Response to interpellation 2023/24:382 on the upgrading of Sweden's civil defense capability
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M argues that the government has strengthened civil defense through a new agency structure, investments in municipalities and regions, a business council 1, activation of the civil obligation, shelter investments, trauma care stocks, and cybersecurity 2. M hopes that S works for resource reinforcement 2, explains that healthcare and telecommunications are indispensable parts of the defense 3, admits that reserve power in mobile masts can be discussed but is bound by EU regulations 3, argues that food preparedness requires large financial demands 4 and emphasizes that participation should occur according to ability 4. S argues that the regions' economic crisis harms healthcare's capacity and resilience 5, that it is unreasonable to require private individuals to manage for a week without electricity and food while telecommunications operators are only required to have reserve power for one hour 6, that they can finance their proposals and that food preparedness should burden the state budget 7, as well as that healthcare crises and telecommunications are key issues for a strong civil defense 8 9.
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! Sofia Amloh has asked me how I shall act to create the best conditions so that all actors can contribute to a strong civil defense.
A strong civil defense is built on the fact that everyone who can contribute should do so. The experiences from Ukraine demonstrate the importance of the entire society being involved in creating resilience. To strengthen the conditions for the various actors to build the civil defense, the government has taken several measures.
The establishment of a new structure for state agencies has created clarity regarding how preparedness work shall be conducted at the national level. With a division of state agencies into preparedness sectors, an organizational platform is created for both the planning and operational management of peacetime crises, high alert, and ultimately war.
Municipalities and regions are central in the work to strengthen and develop civil defense. The Government has therefore, in the budget, among other things, made an investment of 100 million kronor annually from and including 2024 for increased grants to the municipalities' and regions' work with crisis preparedness and civil defense. Also in the budget bill for 2023, the Government added 100 million kronor to these actors, i.e., the municipalities.
Another central actor is the business sector. At the beginning of 2023, the Government appointed the cross-sectoral business council for total defense and crisis preparedness. During 2023, the Government has held four meetings in the council. At a strategic level, the business council shall work for mutual exchange of information and advice on issues of common importance for the business sector, the labor organizations, and the state. During the year, the council has discussed how the business sector can be engaged in the construction of the total defense as well as input to the upcoming national security strategy and how Sweden's supply preparedness can be strengthened.
A robust supply preparedness constitutes one of the pillars of a resilient civil defense. Given the current global situation with war in Europe and with the experiences from the pandemic in fresh memory, it is imperative to find fast tracks that ensure a high tempo in parallel with the long-term build-up of the supply preparedness.
The Government has therefore given two assignments, one to the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency, MSB, and the Swedish Agency for Economic and Innovation, to develop a model for a unified function for information to companies, and one to MSB and the National Board of Health and Welfare to carry out a supply analysis of the preparedness sector Health, care and social services. These assignments are some of several important steps to ensure that the work to secure a good supply preparedness is carried out expeditiously.
A significant part when it comes to building our preparedness and resilience is the individual. Society's ability to withstand crises and war depends on our personal preparedness, will to defend, and crisis resilience. The authorities can support this through education and information. MSB, for example, provides general advice for home preparedness, which is requested and appreciated by many. It is, however, important to clarify that in Sweden, everyone between 16 and 70 years of age is subject to total defense duty. This means that we all together, to the best of our ability, shall contribute to the total defense.
An important part in creating the conditions for society's continued development of civil defense is the work that Försvarsberedningen is now doing. In its report Kraftsamling, Försvarsberedningen describes the total defense's direction and the civil defense's design.
Later, the committee will submit its report on the military defense and the economic conditions for both the military and the civil defense. That presentation, together with other documents, will form the basis for the total defense bill on the continued direction and design of the total defense that the government intends to submit to the Riksdag in the autumn.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! A strong civil defense is built on the fact that everyone who can should contribute. It is important that the entire society is involved in creating resilience and that the government creates conditions for all different actors to build a strong civil defense.
I myself and many others have for some time now tried in various ways to prepare ourselves for times of crisis and war. We experienced what it was like to be in a crisis during the corona pandemic. And it was not many days we had managed to be out of the corona pandemic before the war in Ukraine broke out and we had a war in our immediate vicinity, in Europe. One of the biggest lessons from the corona pandemic was that what does not work in peacetime or normal conditions does not work during a crisis either.
Madam Speaker! It becomes very contradictory when this government puts Swedish healthcare and the regions into a financial crisis. The regions are forced to cut back on activities. One notice after another is issued. The situation is serious in almost all regions, not least my own. In Region Sörmland, the managers are relinquishing responsibility for the work environment because the situation is beyond control - at an emergency room when there is neither crisis nor a state of war in the country. At the same time, it is said that it is urgent to arm Sweden.
I know that the Minister for Civil Defence does not want to talk about either the municipalities' or the regions' economic conditions to provide welfare today. But it is not possible to talk about strengthening society's resilience and the importance of equipping society strongly for crisis and war while simultaneously dismissing the healthcare system's economic crisis, which this government has left the regions in.
The Minister usually quickly dismisses this by saying that money is being invested in healthcare in the budget. That is lucky, I think, but unfortunately it is obviously not enough in the long run when thousands of healthcare workers are being laid off because the deficits are so large that the extent is difficult to grasp and understand.
This is not something that only I or the Social Democrats are saying. The Corona Commission concluded, among other things, that one of the biggest deficiencies was a lack of staff and the right competence. Furthermore, the chairman of Vårdförbundet has been very clear: First, we must be able to manage the healthcare in peacetime. That says a great deal.
Now that it is urgent to bolster our defense capability, the minister responsible for civil defense cannot think it is right that the regions are struggling with issues of priorities and which healthcare facilities they should cut back on or close instead of planning and preparing for crisis and war. Does the minister not think that this is troublesome and that it would have been better to bolster healthcare instead of cutting it back when we now need to strengthen our defense capability?
Patrik Björck (S)
Madam Speaker! I want to pick up where Sofia Amloh left off and ask the questions to Carl-Oskar Bohlin that I previously asked of Minister Acko Ankarberg Johansson: Does the Minister consider that Sweden is better equipped for crisis or war when the Swedish healthcare system is laying off staff and has difficulty fulfilling its mission? If not, what measures does the Minister intend to take?
Somewhere here, the Minister for Civil Defence has the opportunity to give his perspective on this issue. We have previously had many and long debates with Minister Acko Ankarberg Johansson, and that is good; we appreciate that the Minister comes to the chamber and discusses healthcare with us Members of Parliament. But now it was specifically from a civil defence perspective that I submitted my interpellation to the Minister, and then I did not receive an answer. But now the Minister has the opportunity to give an answer regarding what measures the Minister intends to take.
In the answer that Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin gave Sofia Amloh, he said that the experience from Ukraine speaks of how the entire society is involved in creating resilience. We agree with that. It is a reasonable analysis. He also said that municipalities and regions are central in the work of strengthening and developing civil defense. We agree with that. It is a reasonable analysis.
He further raised the supply analysis that MSB and Socialstyrelsen have been tasked to carry out regarding health, care, and nursing. That is good and reasonable. But there is still no answer on how the Minister views how the healthcare crisis affects civil defense. I want to get an answer on that here and now.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! About a week ago, I had an interpellation debate with Civil Minister Erik Slottner. In it, I told about the crisis that occurred in Älvsbyn on January 4. It was a grim day. The temperature was minus 40. The power went out. After barely four hours, the mobile coverage disappeared. The home care service's alarms stopped working. The crisis management could not communicate with its organization. The general public was left without updates and contact with loved ones.
After further investigation, I managed to ascertain that the requirement for telecommunications operators is that they shall maintain reserve power for one hour for their mobile masts in central locations with more than 8,000 inhabitants and four hours outside of central locations.
In the debate we had, I mirrored this in the Minister for Civil Defence's words from Folk och Försvar—that speech which gave him 15 minutes in the spotlight where he, "with the authority of the office," "less wrapped and with an unvarnished clarity," speaks about the possibility of war in Sweden. He then posed questions that read as follows: "Are you a senior official in a preparedness authority?" "Are you a municipal councillor?" "Are you an employee?" "Are you a private individual?" But not a single question in that speech read: Are you a teleoperator?
Carl-Oskar Bohlin demands individual responsibility, and for those who want to know what he asked the private individuals on that day, a few days after the crisis in Älvsbyn, I can mention that the question was: "Have you taken responsibility for your home preparedness?" And if one wants to know what Carl-Oskar Bohlin requires in home preparedness, one can look in Expressen on New Year's Eve 2022. "Purely concretely, it means," he wrote there, "prepare yourself to be able to manage without society's help for a week, but preferably longer."
From me as an individual private person, from my parents, or from any individual private person whatsoever, the government and Carl-Oskar Bohlin demand that we manage for a week without electricity, without heat, without food, and without water. But from the telecommunications operators, they demand one hour.
Then I asked Erik Slottner: Is this reasonable, reflected in Carl-Oskar Bohlins words? Erik Slottner began his next contribution by urging me to interpellate the Minister for Civil Defence about this instead of him standing here in the chamber and guessing, as he said. When I saw that this interpellation debate was going to take place, I thought I would take the opportunity.
With greetings from Civil Minister Slottner, I would therefore like to ask the Minister for Civil Defence today: From me as an individual private person, from my parents, or from any individual private person at all, the government requires a week without electricity, without heat, and without food, but from the telecommunications operators, one requires an hour – is this reasonable, Carl-Oskar Bohlin?
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! I intended to return to the main question in this interpellation because neither the interpellator nor any other of the members of the Riksdag actually seem interested in dwelling on it: What do we do to provide the best conditions so that all actors can contribute to a strong civil defense?
The fact is that since this government took office, we can summarize approximately 80 points where we have taken measures to strengthen civil defense. Would it have been better if those measures had been taken much earlier, after the first invasion of Ukraine in 2014? Yes, of course. But the work has proceeded infinitely slowly over the last eight years.
What we have done during the past year is that we have activated the civil obligation in a fast track. We have carried out a special shelter initiative, the largest in 20-25 years since the Persson government decided that we should stop building shelters in this country. That is to say, we see a change in direction in the work with civil defense.
We have provided the regions with resources to begin working on their supply preparedness, an issue that was left completely to the wind during the pandemic and which de facto cost human lives when the regions were left without supply preparedness and without resources. Alongside this, the government has also made a decision to procure a special trauma care stockpile, a safety stockpile that Sweden previously lacked. We could have addressed this earlier. This government has now done so. Such a stockpile is a prerequisite for being able to handle, for example, a mass casualty incident on Swedish territory.
We are taking action to address the lack of cybersecurity in various parts of society. Unfortunately, it has become painfully clear what it means for a society that has not taken cybersecurity issues seriously enough.
We are working on a new cybersecurity strategy. We are working on reshaping the national cybersecurity center, which could function even better than what we have seen so far. We are adding more resources to the rescue services during high alert. We are adding more resources in this budget to handle cybersecurity issues. We are introducing a cyber campus to strengthen the supply of competence because the cyber domain is an absolutely indispensable part of modern civil defense.
We are also providing more money to municipalities and regions than the previous government did, both in general state grants and in targeted funds for the work with civil defense.
It always seems to be the case that the Social Democrats have more money than others when they are in opposition. But the history we come from shows that we have had underfunded infrastructure investments and underfunding in a long series of areas. It is with that starting point that the government is now taking on the work with civil defense and setting a higher bar than what was agreed upon in the cross-bloc defense decision in 2020.
We look forward to the Social Democrats working for an additional resource reinforcement for civil defense in the Defense Committee's final report. I hope that the Social Democrats' representatives will do so there as they do in this chamber tonight.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I was actually a bit surprised that I nevertheless received such a clear answer to my questions. One does not always get that from ministers, so I would like to thank you particularly for that.
I can state that the answer we received was that Swedish healthcare is not part of the civil defense. But it might be good enough to know that at this stage. Then the Minister says that we Social Democrats would have more money in opposition. I would say that we can finance all the proposals we have put forward. We have a budget that also adds up. It is just that we make different prioritizations in the budgets. That is the difference.
Mr. Speaker, now that we have received this answer, I think we should perhaps talk about some other issues.
The question of food and our own ability to provide food is fundamental to our robustness and to how strong our resilience is. It is vulnerable when it comes to our drinking water sources around the country. They are easy targets when it comes to disrupting cities with quite small means. When it comes to our food production, we as a country have a low degree of self-sufficiency.
In recent days, an investigation was presented that clearly describes the need for goals for the Swedish food preparedness, so that the entire food chain and society know what to plan for. An important proposal that the investigation highlights is that the costs for food preparedness should be borne by the state budget. The responsibility for security of supply cannot be shifted onto the business sector. Preparedness and storage cost, and far from all agricultural companies have such economic resources that there is room for this.
Then my question is: How does the government view that proposal?
The investigation addresses the need to maintain the food supply necessary for the population's survival, to ensure the most important societal functions, and to contribute to the military defense's capability, and sets goals for this. It is about how we can better secure the availability of food and essential goods during crises and war.
I also wonder what the government's position is on that proposal. And when can we expect to see proposals on the floor of the Riksdag that strengthen our own food security?
Patrik Björck (S)
Madam Speaker! Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin says in his answer here in the chamber that he will return to the main issue in the interpellation debate. The main issue was how the minister should act to create the best conditions so that all actors can contribute to a strong civil defense.
Then I find it very difficult to draw any other conclusion than the one Sofia Amloh draws. The Minister of State enumerates what the government prioritizes, Madam Speaker. It is reasonable things that are raised: shelters, civil defense duty, supply preparedness, trauma care stocks, cybersecurity, rescue services and funds for civil defense. It is absolutely good, but in all actors, Swedish healthcare is not included.
Madam Speaker! The question that I asked the Minister - which apparently did not fall within the Minister's way of understanding it - was: How is Swedish healthcare to fulfill its mission today when we have a healthcare crisis? Swedish healthcare today has difficulty fulfilling its mission in peacetime. How does the Minister for Civil Defence think about this from his area of responsibility and when it concerns taking responsibility for civil defence?
I do not think it is a very complicated question. I understand that it is a costly question and that it naturally requires some work for the Minister for the Government. But it cannot be so complicated that one completely misunderstands it and does not make an effort to answer it. I think it is worrying if we do not get an answer in the Minister's next contribution regarding how the healthcare crisis affects civil defense and what measures the Minister for Civil Defense intends to take.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! I find it astonishing that Carl-Oskar Bohlin begins his second speech by saying that neither the interpellor nor any other Member of Parliament is staying on the main issue in this debate. Neither healthcare nor telecommunications is therefore judged to be a main issue for a strong civil defense – is that how we are to interpret the Minister?
The Minister for Civil Defence spends his four minutes in the speaker's chair shifting the responsibility away from himself. The Minister for Civil Defence blames previous Social Democratic governments. I think it is obvious that the minister has made himself a bit too comfortable in the role of the opposition. He does not need to worry about this, because by 2026 at the latest, we will bring him back to where he feels comfortable. But now it is the minister who is responsible, and then we deserve answers to our questions without the minister trying to shift the responsibility away.
I asked the question: Does the Minister for Civil Defence think it is reasonable that the telecommunications operators do not need to maintain reserve power for more than an hour? I listened attentively, and I did not hear the Minister for Civil Defence mention telecommunications at all – neither in the first nor in the second contribution.
Now he has a chance in the next contribution to actually answer the question: Is it reasonable that the telecommunications operators only need to maintain one hour of reserve power and that the mobile coverage then goes down?
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! I spent perhaps 10-15 seconds stating that it has gone too slowly. Then I spent the remaining three minutes telling what the government is actually doing - a highlight of the approximately 80 measures we have managed to complete during the first year in government.
But let me begin by explaining, since there seem to be ambiguities there, how the responsibility is distributed in the government and how the government conducts its work. This should not come as a surprise to a party that has held government power for a number of parliamentary terms. One might think that they should know roughly how the Government Offices' work functions.
But it works in such a way that we have a number of departments with associated ministers who are responsible for specific areas of responsibility. Civil defense is the most cross-sectoral issue that we have to manage in society because it is about the entire society being able to function under great strain. And it is exactly as the members say: Both telecommunications and healthcare are indispensable parts of civil defense.
In the Government Offices, the work is distributed such that each minister is responsible for the preparedness issues within their department. That is the reason why the Minister for Health and Social Affairs was here earlier and answered questions regarding the work with healthcare preparedness. It is also the reason why the Minister for Civil Affairs, Erik Slottner, has previously answered interpellations concerning PTS. So, that is how the work is structured.
I am responsible for the sector of civil protection and have the coordinating responsibility for the work on civil defense throughout the Government Offices, and I also ensure that we have a purposeful and functioning total defense planning in the Government Offices.
Madam Speaker! The problem is that these issues have historically not been prioritized in the respective ministries. Now we see a great difference in that area. Among other things, the Minister for Health and Social Affairs is pushing forward and giving the National Board of Health and Welfare a long series of assignments when it comes to working with war as the dimensioning threat. This has, therefore, not occurred systematically previously.
But I will then try to answer Linus Sköld's concrete question: Is it reasonable? No, that can truly be discussed. I am the first to agree. The problem is only that in this area we are bound by an EU regulatory framework that sets this as a mandatory requirement for competition reasons.
I do not rule out that we need to carry out work to review the issues regarding the availability in mobile masts. At the same time, we must be aware that these requirements are dimensioned so that one can handle 80-90 percent of all power outages. It is therefore a matter of naturally having to weigh the cost of personal home preparedness against having redundancy that covers an even larger proportion of all power outages. But I am the first to agree that that question really may need to be discussed.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! We did not hear very much about the food supply and the proposals that came with the investigation the other day. They were quite clear proposals, so I just want to urge the Minister to comment on the proposals. I would really find it interesting to hear, so I hope that the Minister can devote a moment to it.
Madam Speaker! We have heard how the Minister, on a number of occasions, not only tonight, emphasizes the individual's responsibility in this. I absolutely agree with that. But it is a responsibility that is shared with the state and the government.
Right now, many households have emptied their savings accounts and pledged heirlooms. Still, one cannot put food on the table without incurring debt. We also know that the particularly vulnerable households are single women. Their possibilities of having cash on hand to manage when payment systems do not function are virtually non-existent.
I am convinced that there are very many who, in different ways, want to do their utmost to defend Sweden by being prepared for both crisis and war. But the conditions differ incredibly much.
We need to ensure together that Sweden is strengthened in several ways at the same time, but the conditions that are provided also say something about how fast it will go.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! Food preparedness is, in consequence of what I stated in my previous contribution, a matter that lies with Minister Peter Kullgren. It is also he who is the recipient of the investigation.
I do, however, agree that food preparedness is a very important issue for civil defense, and we have now taken the first steps to rebuild a Swedish supply preparedness. It is, however, something that, if it is to be fully implemented, will place large financial demands on the entire system. I hope and believe that this is an issue that the Defence Preparation Board, hopefully in broad agreement, is prepared to take on.
I also look forward to scrutinizing this investigation from my perspective, even though it lies with Minister Kullgren at the Ministry of Rural Affairs and Infrastructure. I do not, however, believe that I will undertake to review the investigation a few days after it has been submitted to the government.
To conclude, I can say that I agree with the interpellor that it is required that everyone takes their responsibility and participates. Let me just say that participation in civil defense should, of course, occur according to ability, that is to say, everyone who can participate should do so. The conditions for home preparedness look different, but if everyone who can take responsibility for their home preparedness does so, it will become much easier to help those who have more difficulty taking responsibility for their home preparedness.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.