Response to interpellation 2024/25:162 on good welfare and service throughout the country
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that the government has a clear focus on the countryside 1 2 and that the special government grant for business climate is ending as the purpose has been fulfilled 1 2. KD considers that government grants should be time-limited 2, that the government's restrained fiscal policy has fought inflation 3 and that state funds must be used wisely through reassessment 3. KD wants to carry out a review of rural policy 3, create regulatory simplifications 4 and argues that the countryside is viable 3. S argues that the government provides insufficient resources to rural areas 5 and that the removal of 300 million kronor is worrying 5. S proposes that the government grant be extended 6 and argues that the reduction of 50 million kronor means fewer service centers 6. S stands for the fight against inflation and wants to strengthen the conditions for an equal welfare.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I have asked the Minister for Civil Affairs how he explains the reasons why special resources for rural and countryside municipalities are being removed and why service and presence are decreasing, and how he intends to act to ensure good welfare and service throughout the country. The work within the government is so distributed that it is I who am to answer the interpellation.
The development of the countryside is crucial for the success of the whole of Sweden. That changes are occurring in how the policy for our rural areas is designed does not mean that the government is letting go of its focus on improving the conditions to be able to live, reside, and work in the entire country.
The special time-limited state grant which for a period of seven years has been awarded to 39 municipalities in the inland of Norrland and certain municipalities in Dalarna and Värmland that have specific challenges regarding the business climate and industry is now concluding as planned. With the help of the time-limited state grant, the municipalities have increased their long-term capacity to develop the business climate in cooperation with the industry. The municipalities have also improved their cooperation with other municipalities and actors within the framework of the regional development work. This was also the purpose of the state grant.
Regarding Statens servicecenter, the government, as part of the work on the budget bill, has made a collective assessment of what opportunities Statens servicecenter has to streamline its operations with service offices - this based, among other things, on what the Swedish National Audit Office pointed out in its review of the operations, what the development has been regarding the number of visits, and how the appropriation level has changed over time.
Good welfare, state presence, and access to both public and private services throughout the country are important for the whole of Sweden to function. As part of this, the government has set a goal for the Police Authority to increase its local presence across the entire country.
The government has during 2023 and 2024 invested 300 million kronor to strengthen healthcare in rural areas, an investment that continues during 2025 if the Riksdag supports the government's budget proposal. The government has also granted Norra sjukvårdsregionförbundet funds for the years 2023-2024 for the ongoing project Coordinated development for good and close care in a rural perspective, a joint project between 15 municipalities and 4 regions in northern Sweden, and intends to allocate funds for 2025 as well.
In the budget bill for 2025, the government has submitted proposals to abolish the aviation tax, something that improves the possibilities to maintain smaller airports and the flight routes that are so important for businesses and residents throughout the country. The state grant for operating support to non-state airports around the country has also been doubled starting from 2024.
The government has also proposed a new reduction obligation where the increased blending levels are combined with changed tax levels to counteract an increase in the price of fuels. Taken together, this is something that particularly benefits residents in our rural areas who often have longer distances to drive and poorer access to public transport.
In the budget bill, we propose that an electric car premium targeted at groups in need of support, for example in rural areas, be introduced subject to the Commission's approval. The support is estimated to amount to a total of 800 million kronor annually, where 75 percent is financed by the EU's Social Climate Fund.
In the budget bill, the government has also proposed an incentive for municipalities with wind power establishments. In its entirety, the compensation mainly corresponds to the property tax for wind power installations and will largely be paid out to rural municipalities.
I want to mention that the parliamentary Equalization Committee, in its final report, has proposed that the cost equalization should compensate for small-scale operation disadvantages in a clearer way. The committee has also proposed a new sparsity index to capture costs associated with sparsity. The referral period for the Equalization Committee's proposal has just expired, and the matter is now being prepared within the Government Offices.
In conclusion, I would like to mention that the government has appointed an inquiry to review future regional development policy and rural policy. Experiences from previous initiatives will be taken into account in the inquiry. A final report is to be submitted by July 1, 2026, at the latest.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Many thanks to the Minister for the answer!
I expected that I would discuss this issue with the Minister for Civil Affairs, but I have no views on how the ministers distribute the work. These issues are, however, very focused on expenditure area 25, so I hope that we can resolve them.
Madam Speaker! All municipalities and regions are now receiving insufficient resources to manage their welfare. Particularly vulnerable are many of the municipalities that are small and located in rural areas or in sparsely populated areas. This naturally affects the lives of everyone who lives and works in the countryside. This government's specialty has been to give more to those who already have and especially to those who live in large cities. But resources are not being provided to manage the welfare for those who live and reside in the countryside.
Let me explain why! The government has, as stated, made cuts and does not provide sufficient resources overall in Sweden to manage either healthcare, schools, or elderly care. But we also know, we who have sat in the Equalization Committee and seen the figures on how it looks, that it is many of the smaller municipalities, and particularly municipalities in sparsely populated areas and rural areas, that are struggling the hardest. That the government then chooses to remove the 300 million that have been specifically targeted at smaller municipalities and municipalities that are really struggling hard is very remarkable and worrying.
It becomes particularly strange in my world because the Equalization Committee has come forward with a proposal after having looked specifically at what the Minister is responding to. A cost equalization has been proposed which is intended to compensate for small-scale operational disadvantages in a clearer way. That is what the proposal concerns. A new sparsity index has also been proposed.
If the proposals of this investigation become reality, they will be implemented from 1 January 2026. We do not know if that will be the case, but that is the intention. That the government then removes these 300 million this year, before one has implemented a cost equalization that takes more into account the sparseness and that smaller municipalities have it tougher, is very strange.
Furthermore, it is incredibly important for me and all of us Social Democrats who are driving this issue that we do not just look at what the conditions are in certain parts of the country, but truly strengthen the conditions for an equal welfare and equal conditions throughout the entire country. This also applies to people who live in smaller municipalities.
In my county, it concerns five municipalities: Boxholm, Vadstena, Valdemarsvik, Ydre and Ödeshög. They receive between 2.5 and 3 million kronor less because the special support for smaller municipalities in sparse and rural areas is being removed. For those municipalities, this is an enormous amount of money that truly plays a decisive role.
Let me ask the question again: Why does one choose to remove these resources?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! At the Ministry of Rural Affairs and Infrastructure, we collect many issues that are of truly great importance for our rural areas. It concerns given matters such as rural development, regional development, infrastructure, housing issues and community planning issues. It also concerns forestry, agriculture and fishing. These areas hold together and affect each other in a decisive way.
The government has a clear rural focus and is working purposefully to improve the conditions for those who live, work, and operate in the Swedish countryside. As I said in a debate with Eva Lindh's party friends yesterday, it is a fact that certain rural municipalities have faced specific challenges, not least regarding the business climate and the commercial sector. Therefore, for a period of seven years, they have been granted a special government grant to strengthen their capacity and be able to work strategically and long-term with issues concerning precisely the commercial sector and business climate.
The municipalities have gladly increased their capacity when it comes to developing the business climate in cooperation with the business sector. They have improved the cooperation with other municipalities and actors within the business sector. I am pleased that these municipalities have been able to build a more robust and unified organization to support the business sector in times of both crisis and societal transformation.
The purpose of that assignment has, however, been fulfilled and concludes this year. This is entirely in accordance with the decisions taken by the then Social Democratic government. I assume that Eva Lindh agrees that targeted government grants should be time-limited. It is one of the criteria for the design of targeted government grants that the Equalization Committee, which Eva Lindh was a part of, proposed in full agreement. I understand that the Social Democrats in their budget motion now propose an extension of these targeted government grants.
It is appropriate to pose a counter-question: How long can one continue to extend targeted government grants, and how do sudden changes of this type of intervention or project – call it what you will – contribute to achieving the development that is desired? How long is it reasonable to just continue with that, and why did one not, in that case, make such an initiative permanent during the years one sat in government?
It becomes a bit strange if we have temporary projects and temporary funds to achieve a purpose and then everything is immediately to be extended when it, according to the decision, expires. Then it is not a temporary initiative.
I look forward very much to the Equalization Committee's further work and to seeing what we can land on there. We can achieve a long-term structure that takes more factors into account. This is work that is ongoing right now.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! It is clear that we Social Democrats want to go a different way. We are proposing a powerful rural and countryside package where some of the money that the Minister mentions is included. Let me say something about that.
We had support for business development in rural and countryside areas in our budget. We have that now too, because we have seen that some of the things that are done when targeted state grants are implemented are done for testing purposes. This support has been incredibly important for the municipalities that have had it. We have received many examples of what it has led to, that one has been able to conduct certain growth policies even in rural areas.
That is why we are extending this. We see how it looks in reality and that the money is still needed, so it is clear that we are extending this. Even if there is an end date, one can extend the whole thing if one sees that it is actually effective. That is what the government should do when one sees that an investment is significant.
We see that it is incredibly important with these 300 million to small municipalities in remote and rural areas. My point in my previous speech was that this should be extended for at least one year, until one potentially has a new equalization system in place, because it takes more into account the municipalities that these resources have gone to. It is therefore why I think it is so incredibly strange that one cannot extend this for at least one year to provide conditions for these municipalities and continue to invest in an equal welfare for the whole country.
Another thing I raised in my question was the investments in service centers. Now, 50 million kronor are being removed for service centers across the country. We know that for many, it is an incredibly important and decisive issue that there is a state presence throughout the country.
We Social Democrats had the idea that we would develop this. Sometimes at least some cabinet ministers have been heard saying that they would like to do so. With this reduction of 50 million, no one makes any assessment other than that it cannot, at least, be built or any new service centers be added out in the country. This will mean that there will be fewer service centers. The concern is great in many of the villages, communities, and towns where there are service centers.
I would very much like to have an answer as to what the assessment is and why this government does not consider this to be an important issue.
Let me go back to what this actually means. A colleague of mine is the chairman of the municipal executive board in Boxholm. He is now getting 2.7 million less for his budget, and that is beyond this SD-led government's reduced investments in welfare. He says that 2.7 million might not be that much in larger municipalities, but in his municipality - in Boxholm - these funds make a big difference. These 2.7 million would have been a substantial addition to their welfare.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! The most important thing this government has contributed to for the municipalities' finances is getting a handle on inflation. It dug deep holes in the budgets of municipalities and regions and was something that inevitably had to be managed. Not least considering various pension agreements, this meant a great burden for the municipal economy in Sweden. I am glad that we, with joint efforts and obviously with other important actors, have gotten this in order. A restrained fiscal policy is central to combating inflation, and we seem to have succeeded in that.
I share Eva Lindh's view that it is important to have state service and presence in as large parts of the country as possible. But at the same time, it is important that every tax krona is used wisely and that state-funded activities are constantly subject to reassessment and prioritization. When it comes to the consequences of the proposed appropriation changes for the state's service offices, I refrain from commenting on the decommissioning of offices and the like at this stage. The savings will certainly have consequences, but those are details that the agency Statens servicecenter is now working on.
When my colleague Minister for Civil Affairs Erik Slottner was here a month ago, he emphasized that the service centers will also continue to be important and that they will exist all over Sweden going forward, even with the proposed savings on Statens servicecenter, and this message still applies.
I also mentioned in my opening response a number of measures that the government is now taking to improve the conditions for those who live, reside, and work in our rural areas. In my ministry, we have begun a review of the overall rural policy, which involves many ministries and concerns healthcare, police, yes, the whole of society. We will continue to present proposals in a unified approach that will strengthen the conditions for rural areas. Worth mentioning in this work is the special reference group the government has formed to receive views and input from civil society actors.
One thing that has clearly emerged in the conversations we have had with various actors is the need for a shift in perspective away from the urban norm, where cities are seen as something one invests in and rural areas as something one provides grants to. Sweden's rural areas are strong and vibrant, and they are crucial for our welfare and our prosperity.
It is important to continue the work of providing good conditions for our rural areas, but we must not create an image of poverty and misery in the country as soon as one moves outside of built-up areas. In the work of strengthening the conditions for our rural areas, the government must, however, sometimes make tough prioritizations so that our common resources are used in the best way.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! Almost every time we raise an issue, the answer is about inflation. Let me just say one thing: the Social Democrats stand up for the fight against inflation. It is at least as important for us as it is for the SD-led government. In this regard, we do not think differently. But we also know that investments in welfare do not actually affect inflation in the way the government seems to believe. We have fought inflation the whole time but still been able to present budgets that provide the conditions for a strong and equal welfare across the entire country.
Of course, forestry, agriculture, and fishing are many times important in sparsely populated areas and rural regions. But it is about so much more than that, such as having a good school and elderly care and having the conditions to live, reside, and work outside the big cities. It is also about being here and now. It is very good with rural strategies and to develop policy for the future. But these people live here and now, and right now the resources for sparsely populated areas and rural regions are decreasing, which is a problem for them.
For us Social Democrats, it is absolutely crucial that the entire country shall live and develop. It is also for that reason we have presented our large package. We want to strengthen the conditions so that everyone shall receive an equal welfare regardless of where in the country they live.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I hope it has become a bit clearer what the government is doing to improve the conditions for good welfare and service throughout the country, even for the Environment Party-led opposition.
The conditions and opportunities of rural areas differ, and therefore a breadth of measures across many policy areas is needed. Eva Lindh and I seem to share a common view regarding the goal that all of Sweden should function and that measures are therefore needed to improve the conditions for those who live, work, and operate in rural areas. I can, however, state that we do not completely agree on which measures are needed. The Government focuses on facilitating everyday life for companies and people in our rural areas through regulatory simplifications and by creating more room in individuals' wallets. The Social Democrats say no to lower taxes on fuels, no to lower taxes on income, and no to lower taxes on savings. Instead, they want to increase the number of grants. But more complications and less autonomy are not the way forward for our rural areas.
The government has a unified focus, and that is that the conditions for living, residing and working in all of Sweden shall be strengthened. Regardless of where in the country one lives, one shall be able to create a good life. We are a government so that all of Sweden shall function.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.