Response to interpellation 2024/25:340 on the future of the National Archives in Östersund
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that Riksarkivet can best determine its own organization to achieve public benefit and efficient use of state funds 1 2. M argues that it is reasonable for the agency to review local needs as it is cost-driving to operate in several locations 1. M argues that the government has worked hard to build up a defense and a preparedness function for agencies 3. M believes that no centralization is taking place, but rather that the agency is investigating how it can best organize its operations 3. M has confidence that the agency is doing a thorough job 4. S argues that the government has taken its hands off the issue 5. S believes that the government should let an independent investigator or the expert agency for total defense analysis investigate the organization 6 5. S argues that state presence throughout the country is strategically important for legitimacy and trust 7. S argues that centralization of the archive activities increases vulnerability in the current security policy situation 8. S believes that the government does not want Riksarkivet in Östersund to remain and that the process is backward as the government lets the agency decide without taking political responsibility 9. S believes that it is reasonable to lower the tax by 26 billion instead of 27 billion 8.
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! Kalle Olsson has asked me if I will take any initiatives to ensure the future of the National Archives in Östersund as an accessible institution for citizens and the local community.
Public benefit and an efficient use of public funds are something that all agencies constantly need to keep in mind. It is cost-driving for an agency to operate in several locations, and the operations in individual locations can become very vulnerable. The National Archives is currently located in about ten locations around the country, and a large proportion of the agency's costs concern precisely premises. It is therefore fully reasonable that the National Archives from time to time reassesses the operations' premises needs and organization. At the same time, it is important that our agencies are present in several places in Sweden, as state presence maintains the legitimacy and trust of the state administration.
Kalle Olsson has in his interpellation raised the perspective of preparedness and the state's efforts to protect our cultural heritage. This is also very important for the government. In February 2024, the government tasked the Swedish National Heritage Board with establishing a council for the protection of cultural heritage. In the budget bill for 2025, the Swedish National Heritage Board has been allocated funds for efforts concerning evacuation warehouses and transport. But removal of archives will in many cases not be practically possible in the event of war. A decisive preparedness measure is therefore that the state has archive depots with high security.
This autumn, the National Archives will gain access to a new, modern archive warehouse in Härnösand that meets high requirements for security and climate. This gives the National Archives the opportunity to increase its readiness as needed by moving archives there from warehouses that do not hold the same security classification.
It is the government's view that the National Archives is best suited to assess and decide how the agency's activities should be organized for the greatest possible benefit to citizens and an efficient use of state funds. I have great confidence that the agency will be able to make its decisions with as much consideration as possible for the need for accessibility for citizens and the local community.
Regardless of what decisions the National Archives makes regarding the operations in Östersund, the new depot in Härnösand means that the National Archives will also be able to operate in the future within the area that is commonly designated as Sápmi.
Kalle Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for her answer.
Someone following this debate might wonder: Why a debate about an archive in Östersund? I therefore thought I would start by saying a few words about this archive.
The National Archives, or the County Archives as it was called until 2010, has been located in Östersund for a hundred years. It has developed into a much-demanded and very popular operation, not least for its archival pedagogical expertise. School classes, genealogy researchers, academic researchers, and others come here to access the material. Through cooperation with Mittuniversitetet, Jamtli, the association archive – which it shares premises with – and not least the South Sámi cultural center Gaaltije, it is closely connected with the surrounding community.
I personally think the Sami connection is particularly important to highlight because the archive is a carrier of the Sami history that exists in the surrounding geographical area.
The National Archives in Östersund stands out in many ways. It is actually quite impressive, Madam Speaker. It reports steadily rising visitor numbers, figures that are now higher than for other national archives with significantly larger catchment areas. Together with Visby, Östersund has the most visitors in relation to the number of shelf meters and the number of employees. There, to borrow from the Minister, we can speak of both "citizen benefit" and "efficient use of state funds."
Against that background, one might think that this entire debate is actually a bit strange. The question today should actually not be why the National Archives in Östersund should be closed. The question should be how the other national archives can become more like the one in Östersund, which is the shining star in the archival sky.
It is strange, Madam Speaker, that the government does not see this – especially considering the times we live in now, characterized by fake news, historical revisionism, populism, and fact-resistance. The ambition should be to highlight our history, not to move it further away from the citizens. But that is exactly what will happen if the archive is now forced to close.
Another aspect, Madam Speaker, is our preparedness. In Ukraine, Russia is bombing the Ukrainian cultural heritage. That the National Archives now plans to concentrate its activities to a few locations in the country goes directly against the idea of creating redundancy by being and operating in a number of locations to make it difficult for a potential attacker. This is truly an example where the government cannot leave it to any internal investigator at the National Archives to make the decisive decisions. The government has the ultimate responsibility for total defense.
Now the Minister says that the National Archives is best suited to investigate its own organization. I do not think so. Why not let an independent investigator comprehensively illuminate the consequences of a change in the National Archives' organization? The latest major archive investigation was presented in 2019, i.e., before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
If the Minister, for some inscrutable reason, is nevertheless not prepared to investigate the matter broadly, is she at least willing to task the Defence Analysis Agency with producing a knowledge base on how the state's archiving activities are best organized from a preparedness perspective?
Kristoffer Lindberg (S)
Madam Speaker! This autumn, we were all reached by the news that the future of the National Archives in Östersund would be investigated. The reasons given for this are increased local costs and poor finances. The direction now seems to be that the archive risks disappearing from Östersund.
The archive plays an important role for research, cultural heritage, and democracy in the region, particularly through its work with Sámi archives and cooperation with local institutions, which Member Kalle Olsson explained very clearly. The National Archives in Östersund is a well-visited archive. We also know that digitalization cannot replace the functions of the physical archives or the expertise that the staff offers. It is only 5 percent of the National Archives' material that is digitized today.
In addition to the material from government agencies, the National Archives in Östersund also has 1,500 shelf meters of private archives, and these are archives that people have left to Östersund in the belief that the material stays in Jämtland. The Minister has previously stated that it is important that our agencies are located in several places in Sweden because state presence maintains the legitimacy and trust of the state administration.
Madam Speaker! I share that view. It is important and strategic that the state increases its presence throughout the country because it strengthens the ties between the countryside and the city. It also contributes to jobs, sustainable growth, and development across the entire country.
The presence of government agencies in different parts of the country means that the local and regional labor market can offer a variety of occupations and contributes to making it easier for companies to find qualified labor in the area.
If one thinks like the minister and I, namely that it is important to maintain the legitimacy and trust of the public administration, the minister needs to act. Then it cannot fall on the individual agencies to decide where they want to be located. Now, the minister has instead changed the Riksarkivet's instructions in order to facilitate that the agency's activities around the country can be phased out. Previously, it was clearly stated at which locations Riksarkivet would conduct its activities, but since December last year, two months ago, it states in the instructions that Riksarkivet shall conduct activities at the locations justified by the agency's tasks. The Minister for Culture has seen to this himself.
Now we stand here today and debate and state that the authority is disappearing from Östersund. According to the national antiquarian, there is also a risk that the archives in the other locations that have been struck from the paragraph, that is to say, that they are also being closed down.
That the agency's management itself sees no problem with this is one thing. It is obviously most efficient to be in as few places as possible. But for a government minister in a government, there are other values to take into account. A politician can have visions and ambitions - if those are words that feel familiar. Here, the minister acts in such a way that we see less state presence and more centralization.
I still think the question is relevant, namely what the minister intends to do to preserve the National Archives in Östersund and in the other locations that have now been removed from the paragraph.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! I completely agree with Kalle Olsson's view on how important the archives are from both a preparedness perspective and an accessibility perspective.
The report that the Archive Investigation presented was completed in 2019, as pointed out earlier, and was produced during the previous S government. What we have done is to both refer and follow up on what emerged in the investigation. It was proposed in the investigation that it should be stated that the National Archives shall conduct activities in the locations justified by the agency's tasks, and that is what the government has chosen to proceed with.
Madam Speaker! So far, no decisions have been made. It sounds to the members as if everything is already settled, but that is not the case. Riksarkivet has not yet made any decisions regarding the future of the operations in Östersund. The agency has very recently appointed a working group to look into the issue and produce various proposals on how Riksarkivets presence in Östersund could look and describe the consequences.
The authority's task will also in the future be to ensure that the archival material is provided so that it is accessible to both the citizens and the local community in Östersund, regardless of what organization one ends up in.
Madam Speaker! The fact remains that it is not the government – and this is evident from the report submitted during the previous S-government – but the authority itself that best decides how it wishes to organize its activities. Therefore, I look forward to, and have confidence that, the Swedish National Archives will do this in a well-balanced manner.
Kalle Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! It is true that the Archive Investigation presented its report in 2019. It is also true that the then S-led government did not proceed with the questions, precisely because a value was seen in the fact that the state archive activity exists throughout the country.
It is clear that the Minister, in his answers, does not want to address the issue but pushes it back to the authority – despite the fact that we are talking about an authority subordinate to the Minister for Culture.
I, in my capacity as a member of Parliament, cannot call the head of the National Archives here to the chamber for an interpellation debate, and as a voter, I cannot remove a head of an agency at general elections through accountability. However, I can request a debate with the head of the agency's head, the Minister for Culture. It is the Minister for Culture who governs their agencies through budget, instructions, and regulations.
The Government, therefore, has every possibility to direct the state's archival activities. But that, of course, depends on wanting to do so. Instead, the Government, just as we have heard from the previous speaker, has chosen to take its hands off the question of the National Archives' location. Last year, it was announced that the Government had amended the ordinance so that the agency no longer needs to operate in a number of designated locations, including Östersund.
When this change was made, the government was fully aware of the National Archives' plans to centralize and concentrate its activities, just as so many other agencies are being forced to do under this government. In fact, it is the government that has made it so that we have ended up here. The government knew what would happen, namely that a process would be quickly initiated to phase out Östersund and perhaps also more locations.
There is certainly great expertise on archival issues at the National Archives and its management – I really do not doubt that. But what my colleague and I have tried to demonstrate is that more aspects must be weighed in. These are trade-offs that, ultimately and finally, fall to a government to make.
Does the government see a value in the state being represented throughout the country? It is not exactly so that it swarms with state cultural institutions in the inland of Norrland. Yes, the Minister replied. But still, she stands passively and watches as the decommissioning process begins.
Is it important to consider total defense? Yes, it is very important, the Minister replied. But why then not let the expert authority, the Agency for Total Defense Analysis, produce a basis for how specifically the archive operations are best protected in the event of war? The plan that the National Archives is now working according to, to concentrate the operations and put all eggs in one basket, is more reminiscent of how the state worked during the late 90s and early 00s when we lived in the notion of an eternal peace and even the Armed Forces built their own central warehouses. We have thankfully now moved away from that mindset - on good grounds.
Then we have the question that I have asked many times and that Kristoffer Lindberg raised. It is a question that cannot be measured in terms of efficiency or kronor, but it is about trust between the National Archives and all those personal archives, farm archives, and corporate archives that have been submitted to the National Archives in Östersund, in the belief that the materials would be preserved in just Östersund and be accessible for future generations.
Does the Minister consider it right to remove this material? Is it reasonable and morally correct to break that trust?
Kristoffer Lindberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for the answer. And I would like to particularly thank Kalle Olsson for submitting the interpellation. It is clear that it is necessary that we continue to highlight and question all the deteriorations that this government is implementing, not least in the area of culture.
The tough economic situation is noticeable across the entire cultural sector. The culture budget now has the smallest share of the state budget in decades, and the National Antiquarian confirms that the National Archives is in a difficult economic situation.
But it doesn't have to be that way. It is about priorities. One does not have to use 27 billion to lower the tax. One can settle for 26 billion. It is still a decent tax cut. That must be accepted.
This is about will, and it is about political accountability. I also think that the relevant aspects being raised regarding whether it is truly a reasonable way to go to centralize the archive activities in Sweden are important.
We find ourselves in an extremely strained security policy situation. The Prime Minister has informed the Swedish people that peace no longer prevails in Sweden. At the same time, the material held at the National Archives is an invaluable part of Swedish history. That content is important to protect. There is information here that is absolutely necessary for rebuilding a society after a war, a crisis, or disasters. Consolidating archival activities to fewer locations implies an increased vulnerability.
In this security policy situation, the protection of the Swedish cultural heritage must therefore be discussed, and the strategic and reasonable nature of centering the archive activities must be strongly questioned.
I want to conclude by asking the Minister how she intends to act to ensure the presence of authorities throughout the entire country, even outside the major cities.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! The S-government chose not to proceed with anything at all from the report Herefrom to eternity. It was quite symptomatic, I must say, for the previous government's work on a general level. If you do not proceed with anything, you get nowhere.
I think it is interesting that the Social Democrats now care very much about the issue of preparedness. During the mandate period when they themselves were in power, they did not do anything special at all when it comes to this. This government has worked very hard to build up a defense worthy of the name for Sweden, and both a total defense and a preparedness function for our authorities.
We have tasked the National Heritage Board with establishing a cultural protection council to coordinate our authorities and to help our cultural heritage and cultural institutions with their preparedness work. We have looked at the archives' possibilities to function, not only in peacetime but also in crisis and in war. In that case, one must also take into account other aspects. One must take into account how the premises are designed and what possibilities they have to function during wartime. And now a new facility is being built to enable this.
We keep returning to the fact that a centralization should take place. No decisions have been made regarding centralization. No centralization of the National Archives' activities is currently underway. However, the agency has noted that it is not cost-effective for the archive repositories to grow in all locations. That is what has been noted. Because it is not cost-effective, the agency is now reviewing the possibility of phasing out external archive repositories at different operational sites in order to limit costs for premises and achieve more efficient management.
This is ultimately about enabling greater accessibility for the citizens, but it may look different. I think we also need to follow it over time.
I think it is positive that the National Archives, as the member mentioned, cooperates with other activities in various ways to be able to utilize its own resources more effectively and to limit costs for different parties. But it is, again, the National Archives' responsibility to organize its activities in such a way that they can fulfill the tasks they have according to the Archives Act.
What activities are to be conducted and at what location, in Östersund or at another location, and to what extent, Riksarkivet itself must take a position on. And they are doing so now through an ongoing investigation. No decisions have been made, and there is no ongoing centralization. There is only a mandate following a report that has been made, which states that Riksarkivet itself best plans for its activities and at which locations and to what extent the activities shall take place at those locations.
Kalle Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker and Minister! It is good that these debates are being recorded so that we can preserve them for posterity. I am thinking of the Minister's comment that it might even lead to greater accessibility in the event of a closure of the archive in Östersund.
The question in this interpellation was whether the Minister intends to take any initiatives so that the National Archives in Östersund can remain. The regrettable answer is no – not because the government cannot, not because the government does not have the mandate, but because the government does not want to.
Madam Speaker! I do not think it is reasonable that an operation that has existed for a hundred years in the same location should be able to disappear without the most politically responsible person having their own clear opinion on the matter, instead just sliding along with a government authority's leadership.
Today's debate has not been about whether the National Archives should purchase blue or red pens. I believe it has been about important, principled considerations. These are considerations that deserve both greater care and greater reflection than what has been shown so far.
Actually, this whole process is backwards. It began, as we have now reminded you several times, with the government telling the National Archives: "Do as you wish. Then we can dress up the decisions with a bit of investigative prose." It is not taking political responsibility.
What we see here is another example of important and appreciated state activity disappearing from the country, with this government's good memory. But there is still time. And I truly hope that the Minister is prepared to take some time on this issue and reconsider her position, and that she is prepared to take in the arguments from not only this rostrum but also from the thousands of people who, through petitions, in public meetings, and in Facebook groups, have clearly signaled against a closure of the National Archives in Östersund.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! I think it is positive that there is such care for our common archives. It is very good. That care for our common cultural heritage, where the archives are such an important part, will be needed.
However, I can only regret that the member has such low confidence in the authority's ability to organize itself. The member says that this government is just tagging along and letting the authority decide for itself, and that one should have started on-site and then looked at the rest. I do not agree with Kalle Olsson on this at all.
For me, it is the task that is in focus. The task that the authority has to solve must reasonably be that which is in focus. After that, the authority itself can, from a number of different perspectives and parameters, look at how they best manage to solve the task that they are set to solve for Sweden.
Madam Speaker! In this case, I have good confidence that the authority will do that work and do it thoroughly and thoughtfully. They weigh in different perspectives and manage to make good trade-offs, even when it concerns both accessibility and location, and that the archive should function in both crisis and war.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.