concerns the proportion of staff who believe that the requirements cannot be met.
According to Seko, the crisis hits their members' working environment very hard. It will also hit society when the authority fails to fulfill its mission. For women, it becomes extra tangible.
It has emerged in discussions with staff that inmates can no longer have their infants with them. For those listening who do not quite understand this or know how it works, I can say that inmates have the right to be with their infants if it is considered to be in the best interests of the child. Such situations can, for example, arise when parents have very short prison sentences, when release is near, or when there is no more suitable placement for the child. It is the correctional services and the social welfare committee in the respective municipality that decide on this. But the double-bedding means that the correctional services themselves now state that they can no longer guarantee the safety of the infants. Of course, it is the case that we cannot allow infants to stay in double-bedded rooms. There is no room to have their children there.
This is something that does not facilitate either a woman's mental well-being or her opportunity to focus on changing her lifestyle. Once again, I want to highlight the question of how we ensure the working environment within the correctional services, where one experiences that they cannot live up to their mission, and strengthen the well-being of those detained, so that they can break with their criminal lifestyle.
Pontus Andersson Garpvall (SD)
Madam Speaker! I hear what the Minister says – he has confidence in the work of the Prison and Probation Service. So do I. But is it really reasonable that the consent part regarding the placement of persons of the opposite sex is removed?
To return to Anna Wallentheim's own question in the interpellation: How do you ensure the safety of those admitted to the women's institutions when it is now made easier for men who consider themselves to be women to end up in those types of institutions?
We can simply hope that Sweden is not forced to experience situations such as those in, for example, Scotland and New Jersey. But there is a simple way to avoid situations like these, and it is simply that men who were born as men are held in facilities for men and that women who were born as women are held in facilities for women.
Just these types of gender reassignment discussions have come to be regarded as part of some kind of culture war. I want to emphasize that it is not my intention to engage in anything of that sort. In Sweden, we have long had the culture that we place men in institutions for men and women in institutions for women. I would not say that it is I who is waging some form of culture war. Rather, it is that I am defending the culture that has existed. My view is that the one who is waging a culture war is the one who wants to change the prevailing culture that we have and who thinks that it should become easier to change gender and easier to end up in an institution for the opposite sex. But what do I know? I can state that it is a very strange world we live in.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Madam Speaker! It is indeed a strange world we live in. I do not intend to object to that.
Member of Parliament Wallentheim once again describes profitably the situation at the country's women's institutions. I have unfortunately never been to Hinseberg and visited that operation, but I am convinced that one has the same challenges as at home in Ystad.
I continue to appreciate much of what the Minister for Justice says. I think it is pleasant and pleasing to hear the Minister for Justice in this case. I know that the Minister for Justice has been in Ystad, just as he said. If I am at home in Ystad and meet people who are employed at the prison, I am happy to be able to tell them that my experience is that the Minister for Justice is familiar with the situation. It pleases me to be able to take that home to Ystad.
I know that the Minister for Justice made a rather extensive visit to Ystad when he was there. It was reported in the local newspaper. This also pleases me. I do not know if the Minister for Justice received information about the work that is ongoing there at home with, for example, Backa barnet, where they are trying to work actively with children who risk going astray. The best thing, after all, is if we can prevent crimes from being committed in the first place, so that we do not need to build more and more institutions and stand here and talk about the working environment for employees and inmates in overcrowded institutions.
While we are standing here and talking about the institution and other things back home in Ystad, I want to make a point for the preventive work and especially the work with the Backa child. We would like to have a better working environment for employees at institutions and a bearable environment for those who are admitted to institutions. But preferably, we want good preventive work, so that we ensure that people never end up in those institutions.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! I begin with Seko's report from 2022, which I have had reason to return to several times during my first 14-15 months in this role. We really should not conclude this pleasant exchange this Tuesday evening in a polemical spirit. But it is still difficult not to note that the figure that Anna Wallentheim reported, namely the doubling of the problems in the criminal justice system between 2017 and 2022, must be seen as a rather brutal closing balance of the policy pursued until the change of government.
When we sought a mandate from the voters to get Sweden in order, as we said, some thought it sounded a bit modest. But that included, to a very high degree, getting crime and the justice system in order and giving all the actors in the justice system, not least the Prison and Probation Service, better conditions to fulfill their tasks.
This is a bit of an ocean liner – nothing you turn on a dime. But I am convinced that what we are doing now has good prospects of handling the crisis situation in the short term. This actually has nothing at all to do with the Tidö Agreement's criminal law reforms. These, as mentioned, are not yet in place and have not yet had any effect on the correctional services. Nevertheless, the situation must be handled. But long-term conditions must also be created to meet societal developments and increase the crime clearance rate. More people will be in prison in the future, and for longer periods. In that context, I also want to emphasize that it is particularly significant to ensure that women who are in prison are able to do so under reasonable conditions.
I would also like to bring up this issue of double-housing, as it has been mentioned in a couple of posts. I believe we just have to accept that it is the new normal. It is largely so already today. Naturally, it is being handled under somewhat more demanding circumstances now, because today's facilities are not built with double-housing in mind. But everything that is in the works can be planned on the basis that one will share a cell.
My impression is actually not that the double occupancy poses a general problem for either safety and security or the possibility of conducting meaningful recidivism prevention activities. I rather get the impression that what poses problems regarding, for example, safety, security, and privacy with the current pressure is that so many people are to share common areas.
It is very individual how one experiences sharing a cell with someone else. A very methodical work is carried out by the Prison and Probation Service to ensure that the right people share cells with each other and so on. I believe there is a positive pressure for development in that situation. Seen from an international perspective, this is not at all anything strange. On the contrary, it occurs in many other countries that even more people share a cell.
I believe that this will be a necessary part of the change that is occurring. But it is clear that there will always be individual needs of different kinds that must be able to be met even in such a normal state. It can concern everything from psychosocial problems to the possibility for detained women to meet their children. It is clear that the correctional services must have the capacity to handle those types of individual needs even in the new normal state that we see ahead of us.
Anna Wallentheim (S)
Madam Speaker! There are few people I have come into contact with recently who have such professional pride as correctional officers. But as I have emphasized in my posts, the fact is that both more and more employees and the unions are pointing out that the situation is beginning to become unsustainable. Within a few years, we are set to have a correctional system that has more places than the healthcare system has care beds. These are enormous amounts that will need to be spent on expanding the jails and expanding our institutions. But the operations within the correctional system risk becoming fruitless. We do not want a correctional system that becomes even worse at preventing recidivism.
We do not want a correctional system where we see even more incidents directed at staff or between inmates. We also do not want to see a correctional system that creates further ill health among inmates. I hope that neither the government nor the minister wants to see that development either.
I also want to take the opportunity to say that double occupancy is not always negative. Many clients I have spoken with can also see it as something positive to have someone to talk to during the time they are locked up. But it becomes a problem in the common areas and when one cannot manage the situation by giving the inmates opportunities for vocational hours and when they are not given the same opportunity to be outside and so on.
That makes me worried that it is a beginning of perhaps going towards SD's agenda once again. The Sweden Democrats are clear on this. They want to rename the Prison and Probation Service to the Punishment Authority. They want the focus to be on punishing criminals and to stop focusing on crime prevention. I am incredibly afraid that it is that development we are heading towards.
Crime prevention is, according to us Social Democrats, the absolute most important thing we can focus on to break the negative development we see in society. This also applies to the inmates' opportunity to live a democratic life after their sentences. I hope the government also stands firm on this.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! I would like once again to thank Anna Wallentheim for the opportunity to discuss these pressing issues this evening.
One might have to rewind and ask: What is the purpose of punishment? It is a matter of getting right to the question of what is the purpose of the correctional services. The punishments have the purpose of demanding accountability for actions that have violated the social contract and violated the law. Incarceration in itself is a very important and central part of the correctional services' activities.
When we want to tighten the penalties, it is about wanting the penalties to reflect the seriousness of the crimes in a better way than they do today. This applies not only to the serious organized crime committed in criminal networks but also to other crimes, for example, sexual offenses and other serious crimes.
We also want to provide victims of crime with redress in a clearer way than today, and that the surrounding society should be given better protection against serious crime by keeping dangerous individuals locked up for longer. Incarceration is a fundamental part of the correctional services' mission. That is something I am prepared to stand for every day of the week.
In the month that anyone thinks it is the Sweden Democrats who have come up with this stance, I recommend a criminal law philosophical study that extends many hundreds of years back in time. It emerged long before the Sweden Democrats entered the Riksdag. It is an important part of, in any case, the liberal-conservative tradition and view on this area.
With that said, there is also no doubt that the correctional services also have a very important purpose in trying to ensure that as many as possible come out as better people on the other side. That mission should not be changed, but rather strengthened.
I will finally take note of what the colleague from Ystad said. We would most preferably want as few as possible to end up there. It is clear that in the first instance, it is about preventive measures. We are happy to talk about that another evening.
The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.
Madam Speaker! I would like once again to thank Anna Wallentheim for the opportunity to discuss these pressing issues this evening.
One might have to rewind and ask: What is the purpose of punishment? It is a matter of getting right to the question of what is the purpose of the correctional services. The punishments have the purpose of demanding accountability for actions that have violated the social contract and violated the law. Incarceration in itself is a very important and central part of the correctional services' activities.
When we want to tighten the sentences, it is about wanting the sentences to reflect the seriousness of the crimes in a better way than they do today. This does not only concern the serious organized crime committed in criminal networks but also other crimes, for example sexual offenses and other serious crimes.
We also want to provide victims of crime with redress in a clearer way than today, and that the surrounding society should be given better protection against serious crime by keeping dangerous individuals locked up for longer. Incarceration is a fundamental part of the correctional services' mission. That is something I am prepared to stand for every day of the week.
In the month that anyone thinks it is the Sweden Democrats who have come up with this stance, I recommend a criminal law philosophical study that extends many hundreds of years back in time. It emerged long before the Sweden Democrats entered the Riksdag. It is an important part of the liberal-conservative tradition and view on this area in any case.
With that said, there is also no doubt that the correctional services also have a very important purpose in trying to ensure that as many as possible come out as better people on the other side. That mission should not be changed but rather strengthened.
I will finally have to note what the colleague from Ystad said. We would most preferably want as few as possible to end up there. It is clear that in the first instance, it is about preventive measures. We are happy to talk about that another evening.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.