Response to interpellation 2024/25:252 on national minority languages and budget cuts
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that national minority languages need to be made visible and supported 1, but that priorities must be made due to the economic downturn and inflation 1 2. M argues that the allocated funds provide good conditions 1 and that it does not always become better with more money but requires other measures 2. S believes that previous investments were important to preserve the languages 3 and that reduced appropriations threaten the Sami language and culture 3. S argues that the budget framework has been reduced by 50 million kronor 4 and that the appropriation to the language centers was cut significantly 4. MP believes that Sweden needs to do more to ensure rights for the Sami 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me on what grounds the decisions to withdraw resources from the language centers for the national minority languages and for Sámi Giellagáldu were made, and what consequences I assess these reductions will have.
The Government considers that the national minority languages continue to need to be actively highlighted and supported. It is important that the activities that the Institute for Languages and Folklore has built up regarding language centers can continue and that the Sami Parliament's language center also receives continued reinforcement. The Government has therefore decided to allocate a total of 28 million to the language center activities in the appropriation letter for 2025. This sum includes the temporary reinforcement of 8.5 million kronor that was announced in the budget bill.
When it comes to Sámi Giellagáldu, the Sametinget has the possibility, within the framework of the funding allocation that the government decides in the regulatory letter, to itself make decisions on any continued funding.
The government has had to make prioritizations in a time when we are in a recession. The activities at the language centers need, as always, to be adapted to the current funding level, but the government assesses that the agencies with this funding have good conditions to carry out their assignments.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister!
Almost three years ago, the S-led government introduced an initiative of 90 million annually for language centers for minority languages. At the same time, the Sámi Language Centre was also strengthened. The initiative has been extremely important for preserving and also revitalizing the languages that have existed in the Nordic countries for a very long time.
After reading the budget, one could imagine that this government also agrees with that. It states that everyone shall have the right to develop and use their own mother tongue and the national minority languages. But in the same budget, one can see that what is written in the text does not quite correspond with what is stated in figures and what is realized in action.
The reason I am engaging in this issue is that I sit on the Welfare Committee in the Nordic Council, and we are responsible for the Sami issues from a more overarching perspective. These issues concern not only Sweden but also Finland and Norway. We are trying to cooperate. Sami language and Sami culture know no borders. Therefore, we also cannot think of borders when it comes to investing in the language and the culture.
An agreement was entered into previously. Our three Nordic countries said: Now we will make this initiative joint. The agreement implies that one commits. If a country no longer finances, it therefore also entails consequences for the agreement as a whole.
When the Nordic linguistic organization was now threatened in this budget, it mattered in many different ways: for the Sami language, for the Sami culture, and for the cooperation agreements that have been entered into. I believe that agreements should be honored.
When this became clear, when we saw the figures in the budget and not just the text, it gave rise to very great concern for the national minority languages but also for the activities at Sámi Giellagáldu, which I have mentioned above, above all. There is, in fact, a concern. For a long time, it has felt as if the national minority languages but also the Sámi culture have been threatened. They have also been threatened.
What is now required of us is that we show that there is long-term perspective, respect, and a thought that we shall support, stand firm by, and stand behind what is important, that is to say that one can feel secure in one's language and one's culture.
That is why I have asked this question. I wonder about the grounds for making this decision, which causes concern and poses a threat. It naturally concerns me as well. What were the grounds for making this decision, even though it sounds so nice in a part of the text that is also included in the budget?
Jan Riise (MP)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for coming here and speaking with us about this. I would also like to thank Member Eva Lindh for raising the issue of funding and further development of Sámi Giellagáldu and for taking the initiative for this occasion to discuss it.
Eva Lindh has raised a couple of the issues that reflect the concern that exists and which can possibly be discerned in the answers we received in the first round here. But it honestly does not feel entirely heartening that one refers to a recession and opportunities for redistribution within the Sami Parliament's already modest budget frameworks.
I will therefore begin with an international perspective. Shortly before Christmas, I had the pleasure of meeting the UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues, a professor named Nicolas Levrat.
The UN also has a special rapporteur on indigenous peoples, named Fabián Salvioli, who visited Sweden and Sápmi in March last year. His conclusions from the visit can be summarized as that Sweden needs to do more to develop and ensure rights for the Sámi. He also specifically mentioned the Torneviens and their situation. They are not counted as indigenous people today, but the discussion about such a recognition is alive. We as a party are positive about it.
That Sweden has not ratified the Indigenous Peoples Convention ILO 169 was seen as extraordinarily noteworthy, and he advised the State to ensure that it happens immediately. The convention is an important instrument for the rights of indigenous peoples. I have from prominent Swedish lawyers understood that one can even argue that we are probably bound by the convention under international law even though we have not ratified it. It is so strong internationally seen that it is important even in Sweden. This is a message to the Government.
I go back to Nicolas Levrat, the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues. He has not visited Sweden specifically, but rather a long series of other countries. As a rapporteur to the UN, he particularly highlights the design of the administration or in other words how purposefully authorities and other state structures are designed to favor the participation of minorities - a minority friendly administrative design, as he calls it. Here we could perhaps simply and smoothly express it as a minority-friendly administrative order.
I think it is reasonable to include even the financial support structure in such an analysis or description. The previous government, with the parties of members Lindh, Riise, and Räihäs, initiated such support for the development of minority languages and for the consultation procedure, and additionally a not huge but crucial support to the jointly Nordic-funded language center Sámi Giellagáldu. They were designed as three-year supplements for the period 2022-2024.
Sámi Giellagáldu is, as we have heard, funded by Norway, Finland and Sweden. It has a dozen employees, and it has an important mission: to standardize and develop the Sámi languages. I shall ask to return to this in the next contribution.
Initially, I would like to ask the Minister if she agrees with the image of an international, if not global, framework for how, for example, the UN's member states, including Sweden, should behave towards national minorities and indigenous peoples. It could be good to have with you ahead of the global indigenous meeting at the UN at the end of April. The Riksdag has appointed a small but persistent delegation to go there and participate in the discussions and negotiations.
Mirja Räihä (S)
Madam Speaker! The interpellation concerns Sámi Giellagáldu, but I believe it must be placed in the same context as the government's minority policy right now.
I have had several interpellation debates with the Minister for Culture regarding the government's policy for the national minorities and have received answers either that this government prioritizes minority issues or that the member will be pleased when the regulatory letter arrives. The latter has concerned precisely the funding of the language center.
But let us look at what has happened so far. The budget framework for minority issues has been reduced by a total of 50 million, from 207 million to 157 million. It may sound like a small amount of money, like pocket change, in the state's large budget. But in just these activities, the reduction of 50 million will have incredibly large consequences.
The funding for the language centers was reduced from a total of 38 million last year to 8.5 million. All staff were notified in June due to lack of work, and in December, the layoffs at the language centers began to be carried out. The head of the language centers for Finnish, Meänkieli, Yiddish, and Romani Chib has already moved on to new challenges. It is not so strange; if the operations are so shaky, one moves on.
Mr. Speaker, now in the regulatory letter, which would have made me so happy, there is a redistribution of funds for minority issues. The redistribution means that the Minister for Culture takes with one hand and gives with the other. Those who are now affected are the county administrative boards, which must give up some of their funds so that the language centers can function at least adequately. This in turn means that the support for the administrative municipalities decreases. And, Madam Speaker, the operational minority policy is conducted precisely in municipalities and regions. The regulatory letter does not make me happy in that case at all.
When it comes to the operational minority policy in the administrative municipalities, it will be difficult for the county administrative boards to provide support, especially in the small municipalities. I can mention that in SKR's newspaper Dagens Samhälle, even the culture minister's own party colleague turns against these reductions in the state budget. It is argued that they affect the municipality's opportunity for minority work in a very detrimental way.
If one summarizes the policy pursued, Madam Speaker, the harsh reality is that the government will likely have a very difficult time putting this together. The language centers still receive 10 million less per year than in previous years. It can be mentioned that the Sami Parliament received 11 million last year to run language centers. The administrative municipalities receive less money to work with the operational measures and ensure that preschool and elderly care in minority languages can be developed. This is a municipal mandate that must be undertaken in every municipality.
This interpellation concerns the common language center for Sami. But in his answer, the Minister also reflects on matters other than just the Sami language center, and I believe that those questions must also be placed in their context, namely minority policy. A reduction of 50 million kronor will not go unnoticed.
I have two questions for the Minister for Culture that I intended to raise now. Will the Minister for Culture conduct an evaluation of the consequences for the national minorities in an upcoming consultation with the minority groups? And is the Minister for Culture prepared to prioritize national minorities for real and not just on paper?
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! To relate to Member Räihäs's last contribution and the question of whether I will truly prioritize minority policy: The answer is yes. But I will not prioritize as the Socialdemokraterna, Miljöpartiet, or the previous government have done. I do not believe, for one, that everything simply becomes better by offering more money. I believe that other measures must also be taken. I will return to this.
Before I move on to the other items, I want to say that I think it is a bit absurd of Member Riise to say that the recession and fiscal space are not sufficient as an explanation for why we have made the budget priorities we have made. Here it becomes very clear, partly that we belong to different parties, and partly that we have very different views on how it should add up in the economic policy in the final analysis.
For me, it is completely obvious. We have been at an inflation of 11 percent, which we inherited when we entered the government, and currently have an economic situation with a recession and inflation that has made everything more expensive and which affects both private individuals and public institutions. It is well obvious that this has consequences for the budget.
We probably have very different views on how economic policy should be explained. I try to be honest and say that one must be able to make priorities based on the budget space that exists, and that is what we have done.
Member of Parliament Räihä also pointed out that a redistribution is taking place and regrets that it took such a long time to receive that notification. It is quite right – it took time. But that is because the government must also respect this chamber and that this chamber must make a decision on the budget before we can begin working with allocations and redistributions in the regulatory letters. As soon as the chamber had made its decision on the budget, we began looking at how the allocations and also the redistributions should look, because the language center's activities are something that the government wants to safeguard and prioritize and therefore sees the importance of being able to finance.
It is always more expensive to start an operation than to maintain it. It is therefore quite true that with the temporary grants of 90 million, which the previous government introduced between 2022 and 2024, there was an opportunity to build up the language centers' operations. I am convinced that Isof, with the targeted funds in this government's budget, will be able to maintain the quality of the language centers' operations in a good and purposeful way, even if the framework is naturally somewhat smaller than before.
Finally, I believe, as I began by saying, that even other measures within the framework of minority policy are important to achieve language-promoting measures. I hope to be able to return to those in my next contribution.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Let us talk economy! The Minister seems very eager to tell us how it works. I think it is almost ridiculous to talk about an investment of 50 million and say that it would in some way worsen the total inflation, when at the same time there are almost 30 billion in tax cuts for those who already have. It is quite bold.
So we are talking about 50 million in investments in something that really makes a difference for people when it comes to language and culture. That is why we are talking about priorities. In what way does the Minister of State think this government prioritizes the activities at the national minority centers and Sámi Giellagáldu when money is being removed?
I have also on few occasions witnessed money being removed from the budget and then pushed in in another way, in a regulatory letter. I cannot interpret it in any other way than that they discovered this or changed their minds, and so they found money somewhere that they could transfer to something else. I really wonder if that was the case. To show in a budget that one is removing resources and then, a few months later, take money from something else and push it into a regulatory letter is a strange way to manage a budget and resources for operations. This naturally also causes a great deal of concern.
Now some money is being added, and it is clear that the anxiety decreases a little. I do not think, however, that the people who are affected feel calm or secure, when it has been shown that this is actually not something that is being thought about long-term and for which there is respect and an investment from the government.
What is it that we are talking about? Yes, it is about resources to support an important activity. The Sami languages are and have been threatened. It is not us who say it, but it is an assessment that is made. However, in recent years there has been some hope - there is a growing awareness, and more people are using the languages. And the state, society, has also supported an activity to not only preserve but also vitalize the languages. A language is a very important part of our culture and our identity. But this is also about showing respect.
Just as my colleague Mirja Räihä pointed out, it is also about seeing it as a whole. I believe we must be quite cautious and also careful regarding which decisions we make and which signals we send. It is important to preserve an indigenous people's language and culture and also the national minority languages.
I would like to have answers to the questions I have asked in this speech and in my previous speech.
Jan Riise (MP)
Madam Speaker! I am letting this go with "magstarkt" right now, because I don't really have time. I shall devote my two minutes to something else, namely Sámi Giellagáldu.
Giellagáldu is therefore a common body for the Sami people and at the same time the highest Nordic expert body for the Sami languages. Giellagáldu is responsible for language preservation and written language standardization for the Sami languages spoken in the Nordic countries, that is, to coordinate, strengthen and develop Sami language cooperation and also to preserve, protect and develop the cultural heritage that the Sami languages constitute. They are spoken across the borders in Norway, Finland and Sweden, and according to Unesco, all Sami languages are endangered or even seriously endangered languages.
Research shows that many Sámi have lost their language, and the situation of the Sámi languages is very fragile in Sweden, partly due to the harsh assimilation policy conducted a number of decades ago as well as a number of other things. We have to leave that there, but the situation is serious. That is the important thing here.
Report after report shows that the revitalization, development, and preservation of the Sami languages require rapid and permanent measures. In that regard, Sámi Giellagáldu has a central role. It is about the normalization of the languages, so that they can be taught in a reasonable way.
The Nordic Council's new declaration on Nordic language policy from May 2024, which the Minister for Culture himself has signed, underlines the Nordic languages' role in sustaining society. As the Minister himself expressed according to the Nordic Council's website: "Access to language is, ultimately, a matter of freedom, democracy and equality."
I imagine that Sámi Giellagáldu has a very important role to play when it comes to the languages and the benefits that Nordic cooperation entails. That only a few months after the declaration, one chooses not to extend the grant to Sámi Giellagáldu feels, to put it mildly, like a hardly constructive and not particularly dignified gesture.
My question, therefore, is whether the Minister can promise to do what is necessary to restore this by 2026.
Mirja Räihä (S)
Madam Speaker! I did not regret that the regulatory letter arrived so late – I have full understanding of the Chamber's work and that the budget must be finalized first. But I regret that the Minister for Culture is taking money from the County Administrative Boards' work in the administrative municipalities with preschool, elderly care, and municipal information in minority languages. One takes those funds to strengthen the language centers. It is this that I regret. One takes with one hand to give with the other.
Then we will have problems elsewhere instead. It will become very difficult to work with minority languages in preschool and to provide elderly care in minority languages in the municipalities, which is actually a must in administrative municipalities. It is precisely this that the Culture Minister's party colleague in Skellefteå points out in a debate article in Dagens Arbete today. I recommend that the Culture Minister reads it. I thought it was very good.
I can state that I have not received answers to my questions, especially when it comes to this matter of evaluating the consequences. I am a union representative and have worked in the union for my entire life. The first thing I always demand is a consequence description and a risk analysis. Both are missing in the government's policy when it comes to minorities.
I appeal to the Minister for Culture to raise the question of the consequences in the consultations that the Minister for Culture nevertheless has with all minority groups.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.