Response to interpellation 2024/25:131 on measures in connection with events at the County Administrative Board of Stockholm
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned measures following events at the County Administrative Board of Stockholm. KD argues that the government has taken responsibility by promptly terminating the County Governor's employment following JO's criticism 1 2. KD emphasizes that the head of the agency is responsible for the operations 1 3 and that the government has maintained a continuous dialogue with the agency 1 3. KD considers it correct to await JO's statement for a legal assessment 3 4 and that the review has been beneficial 3. KD argues that the government does not necessarily have to take measures now, but can do so if the need grows 4. S argues that the events constituted corruption and a violation of the constitution 5 and that the actions damaged trust 5 6. S questions whether the government has taken sufficient follow-up measures 7 6.
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 Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me what measures I have taken during the spring and summer of 2024 in light of what has emerged regarding recruitment and the working environment at the County Administrative Board in Stockholm County. She has also asked whether the government intends to take further measures in light of the Parliamentary Ombudsman having directed serious criticism at the County Governor in Stockholm County.
It is important to remember that the agency's management, according to the Government Agency Ordinance (2007:515), is responsible for the agency's operations before the Government. It is the head of the agency who is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the agency complies with applicable law.
I and representatives of the Government Offices have held continuous conversations with the now former County Governor to strictly emphasize the importance of the head of the agency and the entire agency following the applicable law. The Government Offices have also had continuous contact with the County Director to obtain information on the measures that the agency has taken internally. These measures have primarily concerned clarifying the application of internal routines within the agency. Regarding the work environment, the County Administrative Board of Stockholm County has decided to initiate a work environment investigation.
In April, the JO initiated an investigation of certain recruitments at the County Administrative Board. The Government awaited the outcome of the JO's investigation before decisions on intervention measures were made.
When the JO decision arrived, the government promptly made the decision to terminate the employment as County Governor and head of the County Administrative Board in Stockholm County. This is a direct consequence of the criticism that JO expressed, and it shows that the government has taken the criticism seriously.
JO has the authority to both make a report to the State Responsibility Board and initiate a prosecution. JO has chosen not to take either of these measures.
Moving forward, I and the government will follow the developments at the County Administrative Board of Stockholm County. I will continue to have ongoing contact with the agency's leadership. The government has appointed an acting County Governor. The government has also initiated a process to be able to appoint a new permanent County Governor.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! The question that I have posed to Minister for Industry Erik Slottner may require a brief look back.
I will start with: What is the County Administrative Board's role? The County Administrative Board is the government's extended arm. It shall promote the county's development, monitor the situation in the county and inform the government on how it looks. One also has responsibility for supervision in addition to everything else that one has as a task to do.
The County Administrative Board, therefore, has a very important role in the state administration and in society as a whole. In that case, the County Administrative Board is truly dependent on having a strong trust from people in the county. The trust is about having confidence that the County Administrative Board and its head, the County Governor, really take their mandate seriously. It is also about being able to feel confidence that what is done at the County Administrative Board is done in accordance with the rule of law.
Then what has happened, specifically regarding Anna Kinberg Batra, raises some questions. She is no longer the County Governor of Stockholm, but she was when this happened.
It started with a new position as planning manager being to be appointed. Then it was decided to recruit by putting up a note in the reception. There was one person who applied for the job. It was also that person who got the job. That person was a friend of the Governor Anna Kinberg Batra. After that it continued with a temporary position, someone who was to work with leadership. Even that position was filled with a friend of the Governor.
A preparedness chief has also been recruited. First, there were some requirements. Then those requirements were changed. One can still assume that they would fit well with the person who was hired, who has a previous connection to Moderaterna and who has received a new title and a higher salary.
This is not amusing in any way. It is actually incredibly poorly handled. It is upsetting. This naturally affects not only the trust in the County Governor but also the trust in the County Administrative Board as a whole.
In addition to this, the representation at the County Administrative Board has been questioned – how it is carried out, on what grounds it is carried out, what is paid and what is not paid, and by whom. And the union has alerted about a poor working environment. There have thus been several things that have not functioned at the County Administrative Board in Stockholm.
An investigation has been commissioned, and the criticism has been very harsh. A professor says: This is nothing other than pure and utter corruption. The constitution has also been violated. That is why I am now asking the Minister not only what has been done but also what conclusions one now draws from this.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I do not know if I am allowed to thank Member Lindh for this historical exposé and reminder of what has happened in relatively recent times. It is a description of a number of different recruitment procedures at an agency, which has now been investigated by the JO. The JO has submitted its final report, and there was such strong criticism that the government chose to terminate the aforementioned agency head's appointment as County Governor in Stockholm County. The government has thus taken its responsibility. I do not know if I can answer much more than that.
It was mostly a historical description in the previous post. I do not think I have much more to add than what I said in the interpellation response. I described how the government and I as minister have acted during this time and what conclusions we drew from the JO's report.
There is no change. Moving forward, we will, of course, continue to have a dialogue with the new County Governor and with the authority. I will make visits there. The new County Governor shall be presented. Then I will, of course, meet and speak with the employees. We will, of course, in the usual order, conduct authority visits and have authority dialogues, just as we work with other authorities.
If we make the assessment that special measures are needed at this specific agency, the government will implement them. But exactly what they would be is very difficult to answer right now because we do not yet have a new permanent head for the agency.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I actually think it is unworthy of the Minister to make such a mocking comment about me making some kind of historical description. I think that there are people listening to this debate, and then one perhaps needs to do a look back first so that people can keep up with what has happened. I thank you for this.
My questions are asked in the most serious manner. What has happened has happened. My questions are: What follow-up measures are being taken? What has happened has been incredibly upsetting. Does the Minister of State think it is okay that something called pure and simple corruption is occurring in the state administration? No, I do not think that is what he thinks, because measures have absolutely been taken, just as the Minister of State says. But we cannot think that it is okay that it actually became so. Is there any look back and any look forward when it comes to what potentially needs to be changed so that this does not happen again?
Furthermore, this action damaged the County Administrative Board's trust long before the Parliamentary Ombudsman issued its statement. Therefore, I am curious about an addition to this historical description, as the Minister says. What happened before the statement? Was there already a thought at that time on the part of the Minister about not keeping the County Governor, since it was quite obvious that the County Governor violated the constitution?
Anna Kinberg Batra did not only appoint people in a highly questionable manner. She also fired, that is, dismissed, a person – the county director. I wonder if the minister shares the former governor Anna Kinberg Batra's assessment that it was necessary. Does he think it was right that she did it? Was there any contact between the minister and the governor before this was done? This is, after all, questioned – whether it was possible for the governor to do it or not.
We could read about what happened. My perception is not that the County Governor has contradicted this. This has happened. We know that what I described has happened. What were the reflections then? Can the Minister draw lessons from what has happened so that it cannot happen again?
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! It was absolutely not my intention to be sarcastic in the previous contribution. I did not really know what to answer because it was a historical description and no new question beyond what I answered initially in this interpellation debate. It was, therefore, not the intention to be sarcastic.
I believe that the reporting that has taken place throughout the spring and summer has in a way been beneficial for how recruitment processes and other matters should proceed in the state. I imagine more or less that every head of authority now thinks one and two steps ahead before making appointments and ensures that this happens in a correct manner. This does not only concern recruitment procedures but also other situations where one might be faced with whether one does right or wrong and whether it occurs according to the regulations and the practice that exists, so that one absolutely cannot be accused of exposing the authority or persons at the authority to the risk of corrupt behavior and other such things.
This review has nevertheless led to this, and in that way, it has naturally been beneficial.
We also have a delegated employer responsibility in the Swedish public administration, which means that it is the heads of the agencies themselves who are responsible for personnel, the work environment, personnel care, and personnel recruitment at our agencies. As a minister, I am therefore not involved in individual personnel recruitments, so in that sense, it is difficult to guarantee that every single personnel recruitment always goes correctly. It is a delegated responsibility, and it is therefore very difficult for me to guarantee.
Naturally, every new head of authority who is appointed receives a lot of information regarding what it means to be a head of authority, the state's value base, various laws, rules and regulations in these areas, the work environment responsibility, and different types of legal frameworks and practices that exist surrounding state administration.
This is an introductory training that all heads of agencies receive, and it is also something that is subject to further training and seminars. We also have Arbetsgivarverket, a very important actor that has a great deal of responsibility and mandates regarding these issues, anti-corruption work and what it means to be a good head of an agency etcetera.
So, a lot of work is ongoing. I think it is good that behaviors and actions are detected that violate this regulatory framework, which is in conflict, for example, with the constitution or which could be perceived as corrupt behavior. We also have institutions that review this, which has now happened with JO.
I have said all along that we take the tasks very seriously and that we have an ongoing dialogue with the County Governor, which we also had at different levels. Sometimes I was involved in these dialogues, sometimes it took place with my State Secretary, and sometimes it took place at a non-political level. It was an ongoing dialogue.
Demands for resignation were raised early, but I then said that we would wait and have some patience until the investigator had completed their work. Not least, I referred for a long time to JO's statement, because I knew that JO had initiated a case and I thought it was wise to await JO's statement before we took any further steps.
JO's statement arrived, and within a day we acted and revoked the governor's decree.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Some clarifications have nevertheless come from the Minister; I shall wait a little with this.
I just want to say that the inaccuracies the County Governor committed with friend recruitment and other things that resulted in a breach of the constitution are quite clear. I believe that most people in Sweden realize that this is not how one should recruit staff. I do not know if there has been any informative intervention; if so, it was at a rather high cost. This has damaged the trust in the County Administrative Board, which is truly regrettable because that role is so important. We also know that even though this has only occurred at one County Administrative Board, it also affects everyone else. This we know who are involved in politics.
I note that the Minister states that no follow-up measures have been taken in this regard. The Minister also means that no further measures need to be taken. To have patience, as he calls it, I interpret as him meaning that it was right to wait. The Minister is welcome to say if I interpret this incorrectly.
I also perceive that the Minister did not have any views on whether it would be necessary to dismiss the County Administrative Director.
It is my interpretation of the answers I have received. The Minister has two minutes left to respond to that.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I actually think that it is sometimes appropriate to have a bit of patience. I know that we live in a time when quick decisions are very often demanded. Demands for resignations are raised here and there, and journalists are often very quick and want answers – yes or no. Sometimes one does not have a yes or no answer on the same day, resign or stay, but sometimes one must be able to have a bit of patience. Above all, when it concerns personnel policy, I think one should have it. We must not end up in a situation where every mistake by a head of an authority leads to obeying different demands for resignation. It actually is not possible.
I wanted a larger overall picture and did not want to put this puzzle together entirely on my own. I knew that a review case by JO had been initiated which would come in a reasonably near future, so I thought, and still think, it was the right decision to await that reporting before the government made the decision. It was right because JO has a legal competence that I do not possess and can also make a legal assessment of whether it has, for example, been in accordance with the constitution and other matters. I have a lot of legal competence at the Ministry of Finance, but I would prefer to await JO before any such decisions were made.
It may also not be the government that is to take measures in this case. It is correct as Eva Lindh says that the government is not currently making the assessment that we must take a lot of measures on account of this, but we may come to do so if the need grows within the authority. Let us therefore see what measures a new landshövding might be thought to need at the new authority.
We also have, I want to emphasize again, Arbetsgivarverket which can certainly also come up with various measures to support agency heads. But there is also a great deal of work regarding this.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.