Response to interpellation 2024/25:247 on the supervision of the funeral services
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD considers that today's funeral legislation and the Swedish Church's administration function well 1. KD argues that the funeral fee and the system of county administrative boards and elected representatives are worth preserving 2. KD sees it as a concern that the time between death and burial is increasing 3 2 and argues that this poses a risk of unethical handling 4. KD does not rule out future measures or a review 1 3 2. S considers that the principalship is based on trust and does not need to be changed 5. S would, however, like to see that differences between city and countryside do not become too large 5. S considers that it is time for a review 5. KD argues that there is no reason to question the principalship as long as the trust exists 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Per-Arne Håkansson has asked me how I assess that the funeral activities are functioning from ethical and economic aspects, and whether I intend to take the initiative to, through an investigation or in some other way, review the issues that have been raised regarding the funeral activities.
Today's funeral legislation is from 1990, and it has functioned well in all essential respects over the years. The Funeral Act (1990:1144) has been amended on a number of occasions. One example is the legislative change which means that metals that have not been incinerated after a cremation shall be recycled. The Church of Sweden is the primary authority for funeral activities in almost all of Sweden, and I have great confidence in how they manage their responsibility.
I think several of the issues that Per-Arne Håkansson raises are well worth further discussion. I do not rule out that there may in the future be a need to review certain issues within the framework of the funeral activities.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank Minister for Social Affairs Jakob Forssmed for the answer.
I have raised this interpellation from the fact that during visits and in conversations and dialogue with both ecclesiastical representatives and representatives from the funeral industry, elected officials, cemetery employees and representatives of various religious communities, but also engaged citizens in questions regarding the funeral industry in general, I have come into contact with issues where a number of problem areas are raised.
After the Church of Sweden ceased to be the state church approximately 25 years ago, the task as the principal for funeral activities, with the exception of the municipalities of Stockholm and Tranås, has remained. It is my assessment, and as I understand it also Jakob Forssmed's, that the many years of experience, accumulated knowledge, dignity, and respect for the task of handling funerals that the Church of Sweden in general possesses means that the trust in the Church of Sweden as the principal is still strong among the population. This also applies to the two municipalities that have the same task.
What I want to highlight is whether increased supervision and further demands from the state and society, since the church no longer constitutes the state, would be justified, not least since it also concerns activities carried out in a completely unregulated market. The requirements that exist are established by the funeral homes themselves. All respect for this, but it is not obvious that everyone who carries out activities follows these requirements. Both economic, legal, and ethical aspects need to be weighed in.
As I see it, it is in the public interest that the business activities that are de facto conducted for people's final rest and farewells are sound. This in itself creates trust and confidence. From this aspect, there are some worrying tendencies.
Some time ago, it emerged in an investigation by Sveriges Television how unprofessional funeral homes embezzled money from estates. Narrow profit interests and fraud had, in these cases, taken precedence over a dignified handling of the deceased and their remains.
This also became the subject of a written question here in the Riksdag, to which Jakob Forssmed replied that he will continue to follow the issue closely and, if necessary, is prepared to consider an initiative.
To this, Mr. Speaker, can also be added the new position that the Church of Sweden, through the church meeting, has developed regarding changing the church order so that it shall be permitted for a parish that is simultaneously an employer to operate a funeral home on commercial grounds.
In this context, it may perhaps not be ruled out that the roles of principal and executor risk being mixed up, not least when this concerns people whose relatives may find themselves in a vulnerable situation precisely at the time of decisions in these matters.
The Competition Authority has looked into this. The Authority emphasizes in a report that existing supervision is not sufficient and proposes several legislative changes in the form that ecclesiastical funeral homes shall not be allowed to charge either the church fee or the funeral fee, that they shall have special staff employed outside of the ecclesiastical operations, and that a general principle of equal treatment shall prevail to avoid a mixing of the roles as principal and contractor.
I interpret both the interpellation response and previous answers to questions in these matters as indicating that there is an interest on the part of Jakob Forssmed to discuss a good deal of the issues I have raised in the interpellation. One question, therefore, is what he is further waiting for to initiate an investigation or some form of review. Are there not already sufficient reasons to move from words to action?
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I would first like to extend a big thank you to Per-Arne Håkansson for the interpellation and for raising these questions.
Funerals are incredibly important for human beings. The way they are carried out affects our ability to handle life. I believe that many of us can testify that when someone close dies, something happens in the room. There is a different tone to life. The room can feel smaller or larger. It can almost feel as if there are physical changes in one's life when it happens. There, funerals, which many testify to, play a major role in how one experiences it. Was it dignified? Was it a way I got to say goodbye in a reasonable and good way? This applies both when the death occurs quietly and when it occurs suddenly, dramatically, and completely unexpectedly.
For this, we need to have a very good order, and in all material respects, we do. That is my opinion. There are many actors who behave perfectly well and who have long experience. Per-Arne describes it well himself. There is a kind of infrastructure around this. There is a long experience of how we meet people in these situations and how we handle this in a dignified way, which in all material respects is also followed by the actors who are involved.
Nevertheless, there are also major problems here. I sometimes think that funeral activities become a kind of reflection of society. We see, for example, that many are buried in solitude, completely without ceremony. We received a new word a few years ago: "direktare" (direct-buried). It is the large proportion of Swedes who are buried every year without any close relative, any friend, or anyone at all present. They are "direktare". No one is there. It is, of course, sad.
Another thing that Per-Arne Håkansson points out is that purely criminal actors sometimes act simply to fleece people in a vulnerable situation. They do not conduct a serious business, and we must, of course, act against that with force. Above all, it is the judicial authorities that need to act when means are acquired in various ways on incorrect grounds.
Per-Arne Håkansson said that this is unregulated. That is not the case. First and foremost, there is a funeral act that regulates the funeral activities themselves. It is not the funeral homes' activities primarily, but, just as Per-Arne Håkansson describes, something that the Church of Sweden, the City of Stockholm, and Tranås Municipality do.
But it is not the case that funeral homes are unregulated. They are subject to, for example, consumer laws, which my State Minister colleague Erik Slottner has to handle. We naturally have conversations. I have spoken with him about these issues and about the importance of them being handled in a good way.
With that said, I do not rule out that we may need to take different types of measures and review certain issues. I myself view with concern that the time between death and burial constantly seems to be getting longer, even though we have tried to shorten it to achieve a reasonable management. In that regard, I believe there are ethical problems that we need to address in different ways.
Regarding the Church of Sweden and the funeral activities, I have urged the Church of Sweden to exercise caution here. They have their ceremonial and diaconal roles in relation to many citizens in Sweden. But in much of Sweden, they also have a responsibility for funeral activities, and that should not be confused with funeral home operations, unless there are very strong reasons for it.
There are some such questions for which there is certainly reason to discuss further.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Jakob Forssmed, for the answer and the reasoning regarding these questions!
One aspect that was mentioned is the economic conditions. Depending on which municipality or parish one belongs to, the price differences can vary quite significantly. I recently received a report titled Det kostar på att dö, which the think tank Tiden has published. They have looked at these fees and show differences across the country. The conclusion in the report was that we cannot be said to be equal before death.
The costs that arise can involve transport possibilities, infrastructure, and a number of different aspects. But to that come fees for funeral ceremonies, estate inventory, and such. There, it is important that it is serious actors acting on the market.
The funeral fee is used to provide public burial sites for everyone living in Sweden. As is known, it is not linked to one's own funeral, but rather concerns things such as premises for storage, cremation, transport, and a burial plot or equivalent at a public cemetery for 25 years. From the individual's perspective, I can also refer to a report from the Riksdag's investigation service stating that approximately 40,000 kronor are paid into the funeral fee per person and life.
We have seven county administrative boards that have the right to inspect operations and, upon request, may access information and other material as needed. They are also responsible for granting permission, to those who wish, to spread ash in a location other than the intended burial site.
However, we lack an overarching supervisory authority in the country. This has been requested, not least by the funeral homes themselves. They want to at least point out to us that it is possible for anyone to start a funeral home. It is the own industry knowledge and the industry itself that creates approval.
The last major funeral investigation was carried out, as I understand, in 2008/2009. There, questions were raised regarding the role of funeral directors, the time between death and burial or cremation, and alternative burial methods, which Forssmed mentioned here. Since then, society has undergone a good deal of changes that likely also have an impact on funeral issues.
Jakob Forssmed was within the timeframe between death and burial or cremation. The maximum time is one month. I assume he is well informed that the average in Sweden is around 25 days. And that is a figure that seems to increase every year. In our Nordic neighboring countries, it takes around ten days, according to the information I have received. A number of denominations do, however, have faster processes.
Sweden is, according to information, the country in the world where it takes the longest before the burial of the deceased takes place. The body lies in a refrigerator at the mortuary until the relatives contact a funeral home. It can sometimes take up to a week. One should keep in mind that decomposition begins quickly even in a refrigerator.
There is, therefore, reason, as I see it, to also follow up on these questions and see what we can do to perhaps achieve improvements and create opportunities to increase confidence in this.
In the newspaper Dagen, we could also read that police must be deployed at funeral ceremonies involving criminal gangs. Hate and threats can occur against people who carry out the activities.
Does Jakob Forssmed judge that these issues are something that need to be included if a review takes place?
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you again, Per-Arne Håkansson, for the questions and the reasoning here!
We have the funeral fee, and it is called a fee so that it corresponds to the costs for us to have a well-functioning and dignified funeral service in Sweden. We also have, as Per-Arne Håkansson points out, county administrative boards that are to oversee this. We also have elected representatives who are to provide citizens' oversight and be their representatives in this context to ensure that the fees are reasonable in relation to the activities being conducted. It is a system that I believe works in all essential respects and which is worth protecting.
But as I also said, there are many questions. Even though we have a system that in all respects functions well, there are always reasons to consider following the question. Are there different things that would need to be handled better? I do not rule that out.
At the same time, I note that there is a slight lack of capacity. When it comes to investigations, there are also many urgent measures that must be implemented in Sweden, not least regarding criminal gangs and other matters, in order to produce legislation to push back those who threaten our society.
These questions are important. I will follow them, and I do not rule out measures further ahead. But I cannot say here today that we will appoint an inquiry or the equivalent.
I see some of the same problems and concerns as Per-Arne Håkansson, not least regarding time. I think it is a concern. I also think that we as a society need to reflect on how we handle those types of situations. Is it not something that is being lost when we are unable to prioritize and coordinate our calendars to be able to bury a loved one within a reasonable time? It is a discussion that we need to have and that one cannot necessarily achieve solely through legislation.
We need to discuss funerals for what they are. The funeral is an incredibly important matter in our society that helps people to manage one of life's most difficult situations - when someone close, someone a friend, someone a colleague or someone a life partner leaves us. I welcome such a discussion. I welcome that Per-Arne Håkansson contributes to it. And I see that it is something we need, both in the individual cases and on a more general level.
We need to consider what our infrastructure looks like for the existential questions. What space do they get in our society? What place do they get in our society? There is every reason to reflect on that.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the answer.
The questions concern a number of social areas that Jakob Forssmed describes. They are also close to every human being. For those who work within healthcare and care services, but also within the church and municipalities or are voluntarily engaged in parishes, funeral issues are constantly present in everyday life. But for many of us others, it may involve single or a few occasions in life when existence comes to a standstill and we, as relatives, are to handle a number of questions that arise rapidly and where decisions are required.
We have touched upon the principal responsibility. For my part, I want to emphasize both the Church of Sweden and the municipalities of Stockholm and Tranås, which have to manage these tasks. I do not perhaps see the principal responsibility as that which primarily needs to be the subject of change and adjustment. It ultimately rests on people's trust and confidence, and it has done so for generations.
Starting points can, however, be questions of the urban-versus-rural perspective and whether the differences in costs and conditions should be large depending on where one lives and operates.
Jakob Forssmed mentioned recycling and environmental issues in his response. It also builds a healthy industry in large terms if one constantly includes those issues in the work.
Digitalization, climate policy, and gang crime are all three significant areas. The funeral services are also involved in these in different ways.
There are a number of issues to look at. A great deal has happened during the 15 years that have passed since the government last conducted a review of the funeral services. Perhaps it is time now. The issues and arguments we have had nevertheless give some hope that an initiative from Forssmed will eventually come.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Per-Arne Håkansson once again for an interesting exchange of views.
Funeral activities are something that concerns everyone in Sweden, but at the same time, it is an activity that does not always receive the attention it deserves. Therefore, I welcome discussions and debates such as this.
My perception is that today's order largely works well. I share the interpellant's view on the question of principalship. There is no reason to fundamentally question it as long as confidence in it exists among the citizens, and it does.
At the same time, there are areas that do not function well enough. I share Per-Arne Håkansson's view that there are issues that are well worth discussing further. One such issue is the time between death and burial. It has increased despite the fact that the legislation in the area was tightened in 2012. That this is the case implies a risk of more unethical handling. It is not acceptable that the current legislation is not followed, and we naturally need to look further into how it can be made to function better than it does today.
Per-Arne Håkansson raises the differences in the costs of funerals. This also applies to many other issues in society that can have different costs depending on the municipality. It can vary - sometimes large cities have higher costs in certain aspects and sometimes the countryside has it in other aspects. But it is, of course, an aspect to consider further.
The industry organization has an important task here. There is an authorization and an industry standard. If one chooses a funeral home that follows the standard, one knows that one will receive a secure treatment. If one does not receive it, one has the opportunity to turn to the industry organization's body for self-supervision but also to the Consumer Agency.
So there is a regulation. One can always consider whether it should look different or be sharper. I do not rule out measures further ahead.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.