Response to interpellation 2024/25:265 on formalities as a political tool

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! Samuel Gonzalez Westling has asked me whether I consider that the Local Government Act needs to be developed or clarified to better ensure that municipal councils and committees can function in a democratic manner. He also wonders what measures I consider necessary to strengthen democracy at the local level and what can be done to prevent interpretations of formalities from being used as a tool to limit the debate.

First, I want to say that it is obviously important that democratic principles are respected at the local level in the municipalities. Democracy means rule by the people, and by that is meant that power emanates from the people. The elected representatives should therefore be able to state their opinion, and both the political majority and the minority should be given the opportunity to raise issues and debate pressing matters.

Since we have local self-government in Sweden, it is the municipalities themselves that decide on routines and methods of work, including how to debate in committees and councils. According to the Local Government Act (2017:725), the council shall adopt a set of rules of procedure from which it appears what shall apply for the council's meetings and the handling of matters. The municipalities can, in the rules of procedure, determine the speaking time and the number of contributions in the debate for the purpose of distributing the floor fairly and so that the meetings do not become too long.

The preparation requirement means that an issue must always be prepared before a decision can be made. There is therefore also a certain limitation in the Local Government Act regarding bringing up "new" or spontaneous issues at the meetings. That being said, the government concludes that at the current time there are no reasons to further develop or clarify the Local Government Act in this respect.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!

I think I would need to elaborate on this. I am completely convinced that the Minister, just like myself, is a warm supporter of democracy and of the right to use freedom of speech in order to be able to influence. We are, after all, in the stronghold of democracy in Sweden, the Riksdag. This is something that should permeate how it functions in both regions and municipalities all around Sweden.

The reason why the interpellation is being submitted at all is that this does not work in practice. I agree with the points the Minister raises regarding how it should work in a municipality, that one should adopt a working order and so on. But it simply does not work.

I have personal experience of these problems. During a speech, one can be interrupted by the chair with the claim that one is not sticking to the subject of the debate in question. An example could be that during a budget debate in a municipal council, one takes up what is happening at the national level in a speech. What does the state budget look like? One is then interrupted by the chair with the instruction that in the municipal council, one should only discuss issues that concern the municipality.

I believe the Minister agrees with me that the state budget affects all of Sweden's municipalities. There is a certain relevance in what is stated in a state budget even for the municipal council, and one should be able to discuss and debate this if it affects how the municipality functions.

There are other examples where chairpersons of committees deny members the right to initiate initiative matters. It is something that stands in the Local Government Act that one should be allowed to do. There are examples in the municipal council where the chairperson denies members the right to move for amendments to the submitted budget proposal with reference to the fact that it must first be prepared in the municipal executive board.

I am deeply convinced that the Minister agrees with me on these issues. These are things that one must be able to do. One must be able to discuss matters in the municipal council. One must be able to submit proposals in the matters that are in the municipal council, especially when it concerns the municipality's budget. One must be able to be allowed to initiate actions in committees and boards in the municipalities.

I believe it would be valuable for the country's municipalities and for the inhabitants of Sweden to hear that the Minister thinks it should be that way. As things stand right now, I have received an incredibly large number of complaints from across the country that it is not functioning as it is intended to function.

I think it is important that we address this in this chamber, because it is still we in this assembly who enact the laws that the municipalities have to rely on when they are to make this type of decision. I hope that I receive a positive answer from the Minister regarding these questions.

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! This is not entirely easy. One sometimes thinks as a minister and a national politician even about things that occur at the municipal level. But we have a far-reaching municipal self-government, and that is also the case with this. The Local Government Act shall be interpreted at the municipal level and, based on that, working procedures shall be created regarding what applies, for example, in a debate in the municipal council or in a committee.

The municipalities interpret this in slightly different ways. I know that different things are done, for example, regarding substitutes' participation in committees. It can be about what role one has as a substitute in a committee, whether one is allowed to submit special statements as a substitute, etcetera. These are things that have also been discussed in this chamber.

I am conducting a continuous dialogue with Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner. There, we raise many different types of questions, but this question has actually never come up from SKR's side as a problem. Nor has the question come up during the municipal trips I make in my role as Civil Minister with responsibility for relations to municipalities and regions. I do not recognize it from my own party either, except possibly in some single case.

Obviously, the interpellator and I have somewhat different frames of reference and experiences regarding this. But I am in no way unfamiliar with making changes to the Local Government Act. We are now moving forward with that following a motion just from SKR concerning, for example, increasing the protection for elected officials from threats and violence. There, we make a change in the Local Government Act, so to speak, when it comes to strengthening the internal control of providers of welfare services.

If a need arises and we in the government share the assessment, we are in no way opposed to making a change in the Local Government Act. But in this question, we have not reached that position. We have not seen that this would be such a large problem that it cannot be solved within the frameworks that exist today.

I always think it is good if one makes agreements as broad as possible, and in this issue, I think it is good if all parties represented in the council can be part of the agreement on how to handle this type of questions. It can be about what frameworks one sets for the debate and freedom of speech. When should a chairperson in the council, for example, intervene and interrupt a debate because it has completely spiraled out of control or because it does not stick to the subject at all? It is good if one can agree on this.

If a member believes that a municipal executive board, for example, violates such agreements, it is best decided there and then, in that situation. I mean that we cannot start changing the Local Government Act every time problems arise in individual municipalities to hedge against all conceivable situations that can arise, because that is very difficult. I do not think the interpellator thinks we should do that either, but I still want to have it said.

The municipal council must also not become too much of a national political arena where one merely stands and discusses the state budget. If one does so in a budget debate in the council, it must be directly related to the debate one has in the council in that specific municipality. One cannot demand of council members, for example those representing the government parties, that they should be able to answer questions about the government's budget and know it inside and out. If it becomes too much of a national political approach in a municipal debate, there is always a risk that one places unreasonable demands on individual members of the municipal council.

This might be more of an argument than direct answers to the interpellator's questions. But with that argument, I can say that there is nothing now that prompts us to change the Local Government Act. That being said: The Government is not averse to changing the Local Government Act if we see a need for it. But in that case, I need to receive a somewhat more established problem picture than the one I have received from Gonzalez Westling so far.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! I think that one must see the problem for what it is. SKR is an organization that covers all municipalities, but it is not all that are represented there. Both I and the Minister have been elected representatives in SKR. We know that not all municipalities have representatives in SKR.

I would say that this problem is relatively small if one is in a larger municipality, where there are media that have greater opportunities to monitor and actually see what is happening in the various parliamentary situations. In the municipalities that are a bit smaller - not those with 50,000 inhabitants but perhaps those with fewer than 20,000 inhabitants - the concern is significantly greater, especially considering the media landscape we have. It is incredibly few news media that have local coverage of, for example, municipal council meetings. My municipality has not had a daily newspaper that has monitored council meetings for almost 15 years - that is the level we are talking about. I know that it is the same in other municipalities.

It is not primarily the members of the majority parties who experience this type of problem. I suspect that it is most often the members of the majority parties that the Minister meets when he visits municipalities and hears about what problems the municipalities face. It is usually not the opposition parties that he meets, and it is usually the members of the opposition parties who experience this type of problem.

I believe it is relevant that one actually takes this issue seriously. This is something that should not occur. I believe this primarily arises when one ends up in situations where one feels that the debate itself begins to feel uncomfortable because one does not have answers to the questions that the debate is about. One is faced with an uncomfortable situation when the opponent presents political arguments and one does not have answers. In that case, one chooses instead to use formalities as a weapon in order to, so to speak, silence the opposition representatives.

That is why it is important to highlight this issue also at this level, not so that we should go in and direct what decisions are made in the municipal council, at different levels, or in the regional council.

I think this is a serious issue. I hope that the Minister takes this issue with them during the coming years during this government period and investigates how serious the problem is. It may be that I am mistaken, that it is not a widespread problem. But I think it is a problem as soon as there is someone who claims that this is a problem.

When we stand in this chamber, it is not formalities that we are to discuss, but we are to discuss real issues, politics that decide how people's everyday lives shall look and how people shall be able to live. That is what is important. That is what we are to discuss. That is what is relevant. We shall not keep bickering about how one is allowed to say something or why one is allowed to say something.

I believe that this would be appreciated across the country. It might also increase confidence in politics on a broader level.

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is, in itself, correct that it is often the majority parties I meet or the chairman of the municipal executive board, which often is a Social Democrat or a Moderate. But it also happens that it is a Christian Democrat or a Center Party member. I have not met any Left Party member so far, but I believe there is someone such. There is one. I would gladly meet that person too. I meet my own party comrades quite a lot as well. They sit sometimes in the majority and sometimes in the opposition.

I will be honest and say that this issue has never come up with me, but it is not that the problem does not exist just because I have not heard about it. I do not actually question the problem. But when I receive an interpellation where it is claimed that a problem exists and none of the others I speak with really confirm that picture, it becomes a bit difficult for me to say: Yes, now we are going to go out and take action.

But with that said, I am happy to take up the issue. Democracy issues are important. We are talking, in the long run, about what threatens democracy the most. It is precisely the occurrence of threats, hate, and violence against politicians. We can see a growing number of politicians at the municipal level who leave politics because they are too afraid. They cannot endure the pressure that this entails. We talk about this quite often with SKR, for example.

I am happy to take up this issue with them. I can also say that Vänsterpartiet is now in the leadership of SKR, so Gonzalez Westling is welcome to help and take up this issue with his party comrades in SKR. I am going to meet my party comrades in SKR tonight, for example. I will see if I get the opportunity to take up this issue then.

We also have Småkom, which is a specific organization just for the 70 smallest municipalities. It could also be interesting to raise the question there.

We will have to see what is said there and if we act based on that.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! I thought I would give some examples that I have had sent to me, so this does not have to be based only on what I myself have experienced.

In one municipality, the chairman of the committee ignored taking up a member's initiative in the committee. From another municipality comes this example: One was allowed to submit a written question in the municipal council. Then one received an answer that one was not allowed to submit it because it had the character of an interpellation. One rewrote it, and then one was not allowed to submit it because it was not sufficiently well-formulated. In another municipality, the chairman interrupted a speaker in a budget debate and stated that the municipal council was not a forum for ideological discussions.

It is at that level it is. I see that Niklas Wykman is sitting here and chuckling a little bit. I think we agree that the municipal council is a forum for ideological discussions, just as the Riksdag is. Politics is rooted somewhere in ideological discussions.

I thank you very much for this conversation - it is a conversation rather than a debate. I hope that the Minister gets the opportunity to meet opposition politicians and that he might be able to raise this issue in the future. In the near future, perhaps we will see a solution to this. It might be enough to point out that it is important that everyone gets to speak in a decent way in the municipal council. One should not have to feel that one is doing something wrong.

I think that the role of the spokespersons here is rather to help us members to have a good debate than to prevent us from having a debate.

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the member for this interpellation debate and this conversation. I believe that we share much and have the same basic attitude, especially when it comes to the fact that all around the country - whether it is in the municipality, the region, or in this chamber - ideology should be discussed. I believe it is very refreshing if it can also be discussed on the municipal side.

Now we do not, nor do I, govern SKR in any way, but we have a good cooperation with them. Possibly they would want to develop guidelines. It is just a thought that one might be able to raise with them. There is surely already a lot of support material from their side regarding this. But I promise at least to look a bit more into the issue. Then I will have to get back to you.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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