Response to interpellation 2023/24:599 on the focus on gender equality in aid
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the focus on equality in aid. M argues that equality is a Swedish core value 1 and that the government creates better conditions through a predictable budget 1. M emphasizes that Sweden is far ahead 2, focuses on concrete results rather than labels 2 and wants to increase efficiency by reducing the number of goals 3. M believes that aid funds can be moved to more efficient organizations 3, that collaborations with companies can create added value 3 and that investments in market economy lift people out of poverty 3 4. M claims that Sweden allocates significantly more to equality than other countries 4. V argues that equality is receding since the feminist foreign policy has been abolished 5. V claims that private sector aid lacks an equality focus 6 and that clear guidelines, concrete strategies and sufficient funds are required for the aid to contribute to equality 6 7. V believes that it is not effective to terminate agreements with civil society organizations that support women's rights organizations 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 Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Lotta Johnsson Fornarve has asked me about how the removal of the one percent goal and the reduced aid affect the gender equality work within Swedish aid and how the gender equality perspective in Swedish aid is affected by the government's reallocation of aid in connection with the new reform agenda. She has also asked me whether I will take the initiative for a plan for how the gender equality perspective shall be integrated within all parts of the aid and foreign policy, and in what way I will work to ensure that an increased share of private sector aid does not contribute to a reduced gender equality focus within Swedish aid.
Swedish aid policy remains generous. With an aid budget for 2023-2026 of approximately 56 billion kronor per year and a cap on migration offsets (maximum 8 percent of the aid budget), the government has created better conditions to be able to plan a predictable and effective operation. This increased predictability also facilitates the financing of and the work with gender equality in aid.
Equality is a Swedish core value, which is stated in the budget bill as well as in this year's foreign policy declaration. This is, contrary to what Johnsson Fornarve claims, more than "words on a piece of paper".
The government works in several ways to ensure that the gender equality perspective is integrated throughout foreign and aid policy. Not least, Sweden is a strong voice to counter all forms of sexual and gender-related violence, as well as norms and customs that limit girls' and women's freedom and self-determination. We work actively to strengthen women's and girls' self-determination, economic empowerment, and educational opportunities, and to increase access to SRHR, including modern contraceptives as well as safe and legal abortion.
The gender equality perspective is also clearly integrated into the government's ambition to increase synergies between development cooperation and business promotion. Female entrepreneurship, access to microloans, and participation in the local business sector are absolutely crucial for increasing gender equality in developing countries. Only by allowing women to participate in the economy on the same terms as men can we increase women's economic empowerment in the long term. Female entrepreneurship is also a sub-goal in the government's new foreign trade strategy.
Women's and girls' freedom to decide over their own lives and the opportunity to participate in and shape society on the same terms as men and boys is not just a goal in itself. The work for sexual and reproductive health and rights, for increased economic empowerment, against child marriage and against gender-related violence, including in conflict situations, are factors that also strengthen the fulfillment of the development cooperation's goals across the board.
In societies where women take a larger share of the local economy, we also see positive effects. Research shows that female entrepreneurs and companies with women in high positions are less likely to accept bribes. These issues are therefore of particular relevance also for achieving the goals of reduced corruption in developing countries.
Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer to my interpellation.
Equality is in decline globally. The rights of girls, women, and LGBTQ people are under strong attack. The situation worsened during the covid pandemic as female genital mutilation, violence against women of all ages, and child marriages increased. Many girls never returned to school.
When equality is under attack, Sweden must take the lead and seriously stand up for the rights of girls and women. The Minister points out that equality is a Swedish core value and mentions several other areas of equality. They are, of course, good and beautiful words, but words are not enough. For me and the Vänsterpartiet, it is obvious that the work for equality is fully integrated into Swedish aid. We know that equality is an important prerequisite for real and sustainable development.
It is therefore strange that the government, as a first measure, abolished the feminist foreign policy, which was not just a label as the government claimed, but it has had great significance for increasing equality in foreign policy and in international aid. It has also led to several countries following the Swedish example and adopting a feminist foreign policy. This is noted, among other things, in a report by the government's own committee EBA. Unfortunately, we can now observe that the total proportion of Swedish aid with an equality component decreases from 82 percent of the budget with equality as a whole or partial goal in 2021 to 74 percent in 2023. Sida thus does not achieve the goal in the EU's action plan for equality, which is 85 percent, according to Sida's own annual report.
This is an alarming signal, if one considers equality to be a core value. Feminist foreign policy was intended to ensure that the gender perspective would permeate all foreign and aid policy, not just be seen as a side issue. The gender perspective needs to permeate all areas, whether it concerns infrastructure, trade, education, healthcare, water and sanitation, power and influence, or peace and security. That perspective is missing in the government's aid policy. Can the minister guarantee here and now that the gender perspective will permeate all aid policy? It would be interesting to get an answer to that.
It is a bit difficult to take the government's ambitions for equality seriously when the financial support for equality and SRHR is not increasing, but rather appears to be decreasing in the government's initiatives. The appropriations to the UN system's most important body for equality issues, UN Women, have been halved. UNFPA, which does incredibly important work for SRHR, has also seen its support reduced by a quarter. Funds for women's rights organizations' and civil society organizations' work for women, peace, and security have disappeared from the agenda. According to Sida's budget forecast for 2025-2027, the global strategies risk being significantly reduced in the budget because it is proposed that appropriation item 34 should be reduced by 45 percent in 2027. This includes, among other things, the global equality strategy and strategies linked to SRHR and education.
The planned separate global strategy for work with SRHR appears to have been scrapped. In my eyes, this is a deprioritization of the gender equality work. Why are you cutting the important gender equality aid? Where are the impact assessments of the changes in the aid?
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank Lotta Johnsson Fornarve for the interpellation on this important issue.
Just equality and SRHR issues are prioritized for the government. It is fundamentally a Swedish core value. The vast majority of Swedes, nearly 100 percent, think the issues are completely decisive. It is also why Sweden continues to be so far ahead in the work, and it is something that I often have confirmed, for example as recently as this autumn during the opening of the UN General Assembly, where I myself participated in a seminar on SRHR issues.
Swedish aid is generous. Sweden is one of five countries in the world that reaches the UN goal of 0.7 percent of GNI. We can also see that Sweden distinguishes itself from most other countries, in that a much larger proportion of Swedish aid goes to different types of equality initiatives than for most other countries. The average for the proportion of interventions with equality as a component, as a main goal or sub-goal, is 43 percent in OECD-DAC. In Sweden, we are at 74 percent, which is a very large difference. Sweden distinguishes itself in a positive way.
I can also state that Sweden ranks at the top even regarding the proportion of initiatives with equality as a main goal. It was 12 percent last year. Looking at the average among OECD-DAC member countries, it was 4 percent. The proportion is three times larger in Sweden than the average. Last year, equality was also a thematic area in 32 of 46 strategies.
The image that Lotta Johnsson Fornarve tries to establish with this interpellation—that the issue would not be prioritized, that it would be a major shift from before—is actually not quite true, but rather it is wrong. Sweden continues to be a leading actor in the field.
The Government has the ambition to place greater focus on the content of the aid policy, the transparency of the aid policy and, above all, the results of the aid policy rather than on what different types of labels one uses.
It is completely true that the government does not use the term feminist foreign policy. We have had to devote time and effort to explaining what feminist foreign policy actually means, rather than focusing on the concrete content. Here, our neighboring countries' attitudes are also telling, despite an identical view on this. The perception is not actually Swedish, but one could describe it as a Nordic consensus. But they have not adopted the concept; instead, they have focused on the content and the results rather than the label. It is a line that the Swedish government also considers wise. Therefore, we are focusing on that path forward.
Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for the further answer from the Minister. I am nevertheless glad that the Minister says that equality is a prioritized core value.
That Sweden is far ahead is true in some ways, but we still see how equality in Sweden is de facto receding. We also see how resources to important equality organizations, for example UN Women, are being cut. It worries me. These are worrying signals when the work that is now considered so important is actually going in the wrong direction. If equality is to permeate all aid, it must be included in the reform agenda in a clear way. There must be directives, guidelines, on this. I simply miss the holistic perspective. I would like to have an answer to the question of whether the minister wants to see that equality should permeate all forms of aid.
In what way do girls and women in the world benefit from a reduced aid and an aid that is to be based on Swedish interests?
In what way does Swedish aid contribute to increased equality by focusing the aid on areas with reduced focus on equality?
The government wants, for example, to increase the proportion of private sector aid. A study from EBA, the Expert Authority for Aid Analysis, shows that only 2 percent of private sector aid has a gender equality focus. This is to be compared with 40 percent in the regular bilateral aid. The same applies to the closer link between aid and trade, where the inequality between women and men risks being reinforced.
A holistic approach is simply needed. Clear guidelines are needed that the gender perspective shall permeate all aid.
The Minister has convinced himself that I am against everything that is spelled trade and business. That is wrong. But the aid should not benefit Swedish interests primarily, but the recipient's.
I have nothing against aid being used to, for example, promote female entrepreneurship in rural areas in Africa. We know that it is wise policy that benefits not only the woman herself but her entire family and the surrounding community. But the aid must be designed according to the needs that exist in the recipient country, and Sweden needs to ensure women's full ownership and participation in the design of the aid.
It is also extremely important to support women's rights organizations and women-led organizations through aid. They are best suited to assess and ensure the needs of women and girls and to work against gender-based violence and harmful norms and to increase women's influence.
It is therefore extremely worrying that the support for civil society organizations both in Sweden and globally is now threatened by the government's new strategy regarding the folk movement support. Sida has indeed terminated the agreements with a long row of civil society organizations, and in that way, one risks that over 1,700 projects in 90 countries are lost. Many are intended to support just women activists.
Swedish aid is also needed in the most vulnerable and conflict-affected countries, for it is girls and women who are hit hardest in crises. It is important that aid is not withdrawn from countries such as Afghanistan and Palestine.
I think it is unfortunate that Sweden has withdrawn its bilateral support to four of the world's most vulnerable countries – Mali, Burkina Faso, Cambodia and South Sudan. It will affect thousands of women in these countries through, among other things, poorer access to healthcare, health care and maternity care and to clean water and sanitation.
For Swedish aid to seriously contribute to equality in the world, more than words on a piece of paper are required. It requires active work, concrete strategies and plans, sufficient funds, long-term commitment and, above all, political will.
I still lack answers. Where are the consequence analyses? And will the Minister take the initiative for a plan on how the gender equality perspective shall be integrated into all parts of aid and foreign policy, including the private sector and trade?
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! We are now breaking new ground with the reorganization of the Swedish aid policy. It has received much criticism for being too fragmented, for having too many goals, for having too little oversight, and for the fact that transparency has decreased.
We must remember one thing: Ultimately, it is tax money from Swedish taxpayers, who every year spend 56 billion kronor on this area. They have a right to oversight and transparency.
It is also about a responsibility towards the recipient countries. They must know that our aid is always used in the most effective ways.
Part of that work is to reduce the large number of goals that have existed. In a situation where everything is prioritized and Sweden is to do everything with masses of goals in all countries simultaneously – simplified a bit but roughly so – one can ask the question: What is actually the Swedish added value?
We have a different view on aid. We want it to be something where we can create clear added value and contribute something that is unique, something that we are very good at. Ultimately, we must always ask ourselves how we ensure that the aid is used most effectively.
That includes, for example, that if organizations show poor results, do not listen to Swedish priorities and are not interested in working together with us, yes, then it can happen that aid funds will be moved to other organizations that are more effective.
UN Women is such an example. It is an organization that has received a lot of criticism for precisely inefficiency. The handling of the terrorist organization Hamas' attack on Israel and the reluctance to condemn it that existed within UN Women for a long time clearly does not speak to the organization's advantage either.
We must constantly, as a responsible donor - for with large aid comes also large responsibility - ask ourselves how we use the funds in the most effective way.
I also just want to mention the question of who is to benefit. I just want to urge Lotta Johnsson Fornarve to read our reform agenda, because the very first sentence in it answers the question asked here and clarifies that the very idea of having an aid [budget] is to help the recipient countries. Otherwise, one would never even have come up with the idea of allocating 56 billion kronor to aid. If it had only been about benefiting Swedish companies, one would have perhaps invested in some research proposal or lowered the tax or something of the sort. That is clear and plain there.
Perhaps, in contrast to the politics that the Left Party stands for, I see that aid and trade are linked. I see that we can create added value through cooperation. If it is the case that Swedish companies can help in, for example, the important health work or the work with green transition, and that can also benefit Sweden and Swedish innovation, Swedish entrepreneurship and Swedish jobs, then I do not intend to apologize for that.
I am surprised by how sensitive this issue is. Sweden has worked this way for many years in connection with the multilateral development banks. I have never heard any criticism there. But just when one speaks about perhaps also Swedish companies should be able to take part here, it becomes very sensitive. I have lost count of how many questions I have received about this. It is something that is causing friction here.
I can conclude by saying that SRHR issues are a high priority for the government. They characterized much of my visit to Liberia last summer. They also played a large part in the trip to Bangladesh a few weeks ago. In a few weeks, I will also travel to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in Africa, where this will characterize much of our program.
Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)
Madam Speaker! I cannot understand how it can be effective to terminate entered agreements, as Sida has now done, with a long line of civil society organizations whose support largely goes to women's rights organizations around the world and in that way create great concern in both Sweden and the recipient country. I cannot see how it is effective. Much of this aid has been incredibly good, successful, and appreciated.
I also don't get a clear answer, I think, on whether equality is to be integrated in all areas regarding aid.
We see now that equality is in decline globally. It is therefore required that Sweden stands up for the rights of women and girls seriously and for real, not just with words. It is difficult to see that when the government has no clear structure for equality work and there are no clear guidelines in the reform agenda for how equality work should permeate all aid activities.
It is also difficult to believe the government's talk that Swedish aid should be a clear force for equality and that the focus should be on promoting women's and girls' opportunities to freely decide over their lives and bodies and on strengthening women's and girls' economic empowerment when no economic means are added to the equality work but instead support is cut - that is actually what is happening - to important organizations and strategies that have equality as their focus.
For Swedish aid to seriously contribute to equality in the world, more than words on a piece of paper are required. It requires active work, concrete strategies and plans, sufficient funds, long-term perspective and, above all, political will.
Again: Where are the consequence analyses? And will the government take the initiative for a plan on how the gender equality perspective shall be integrated within all parts of the aid and foreign policy?
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Yes, Sweden continues to be a world leader in this area. It is noticeable, for example, when one visits the UN. One receives a lot of appreciation for Sweden's work here. The figures also show that we allocate much more of our aid budget to this important area than actually all other corresponding countries.
Equality continues to be prioritized, not least now when we are breaking entirely new ground and leaving the old aid policy, where aid was aid and trade was trade, and instead trying to find synergies. I believe that it will have positive effects even for equality.
We see that many countries that for many years have received very large sums in Swedish aid continue to be poor and continue to be dependent on aid. We also unfortunately know that in many of those countries, it is women who are affected the most.
When we now strive to invest more in business, trade, entrepreneurship and market economy, it is with the ambition that more countries should be able to undertake the type of growth journey that Sweden has undertaken. It will lift more people out of poverty and also have a positive impact on the important work on equality.
I would like to thank Lotta Johnsson Fornarve with this for an important interpellation.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.