Response to interpellation 2023/24:739 on the management of abandoned properties and the revision of the Pre-emption Act
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 management of abandoned properties and the revision of the pre-emption act. KD considers it important to address the problem to create safe communities 1 2 and argues that municipalities can already expropriate grossly neglected properties 3 2. KD argues that previous grounds for pre-emption did not have a direct connection to abandoned properties but concerned, among other things, civil defense and organized crime 4, and is prepared to listen to proposals on strengthening the expropriation act 2. S argues that current measures are insufficient as unserious owners can avoid responsibility 5. S wants more powerful tools for rapid interventions 5 and considers that municipalities need financial support from the state 6 7. S also considers that there is a need to further discuss the expropriation act 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 Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! Denis Begic has asked me if I consider that the current and proposed measures in the investigations and directives that I mentioned in a previous answer to a question can facilitate the management of abandoned properties. Denis Begic has further asked me if there are plans to introduce specific legislative proposals or rules that give the municipalities increased powers to act quickly against abandoned and derelict properties. Additionally, Denis Begic has asked me how I assess that the new proposals affect the municipalities' opportunities to proactively manage and develop properties, especially considering abandoned or unmaintained properties that negatively affect local community development. Finally, Denis Begic has asked me how I and the government intend to ensure that the municipalities have sufficient resources and powers to manage and revitalize derelict property stocks to promote social and economic welfare within their boundaries.
Initially, I want to say that I share Denis Begic's view that it is important to address the problem with abandoned and dilapidated properties. All people should have the opportunity to live and reside in a society that is safe and attractive.
The building control investigation proposes in the report Order and Order - reinforced and reliable building control a reinforced control during the management phase in order for the maintenance requirement to be actually complied with.
In the report, it is proposed that a new tool be introduced in the system to be designated as a control order. A control order shall give the building committees the opportunity to order the owner or the holder of the right of use of the building to ensure that the building is inspected to ensure that the maintenance requirements that already apply are met. The report has been referred, and the referral period expired on 26 April. The proposals are now being prepared in the Government Offices.
But it is not only technical aspects that must be maintained. A building exists in a context and is dependent on how the surroundings function.
Boverket conducted a mapping in 2021 of Swedish experiences of local, long-term, and place-based collaboration between property owners, businesses, and the public in order to combat exclusion, create safer residential areas, and strengthen the local business community. The mapping indicates that it is important to support that form of local place-based collaboration and that industry organizations, authorities, and interviewees with experience of different forms of place-based collaboration see a need for place-based collaboration.
The Government has, through the committee directive Measures for strengthened safety in the built environment, appointed an investigation to analyze and propose to what extent cooperation should be mandatory between the public sector and property owners in order to strengthen safety in the built environment. The assignment shall be reported by January 17, 2025, at the latest.
Furthermore, the government decided in June 2022 on the committee directive A new right of first refusal, which subsequently received a partially changed direction through additional directives decided in May 2023. The additional directives mean, among other things, that the investigator shall propose a right of first refusal basis that facilitates the civil defense's protection and respectively enables the municipalities to counter organized crime. The investigation shall be reported by June 1, 2024, at the latest. The government cannot anticipate the investigation's proposals or reasoning. It should, however, be noted that there is currently no applicable right of first refusal law, why the upcoming proposals from the investigation reasonably cannot entail any deterioration regarding the right of first refusal.
The Government does not rule out further initiatives in the future to address the problem of abandoned properties.
Denis Begic (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Minister, for the answers!
I recently sent a question to the Minister regarding the acute situation with abandoned properties in Ställdalen. I was actually a bit surprised by the answer I received. It made me wonder if I had phrased the question incorrectly or if the Minister did not quite understand what I was asking about. In the answer, he did not at all seem to understand or address the problems that are experienced in, among other places, Ställdalen, where abandoned properties create not only an eyesore but also serious social and safety problems for the residents. Therefore, I thought that an interpellation debate might be able to clear up some of the question marks.
In his answer, Madam Speaker, the minister claims that the government takes this seriously. But I must be honest and say that the measures the minister refers to only scratch the surface of the problems. It is obvious that there is a gap between what the government says and the measures that are actually taken. We need real solutions, as this situation is escalating not only in Ställdalen but actually across the entire country.
I want to elaborate on what the Minister refers to when he mentions the Building Control Inquiry and its proposals regarding control orders.
A control order is a tool that, in theory, is intended to ensure that responsible property owners follow maintenance requirements. But the investigation does not address unserious property owners who do not take their responsibility. What happens then to those who do not follow the rules? Well, they can easily transfer the property to a family member. Then the entire process starts over. This means yet another round in the authorities' swamp, where the property owner slips away from responsibility.
This, Mr. Speaker, shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the core of the problem. We certainly need strengthened controls; that is true. But far more important than that is that we get tools that make it possible to intervene quickly and effectively against those who obviously break the rules. We are not just talking about strengthening the regulatory framework; we must also be able to act decisively immediately when these rules are violated. It requires a more powerful system that stops unserious property owners from exploiting loopholes in the legislation.
Another point that the Minister raises in his answer is the inquiry into spatial cooperation. I understand that the Minister cannot anticipate the results of the inquiry, but I must ask the question. How does the Minister believe this inquiry will be able to help the municipalities that are already today suffering under the burden of unserious landlords and property owners? We see municipalities, especially in rural areas, struggling with these issues here and now. Those municipalities need concrete tools and resources to be able to act effectively against the problems that plague them. Shall we let them wait until 2025, when the inquiry is to be completed? One can do that, but one can also try to do something now.
Furthermore, I must ask in what way the government is prepared to support the municipalities while awaiting the results of the investigation. It is of the utmost importance that the government does not only present plans for future measures but also provides support to the municipalities now.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! The Member asks about property owners who do not follow the supervision requirements that already exist, about what would be the next step if the enforcement order proposed by the Byggkontrollutredningen were to be implemented, and what tools are available.
There is a tool in place now regarding legislation. The municipality can, with the support of current legislation, expropriate grossly neglected properties. According to Chapter 2, Section 7 of the Expropriation Act, tools are provided for the compulsory takeover, preferably by the public from a private individual, of neglected properties.
When it comes to the issue of site cooperation, it is as follows, Madam Speaker, that I cannot comment on individual cases. I answer the question when it concerns neglected and abandoned properties. There, it is important to see what can be done so that property owners who do not take their responsibility voluntarily shall be included in site cooperation.
In order to uplift an area and contribute to increased safety, the purpose of the investigation is to produce a constitutional basis that establishes a responsibility that also becomes mandatory and to produce a proposal on how such a basis should look. That is what the investigation is working on.
The Leader of the Opposition also raises the pre-emption act and its revision in his interpellation, Madam Speaker. No such possibility exists today, so it can hardly be worse with the very clear focus that the government has made in the supplementary directive on the needs of civil defense and the fight against organized crime.
I am, Madam Speaker, a little curious as to which of the pre-emption grounds that were in the directive before we submitted the supplementary directive had hit the situation in question. There was no specific pre-emption ground for just abandoned properties included, but the focus that is now being made concerns organized crime. One cannot, Madam Speaker, on a general level exclude that the real estate stock is used as part of organized crime. I cannot anticipate that investigation, but this means that one gets a clearer focus on just organized crime and its use of the real estate stock and on the possibilities to step in there and use the pre-emption legislation.
Regardless of the pre-emption legislation and what different grounds exist for it, this is only possible when a property is out for sale. I will therefore return to the current legislation, Madam Speaker, where the Expropriation Act provides tools for the compulsory takeover of, for example, neglected properties. Municipalities already have the possibility to do this according to current legislation.
Denis Begic (S)
Madam Speaker! I believe that the Minister and I still do not understand each other a hundred percent. There may be a need to talk about this a few more times and perhaps even meet and discuss.
What I am talking about is when a property owner is so irresponsible that, before it is time for a takeover, they transfer the property to a family member. Then the municipality and the authorities have the responsibility to start over from the beginning, as I mentioned in my speech.
We Social Democrats hoped, Madam Speaker, that one of the tools would be precisely the inquiry into the pre-emption laws. We gave the inquiry the directive that municipalities should be able to have priority to purchase. In the directive that the Minister presented, the municipalities' possibility of pre-emption was removed when a property is to be sold. Therefore, it is important for me to ask the Minister why the municipalities' right of pre-emption was chosen out in the latest proposal submitted. What was the purpose of this decision?
I understand that the starting point is organized crime, but for small municipalities, it is not just about organized crime. It is about the fact that they cannot take care of their centers. How are our municipalities expected to be able to deal with unserious property owners when they are deprived of such tools?
I believe that the minister thinks that the market might solve this issue. This is something I am only asserting now, but I believe it. I often hear from the minister's party comrades that the market will solve a number of problems. I do not believe that the market will solve the problems in these cases. The market only cares about how much money one earns.
That is why politics exists. It is important that politicians design rules that govern market forces in order to protect our citizens and their living environments. We need political measures and legislation that reflect our societies' needs and not just economic interests.
Madam Speaker! Our municipalities, especially those in rural areas, face major challenges regarding the issue of abandoned properties. These municipalities will be doubly affected. They must not only handle the immediate problem but probably also cover the costs of remediation and everything else regarding these properties. It will occur at the expense of the municipalities' taxpayers, without any financial assistance from any property owner.
That is why it is crucial that the government acts to, for example, reintroduce and increase the grants and ensure that these buildings are renovated and restored with financial support from the state. This is not just an investment in a property; it is an investment in our communities.
Without state support, many of these projects will not become a reality. Property owners who have neglected their responsibility will likely not bear the costs. We have seen that in many municipalities. It is therefore up to us politicians in this chamber to consider whether state support is needed for these municipalities, which existed once upon a time.
We can continue to ignore the problems, or we can act and together do something about them. For me, this is not just a cost but a necessary investment, especially in our small municipalities and in rural municipalities. My question is: Is the government also prepared to support the small municipalities both by helping to take care of these properties and through financial support?
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! I genuinely appreciate the member's commitment to the issue. As I said initially in my response, I share the view that it is important to address the problem of abandoned and dilapidated properties. It affects the local environment. Risks and insecurity can arise - there are various examples of this. Even though I cannot comment on individual cases, all people should of course have the opportunity to live and reside in a society that is safe, pleasant, and attractive. This is therefore important.
I have in no way said that the market should solve this itself, as the member claims. On the contrary, the investigation mandate regarding site cooperation is a way to not let all of this happen on a voluntary basis. Instead, we want to develop a proposal for what a mandatory responsibility could look like. It will, as I envision it, be applicable in areas where there may be actors who take responsibility but a property owner who does not, and who thereby reduces an area's attractiveness and safety. There, a possibility for a mandate is needed, and this is what is now being investigated. It may not be applicable in all situations, but it is an important part of the work regarding properties.
When it comes to the pre-emption legislation and the investigation that is now working based on the supplementary directive that the government has decided on, it is, as we see it, important to focus on organized crime and on the needs of civil defense.
The question I asked earlier is hanging a bit in the air. It was not a free field, so to speak, for the municipalities, but there were grounds for pre-emption that even the previous government included in the directives to the investigation. I am curious to hear from the member which of the grounds for pre-emption in the previous directive would have applied to the specific situations that this interpellation debate is about.
When it comes to continued talks to understand each other, I am of course not against it. This is an important issue. If the member has identified something regarding the legislation concerning the Expropriation Act and the possibility to forcibly take over neglected properties, I am of course prepared to listen, Madam Speaker. But there is, therefore, legislation that the municipalities can use and rely on to expropriate grossly neglected properties. If it needs to be changed or strengthened, according to the member's view, I am prepared to listen in this interpellation debate to hear what type of measures the member sees as would be needed.
According to the Expropriation Act, there is a possibility to forcibly take over a neglected property without waiting for it to be put up for sale, which the right of first refusal by definition requires. This is about being able to take over neglected properties faster than via the right of first refusal legislation. There is already today legislation that gives municipalities this possibility.
Denis Begic (S)
Madam Speaker! First, I should say that there is probably a need for me to return regarding this law, as there is also a fair amount of underlying material that we could discuss in order to be able to do something about this. I have started to look a bit more closely at it, so there will probably soon be an interpellation debate on the expropriation act as well.
When it comes to the pre-emption rights act, the investigation could not continue with the same directives as from the beginning. Therefore, we do not know whether a municipality where a property owner sells properties to his brother, son, mother, or someone else could have been able to say stop and buy that property instead of transferring it.
I note, in any case, that the Minister seems to be interested in the issue and sees a need to discuss it further, and so do I. I am truly passionate about it. For me, this is not just a peripheral issue. It stands between city and country, I perceive it as such. It is often in our countryside that this problem arises.
I think it is regrettable that we will not see support and help for the municipalities that are currently suffering from this. There is so much problematic surrounding these properties - we see smashed windows and doors and centers that are completely deserted where there once was a very lively countryside.
I would like to thank the Minister for the answers and the debate. There is truly a need for us to continue discussing this and ensure that our municipalities and their inhabitants live safely.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! I return to the grounds for pre-emption. The grounds that the previous directive established that the investigation should look at were grounds for pre-emption that facilitate the acquisition of key properties to enable business establishments and business expansions for land access to socially important climate adaptation measures, to reduce and counteract segregation, and to design and facilitate for information gathering about the property market.
The pre-emption grounds that were there concerned key properties, business establishments and climate adaptation measures and reducing and counteracting segregation. In addition to that, there was also what we reinforced, namely the reconstruction and development of civil defense. In the supplementary directive, we also added the work against organized crime, when we removed the others.
None of these, however, provide any direct connection to abandoned properties, Madam Speaker. That is why I previously asked the member which of the previous grounds for pre-emption had met the situation we are now discussing. That is why I refer to the current legislation regarding the Expropriation Act, which provides municipalities with the possibility and tools to forcibly take over neglected properties.
Madam Speaker! I do not understand that the pre-emption grounds, even those established by the previous government, would have met the situations that I perceive the member has a genuine commitment to. It is rather the expropriation act that gives the municipalities the possibility to forcibly take over neglected properties.
I naturally welcome further dialogue regarding this. It is important to deal with the problems to achieve a better functioning situation for this type of measure, but there is already legislation that the municipalities can apply.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.