Response to interpellation 2023/24:834 on threats to local democracy

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is pleasant to be back here in the chamber again after a few months' break from the debate side.

First, I want to say that one of the government's most important tasks is to defend Swedish democracy and our open society. We politicians who participate in the public debate have a particularly great responsibility to lead by example and to be objective and clear both with our messages and with who we are as senders. This applies regardless of in which forums the debate takes place, including social media.

The spreading of false information, rumors, disinformation, and hate and threats contributes to increasing contradictions in society, eroding trust in our institutions and, not least, making it more difficult for our local politicians to carry out their mandates.

Party support is a part of local democracy in Sweden. According to the Local Government Act (2017:725), municipalities and regions may provide support to political parties to strengthen their position in local democracy. It is the municipal council that decides on the extent and the forms of the support. Before the 2014-2018 mandate period, the Local Government Act's rules on party support were changed in order, among other things, to clarify the purpose of the support and improve the reporting of how it is used.

Every year, recipients of party funding must submit a written account of how the funding has been used. A special auditor assesses whether the account provides a fair picture of how the recipient has used the funding. If a party does not submit any account or audit report, the council can decide that money shall not be paid out to that recipient. The purpose is to create transparency regarding each party's use of funding, which provides the public and the media with a basis for debate on the issue. Such debates are currently ongoing in different parts of the country, so the provisions seem to have achieved their purpose.

I therefore do not see at the present time that there is a need to change the provisions of the Local Government Act regarding party funding, but I and the government will, of course, continue to follow the issue.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! It is now clear to everyone that the Sweden Democrats operate troll factories, fake accounts that spread threats, hate, and lies. The purpose is, of course, to try to manipulate and create division. It affects democracy. It affects all of us in Sweden.

In the debate on threats and hate online, it can sometimes feel as if it is only politicians at the national level who are affected, but unfortunately, that is not the case. This affects individuals, vulnerable groups and organizations, and it also affects local politicians across the country.

We know that this silences, makes people afraid to participate in debates on different forums and prevents more people from wanting to engage in politics in the future. These are very serious consequences. Just because the group of elected representatives is so often missed, I wanted to raise this issue.

I also asked the question to the Minister for Civil Affairs during a question period in the spring. At that time, the Minister for Civil Affairs answered that too little time had passed for him to be able to answer. Therefore, I submitted this interpellation to give the Minister for Civil Affairs time to reflect and answer my question from the question period.

It is naturally the case that the second-largest party in Sweden, Sverigedemokraterna, commits a serious democratic offense with the troll accounts and troll factories that exist. The investigation shows that one does not just have fake accounts on social media, but that one has many. This affects the entire debate in Sweden.

The reason why I also raise the question of the party subsidy in the same interpellation is that - just as we previously suspected - a large part of the party subsidy that the Sverigedemokraterna have received to carry out local work is passed on to the party centrally. This means that one also pays for the troll factories that the party is responsible for.

What then is party funding, and why have I taken it up seriously? We have free parties, free news reporting and opinion-forming, and these are truly fundamental elements in a democracy. In this, the parties play a major role. They have an important role as opinion-formers, and they provide voters with alternative knowledge and everything else that is needed. Therefore, the party funding is also important for the parties to be able to work not only in the short term but also in the long term, so that they know they have the finances to carry out their party work.

In 2014, the legislation was tightened, and a further tightening has been made. The law was tightened to truly strengthen how party financing should look in order to benefit democracy locally. But we have seen examples, and it has been raised in various municipalities, that the party support has actually not been used for what it is intended for. I hope that the Minister for Civil Affairs, who has responsibility for municipalities and regions, has a great interest in local democracy. Therefore, these issues are very important to take up.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! I agree with Eva Lindh's point that these are important issues, and the questions may not always receive the debate and the space that local democracy deserves. I thank the member for having raised the issues in the Riksdag.

The government parties and government representatives have been clear in distancing themselves from that type of fake accounts that were highlighted in May, if I remember correctly. I think the government was very clear in its communication.

Then the question is how the legislation should be designed so that it is thereby compatible with freedom of expression and so on. Fake accounts cannot be isolated to a political party and a phenomenon. We know that fake accounts occur very much in social media, and I am afraid that it harms democracy and the flow. I think that one should be able to trust that the flow one consumes is also correct. It naturally harms the trust for not least the public conversation. There the government has been clear.

Now the question is posed to me to discuss how democracy at the local level can be protected. We have signaled a change in the Local Government Act regarding the protection for local politicians. Municipalities shall have greater responsibility to strengthen the protection for certain elected officials. It is important. Many local politicians feel vulnerable and insecure, and many unfortunately quit prematurely precisely because they are subjected to too many threats and external pressure. It is serious.

I am pleased that we can move forward with the petition we have received from Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner and turn it into legislation. We have both referred to the amendment which means that the parties must report to the municipal council what their party funds are used for before they can then pay out the money. It is not entirely unusual that a part of the party support goes to the national level to, among other things, finance the service that many local and regional districts and branches receive from the national level. It is in itself nothing odd, but it occurs widely.

On the many municipal trips I take around Sweden, I meet many municipal councilors. But the question of fake accounts or social media's influence on democracy has never come up. It does not seem to be an pressing problem if we ask the municipal political representatives across Sweden. It is important to include this here.

A parliamentary committee has now been appointed, which Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer is responsible for, which shall review party financing, and it is parliamentarilly appointed. Then we will see if the committee will submit proposals to further increase transparency or to place even greater requirements on those who receive party contributions. I am a bit unsure exactly when the report is to be submitted, but the committee has worked for just over a year, since the summer of 2023.

We will have to see what the committee comes to. It is very possible that it sees a need to change the Local Government Act. In that case, we will have to take that ball then and there. As long as that committee is sitting, I think I will let it work in peace and quiet for a while longer.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden's democracy must stand strong in the entire country, and it must cost resources, commitment, and effort to truly stand up for local democracy. It is that which builds the whole country.

Is this a problem? I believe that the Minister for Civil Affairs and I have heard different things. I often hear things not only from party colleagues but also from people who are worried and who, like I have experienced, have faced threats and hate online. It becomes clear that it comes from fake accounts.

Sometimes it is difficult to see, and sometimes it is clearer. This has an impact, and many people really feel a strong concern and challenges in continuing to be elected representatives because they experience this as very unpleasant.

However, I would like to thank the Minister for Civil Affairs for the answer I have nevertheless received and which was read out here. It becomes clear that the Minister for Civil Affairs also distances himself from what has happened. I believe, however, that the interpretation – this is highly personal, I have not conducted any investigation – is that this has not been made sufficiently clear and that the focus on the problem has been more about whether the Tidö Agreement has been breached or not.

We in the opposition and the majority, different parties as defenders of local democracy and democracy as a whole, must stand up for the fact that this phenomenon must not occur regardless of who is affected. I stand up for the Minister for Civil Affairs if threats and hate are expressed, if there are fake accounts, and it is important that we stand up for each other. It is also important to strengthen the work not only for us in the Riksdag, national politicians, but also for local democracy.

Then I move on to the question of party funding. When an auditing firm reviewed the Sverigedemokraterna in Borlänge's use of the party funding, they found that a large proportion had been sent to the national organization. It was then stated that the reason was that they make joint purchases which they then provide free of charge to the local organization. But it turned out that when they received the purchases, they had to pay again. This is an audit that has been carried out, but I do not believe that such large audits have been carried out everywhere in Sweden. We can guess that this occurs in other places in the country, if it occurs in Borlänge.

I know that the concern is great that the party support is being misused. Therefore, I think it is important that we truly support the scrutiny and review that takes place of the party support and how it is used. We must take seriously that the concern for misuse increases when we see that some of the money that is sent away from local democracy to the national level is used to pay for fake accounts. It is the difference, and it has emerged in the review that, for example, Kalla fakta has conducted, that the party pays employees to create more fake accounts.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! I always welcome audits, for example, audits of whether municipalities follow the regulations and laws that exist. It is always very good that this is done.

I cannot describe the case in Borlänge in detail, but it is of course so that the municipalities must take this task very seriously. We can see that the implementation of, for example, various legislations and other things differs slightly between the municipalities. It is not good when it is like that, I think. We must be able to expect that the municipalities have the capacity and power to follow current legislation. If this does not happen, for example regarding the rules on party support, it is very serious, and if it turns out that this is a major problem, I must in some way act and, for example, hold conversations with Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, which I think is a good conversation partner in these types of issues. I am happy to look into that question further.

Both Eva Lindh and I have a background as local politicians, so we both understand the importance of strong, robust municipalities where elected officials can work in safety and security. We know that there are problems with this in their respective areas. That was also why I mentioned in my first post that the government is now moving forward with strengthening the measures to protect local elected officials. I think it is very important.

I also want to say something that I did not have time for in my first contribution: There are also a lot of EU initiatives regarding this, because this is a larger issue than individual fake accounts from individual parties. Disinformation is a security issue. It is a security risk. It is part of our overall defense policy. Eva Lindh is to have an interpellation debate here with my State Minister colleague Carl-Oskar Bohlin where there will also be a broader approach to this from a security policy perspective. This is, therefore, an issue that the government is working on from many different initiatives, where, among others, Carl-Oskar Bohlin as Minister for Civil Defence is responsible for cybersecurity issues. A lot of work is being carried out there to secure protection against those types of attacks against Sweden.

Also within the EU, for example, the implementation of the Digital Services Act is underway, where the digital platforms and social media platforms receive much greater responsibility for what kind of information is posted on their various networks. I truly welcome that legislation. There are also other EU initiatives to strengthen protection, to strengthen democracy, and to strengthen trust in the information that we can all access on various digital platforms.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! When it comes to the party support, it is still the case that an audit shows that the Sverigedemokraterna demand approximately 22 million kronor from their local party organizations' party support. Another party demands even more, but since this has been highlighted against the background of paid troll factories, I still think there is reason to really take this seriously.

Several municipalities have now submitted proposals for tightening and we are to review this. Out in the municipalities, it is exactly as the Minister for Civil Affairs pointed out – a debate is being held, and proposals and thoughts are emerging on how this should be done. I think there is indeed reason to review the use of the party support. Otherwise, we are undermining the long-term support for local democracy.

I also want to say that I truly welcome that the protection against threats and violence regarding local politicians is being looked at. It is very good. I only wish that this is followed up and that people really join forces in the matter that this is not okay. In the long term, but also now, there is the risk that this type of violence makes people no longer want to engage politically. It is also a threat to democracy, but above all, it limits debates, public debates on social media, because one becomes afraid of being attacked. It is truly worrying, and I do not think the Minister for Civil Affairs wants to see that. The undersigned at least does not want it, so I hope that we can work together to counteract this.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! Regarding the latter, I truly hope there is no conflict. Our interests are completely aligned in this.

In this matter, I hope that we will have as little political polarization as possible and that we can stand up for democracy and freedom of speech together, but also dignity in the debate so that people can trust that what we say is true and that what we say also comes from the sender they expect to listen to.

I am also very worried, and have been for a long time, about the polarizing tone that exists, not least on some social media platforms. It is nothing that appeals to me at all. But we will never be able to legislate away all of this; instead, much of a values debate and an ethical debate are also required regarding how we speak about one another and how we speak with one another.

As I also referred to earlier, we now have a parliamentary committee that is sitting and looking at party financing. We shall let it do its job, because it is very possible that it will discover things in the regulatory framework that need to be changed, or parts where the regulatory framework needs to be changed so that it is transparent and so that we can truly trust that the party support we provide also goes to what it is intended for. Let the committee complete its work! I do not intend to interrupt that work but let it do its work. It is Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer who is responsible for the appointment of this committee, and it will be exciting to see what it comes up with.

We will have to see if the committee proposes changes that also affect local party support. That remains to be seen. It is always a trade-off - regulating too much in detail can in turn drag down democracy, but being too permissive can also be a threat to democracy. No matter how you turn, your backside is facing the other way; that is the problem here in life sometimes.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)