Response to interpellation 2023/24:853 on proposals to curb bus driving in Malmö

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! Let me begin by saying that something I have greatly appreciated in the exchange with Member of Parliament Rasmus Ling is that, within the scope of practically one and the same debate, we swing between the Council on Legislation's position and the bus runs in Malmö. These are issues that are very pressing, even if possibly on slightly different merits.

In this specific case, Rasmus Ling has asked me if I will pursue Malmö Police's proposal regarding legislative changes to be able to impound cars that are too loud. Furthermore, Rasmus Ling has asked if I will investigate and present proposals corresponding to the Danish legislation on reckless driving.

I recognize the picture being painted of vehicles being used in a way that disturbs or poses a danger to residents in cities. It is a problem that exists in Malmö but also in other places in the country and which can cause great strain for the residents in the area. Naturally, these are issues that must be taken most seriously.

The regulation that exists today gives the police the opportunity to handle the problem in several ways.

Anyone who disturbs other people by making noise in public places can be guilty of disturbing the peace. If a police officer considers that a person has committed such an offense, the police can directly issue a fine of 1,000 kronor or initiate a preliminary investigation that can lead to prosecution. Furthermore, anyone who drives recklessly can be guilty of negligence in traffic. Vehicles used in such a crime can be seized and forfeited if it is not obviously unreasonable.

Furthermore, police officers may, according to the Police Act, under certain conditions, refuse entry to or remove a person who disturbs public order or poses an immediate danger to it. The same applies if such a measure is needed in order to prevent a punishable act. If refusal of entry or removal is not sufficient, the person may be temporarily detained.

In summary, there are already today different tools that could, in themselves, be actualized if vehicles are used in a way that disturbs or poses a danger to persons in the vicinity of the vehicle. At the same time, I have also noted that actors within the police state that the existing regulatory framework does not provide sufficient support in that regard. Therefore, I have instructed the Ministry of Justice to take a closer look at the proposal on expanded possibilities to seize a vehicle in the situations mentioned by the interpellor.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer, not least the last part of the answer which I was, of course, pleased to hear. I thought I heard "have I instructed", and it would be interesting to hear more closely what the instruction looks like.

Quite exactly one year ago, Gunnar Strömmer and I stood in the same chamber as today and discussed traffic cameras and the use of them to a greater extent to combat crime. I thought at that time, Mr. Speaker, that the interaction worked well. The Minister for Justice and the government decided on a supplementary directive to an ongoing investigation on cameras shortly thereafter, and I noted the week before last that the Prime Minister mentioned that type of measure in the government's statement at the opening of the parliamentary session. It was positive, but one must, of course, also get started and begin using this.

We still have the problem all over the country with bus trips or van trips or whatever we shall call them. Unfortunately, it is not solved, but it is something that plagues citizens in far too many places in the country.

I have written this interpellation based on the situation in Malmö, which has been very much talked about, discussed, and rewritten. I know that this is not a problem only in Malmö, but we in the Committee on Justice have received hundreds of emails. There are petitions with several thousand signatures. Malmö police have also been out and said that legislative changes are needed, which has been noted in Sydsvenskan.

Therefore, it is naturally positive that the Ministry of Justice should look more closely at the proposals that have been put forward in Denmark. I know, Mr. Speaker, that Gunnar Strömmer has visited Denmark on several occasions. It is naturally good to do so overall. In this area, they have tightened the legislation against what they call vanvidskørsel or something similar; my Danish is not perfect, but it can be translated to reckless driving. Since the new law was adopted three years ago, they have seized nearly 3,000 cars. Is that a lot or a little? In any case, it is a large increase compared to before. I know that Gunnar Strömmer has close contact with his colleague, Peter Hummelgaard Thomsen. I hope that this can be something that you can talk about in the future.

Naturally, Mr. Speaker, there is crime that is worse than traffic crime in society, no doubt about that. But it is also impossible to ignore that the person who has repeatedly and in an aggressive and loud manner driven a vehicle at high speeds in an urban environment is often less accountable even when it comes to other crimes. For that reason, Mr. Speaker, this is also something that is important to address.

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

Joakim Sandell (S)

Mr. Speaker! As a former resident both adjacent to Bergsgatan in Malmö and adjacent to Amiralsgatan in Malmö, where these problems have been significant – though these are not the only places in Malmö where we have had problems with this – I could not help but participate in this debate. I must thank Rasmus Ling, who wrote the interpellation. I must also thank the Minister for the positive answer.

It is the case that these problems have been accentuated in recent years, and they do not only concern older vehicles with deficient exhaust and noise suppression systems but also modern vehicles that have been modified in a way that is not compatible with current regulations. The problems have also increased with other traffic offenses, for example, not using a seat belt, using a mobile phone while driving, and driving without a license. It is, of course, perceived as a problem. One could also say that the issues are to some extent seasonal and escalate during the summer.

As a Malmö politician, I can also be pleased with the cooperation that exists between the city and the police. Together, a decision was made regarding a citizen's promise linked to exactly this. The police committed to working on crime prevention by, for example, performing speed checks in the city environment, performing sobriety checks in the city environment, and performing checks of bicycle traffic to increase compliance with regulations. At the same time, the City of Malmö is doing work on the crime prevention side linked to this by introducing 30 kilometers per hour in central Malmö and prohibiting U-turns in certain intersections in central Malmö.

So, work is underway. But just as Rasmus Ling previously pointed out, the police unfortunately point out that these measures will not be sufficient. According to current legislation, the police, just as the Minister stated, have the possibility to issue fines or report vehicles that do not meet the technical requirements that are set. But the police argue that these measures are often insufficient to effectively reduce the problems with the noisy vehicles. Issuing fines is also not always deterrent enough, especially if they are repeat offenders. Furthermore, the current rules for the impoundment of vehicles are unclear and complicated, which the police argue makes it difficult to act quickly and effectively when needed.

I look forward to following the government's work. One can also be pleased that, following the reporting in Sydsvenskan, there seems to be an agreement between the parties that were interviewed in the article linked to this problem. I hope that we can see a collaborative effort and that we can jointly resolve the problem.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! First, I naturally want to agree that there is more serious crime in our society – the organized crime, the elements threatening the system, the gross violence, the criminal economy and the recruitment of children and young people. It is all this that largely justifies the major mobilization taking place around the justice system, both in terms of resources and in the form of new tools and other changes to the penal code and much more.

But with that said, it is extremely important to emphasize the importance of our justice system both seeing and having the right resources and the right tools to intervene against the more, so to speak, citizen-proximate crime, the crime that hits the citizens and makes the citizens less secure or less free in everyday life. The type of reckless driving that is raised in this interpellation is an example of this, of criminal activity intended to create great insecurity and lack of freedom and great disturbances for the citizens. It is very important that the justice system has what is required to be able to intervene against this.

Let me also say that the record-breaking resources that we are now adding to the justice system – that is an increase in the appropriations in the justice system of over 75 percent during the years we are now looking at – are largely justified by the fight against organized crime. But it is also done in the sense of ensuring that the justice system, including and not least the police, has the resources required to be able to maintain the full breadth of its mission, that is to say that the fight against organized crime must not push out all other important activities, both crime-preventive and crime-combative, that only the police can engage in. I think that what is raised in this interpellation is an excellent example of that.

That is why it is also easy to meet the Members of Parliament from Malmö on this issue. Yes, I have taken note of the information that has also been conveyed by you, namely Malmö police's analysis of the situation that existing tools are insufficient. Against that background, we have, as mentioned, initiated work at the ministry to at least conduct some kind of initial analysis of this.

What does that include then? To answer Rasmus Ling's question, it includes taking part in and attempting to analyze and understand the views expressed, among others by the police in Malmö but possibly also other actors.

The second thing is to look at the legislation in other countries, and in particular those countries mentioned in the interpellation and also by the police in Malmö, namely the United Kingdom and Denmark. But it is clear that it can also be interesting to look at other countries and their experiences.

Then we intend to, shall we say, pressure-test our observations and conclusions against the Swedish Police Authority and see what they have to say as an authority. After that, we will likely have a good picture of the situation and can make decisions regarding whether and, if so, how we should proceed to handle this issue.

Again: Many thanks for raising this important issue today! It is a very citizen-oriented issue, but not least for that reason should it be treated with the respect it deserves.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I must admit that there have been more reactions to this interpellation than to the one concerning the Council on Legislation – I will not mince words about that. It is also not so strange. If one is in a situation where one has not been able to sleep at night for months and also experiences an insecurity that makes one not dare to move outdoors on evenings and weekends, this is, of course, something one wants addressed. We should not have it like that, neither in Malmö nor elsewhere in Sweden. Regardless of where one lives, one deserves to feel safe in one's local area and not have to be afraid when going outdoors, whether for traffic or for anything else.

It is exactly as Joakim Sandell said: It has been argued that the current legislation is not sufficient and that a fine of 1,000 kronor is not particularly deterrent for many in this group. I think it is very positive that such work is being initiated – that one should look at how this is handled in other countries and take part in what the Malmö Police have presented. I look forward to this being addressed and that one can then also investigate and present proposals.

I also noted that we who were consulted were in agreement. In addition to the undersigned and Joakim Sandell, it was also Louise Meijer from the Moderate Party who wanted to see this. If we have such support, there should be no political obstacles, but then it is a matter of developing regulations and taking the Council on Legislation into account to the extent necessary so that we can reach the decisions required for the police across the country to be able to act against this issue.

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

Joakim Sandell (S)

Mr. Speaker! If it had been an election a few years ago, one would have shared the papers one had. It was quite popular to share various investigations and such. But I thought I would take the opportunity to give a few more tips on measures one could consider when conducting this review - I have brought them with me from Malmö.

One is, for example, to look at the possibility of fining vehicle owners instead of drivers. This would facilitate an automation of fine issuance for speeding and noise disturbances, as well as provide room for more effective action against vehicles that systematically violate traffic rules.

One can also look at the possibility of giving municipalities the right to install and operate speed cameras in order to get such in place faster. It could possibly also lead to an efficiency gain in the whole process.

One can also look at the possibilities of adapting the camera surveillance act. It concerns, as you have touched upon previously, the increased use of cameras for traffic surveillance purposes. There are those who say that in order to enable the installation of more cameras in places where dangerous driving frequently occurs, especially in densely populated areas, changes in the camera surveillance act are likely required.

Geofencing and electronic traffic management are also things that could be looked at, as well as legislative needs and personal data processing.

Finally, I would still like to say that I appreciate that the government takes this seriously. I cannot speak for Rasmus, but we will follow this work and look forward to the results.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! I have fundamentally said what I have to say. I am grateful that the question is raised here in the chamber. I think it is excellent that we, in a time that is largely and on good grounds characterized by the fight against organized crime, also discuss more citizen-oriented issues, such as in this case, reckless driving that creates insecurity, reduced freedom of movement, and disturbed night's sleep for honest citizens in Malmö and elsewhere in Sweden. I think the least we can do is to take these experiences most seriously, take hold of the experiences expressed by police on the ground, and make a serious analysis of what is on the table in order to then return to the question of and, if so, how we should act.

I take with me everything that has been put forward in this debate by both Rasmus Ling and Joakim Sandell and look forward to continuing a dialogue on these important issues.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much for the answer, Minister for Justice! I think we have had a good discussion on this issue. I too have said most of what I have wanted to convey.

We are waiting for the camera legislation to enter into force so that it can be used to a greater extent in the traffic environment, including in cities' street environments and public spaces, but also that the police will be given greater powers to act in cases where one catches these types of reckless drivers.

This has been problematic during several summers. I hope that it will not be so during next summer and that we can get rid of this. Since we have a consensus on both the problem and what we need to do, it can hopefully be so in the future.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank Rasmus Ling, who has raised this issue today, and Joakim Sandell, who has entered the debate to emphasize the importance of the issue for the citizens in Malmö, of course, but also for citizens in many other places in Sweden who experience the same problems. We shall, as said, take that concern and those experiences most seriously and take note of what the Malmö police, other police, and for that matter also other actors in the field have to say about the situation and about what changes may potentially become relevant to further improve the possibility of curbing reckless driving and other similar public order and traffic disturbances and problems.

I also want to take the opportunity to confirm something that is also raised by the interpellator in the debate, namely the importance of us moving forward on the issue of camera surveillance. This, of course, has a broader significance in such a way that it is, among other things, intended to give us better tools to push back organized crime. There is now very much going on, such as expanded possibilities for municipalities, regions, and other authorities other than the law enforcement agencies to, without the requirement for permits that applies today, themselves assess, make trade-offs, and set up cameras where they are needed. There are also proposals concerning how we can better than today use the total camera capacity by giving law enforcement access to others' cameras, for example traffic cameras.

In summary, we are therefore doing a lot to contribute to the safety, security and freedom of the people of Malmö and other citizens. I look forward to continued good cooperation in these matters ahead.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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