Response to interpellation 2024/25:37 on regional culture

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Madam Speaker! Kristoffer Lindberg has asked me what measures I intend to take so that regional cultural institutions within the cultural cooperation model are not forced to be phased out. Furthermore, Kristoffer Lindberg has asked in what way the government's budget implies a brightening for cultural life outside the major cities.

The state's support for regional and local culture is significant, not least through the grant for regional culture. The grant is an important support to ensure that culture exists throughout the country and amounts to almost 1.7 billion kronor in the budget bill for 2025. It should, however, be pointed out that the state does not have ownership of institutions at the regional and local level, but it is usually the regions and municipalities that are the owners and assignees.

Culture is largely and for a long time jointly financed by the state, the regions, and the municipalities. In addition, there is also significant private financing through households, which, according to the Swedish Agency for Cultural Analysis, accounts for approximately one quarter of Swedish culture's revenues through, for example, ticket revenues. The government's measures to strengthen household purchasing power are therefore important to enable increased consumption of regional culture.

In the budget proposal for 2025, the government also proposes that Skapande skola be strengthened with 50 million kronor annually until and including 2027. The grant promotes both children's and young people's access to culture as well as professional cultural creators' conditions to live on their artistry. The initiative also creates jobs for local and regional artists and cultural creators to live on their artistic activities.

The government has simultaneously taken several measures to support the regions, not least in the form of permanently increased general state grants in the 2024 budget. As a result of the government's successful inflation fight, the municipalities' and regions' pension costs are also expected to decrease by up to 50 billion kronor during next year, according to Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner. These measures collectively increase the opportunities for municipalities and regions to prioritize other parts in their respective budgets, where culture can be a possible part.

I look forward to continued cooperation and dialogue on these issues, so that we ensure that our public funds are used in the best way and that more people can take part in culture.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the opportunity to debate this incredibly important issue - the situation for regional culture across Sweden, that is, the conditions for cultural life outside of Stockholm!

The government has been clear in its message that inflation is being fought. And the Prime Minister began his government statement by stating that things are brightening on the horizon.

The government has now presented its budget for next year. It contains reforms for 60 billion kronor, but unfortunately, we can observe that culture's share of the total budget is less than last year despite great needs.

The state's efforts for regional culture are carried out through the cultural cooperation model. Through the model, state funds are distributed to the regions, which in turn distribute them further to regional cultural activities in their counties. This concerns county theaters, county museums, regional operas, archives, concert halls, and so on. The state accounts for approximately one quarter of the budget. The remaining part is financed by regions and municipalities. Over time, the state's share of the funds has also decreased while the regions have increased their shares. The government's decision this year, 2024, to stop compensating for price and wage increases has had major consequences for the regional cultural institutions. The consequence of this also alarmed ten politicians in five regions a few weeks ago in an open letter to the Minister for Culture.

In more and more places in the country, voices are now being raised that the ongoing development not only leads to fewer performances and exhibitions but also risks leading to the decommissioning of entire cultural institutions across the country. Despite this, the government continues with cuts to culture outside Stockholm, and in its budget, it proposes an annual reduction across the country of 20 million. Between 2024 and 2027, the state is reducing its appropriation by 41 million.

The state's cuts to regional culture have a significant negative effect for the other two funding parties in the cooperation model, regions and municipalities, and not least for the cultural institutions that are affected. The regions report that they will also face a deficit next year, and the municipalities will receive no increased general state grants from the government in the coming years.

SVT, as is well known, conducted a review of the regional culture budgets, and 55 percent of the municipalities stated that they are forced to make cuts in the cultural area during this year. At the same time as regions and municipalities are under severe pressure, the minister is increasing the pressure on regional and municipal compensation for the reduced state responsibility for culture across the country. The government is now, with its policy, forcing regions and municipalities to make cuts in precisely that cultural activity which helps to achieve the state cultural policy goals that everyone should have the opportunity to participate in cultural life.

Therefore, I would like to hear more details from the Minister on how the government believes these cuts represent a brightening for regional cultural life, i.e., culture outside the inner city of Stockholm. What measures does the Minister intend to take moving forward so that regional cultural institutions within the cultural cooperation model are not forced into closure?

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

Lars Mejern Larsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Society and culture go hand in hand, and together they form a fundamental pillar for an open and democratic region. In Sweden's cultural province Värmland, we have long been able to proudly enjoy a rich cultural life. This cultural life does not only enrich our residents' lives but also strengthens our region as an innovative and attractive place to live and work. The role of culture in promoting a democratic, inclusive, and lively public conversation cannot be overstated.

This year marks 50 years since the first culture bill was submitted. It was 1974. In this bill, a bold vision was formulated for a Sweden where culture is a natural part of everyone's everyday life and a democratic right that is accessible to everyone regardless of where they live. This is a vision we Social Democrats have always held fast to and believe must be realized in the entire country, not just in the large cities.

But now we face a serious threat to this vision. The government's cultural policy is slowly suffocating free cultural life, popular education, and above all, children's and young people's participation in culture and sports. Free cultural life, which for a long time has been a catalyst for democracy and social cohesion, is being pressured by constantly decreasing resources and increased costs. Institutions such as Rackstadmuseet and Kristinehamn's art museum, which for generations have been cultural hubs in Värmland, are now fighting for their survival.

The cuts have already begun to be felt, and the consequences will be catastrophic if we do not act. Culture is not a luxury good but a necessity. It is a fundamental part of our democratic society and our collective well-being. When culture is hit, we all are hit. The free performing arts, the museums, and not least the free theater and dance scenes for children and young people are being brought to their knees.

What do we get in return? Yes, reduced appropriations to the Swedish Arts Council and one of Europe's lowest film subsidies. When we should instead be investing in the cultural sectors to strengthen our preparedness for the future and promote community and understanding in a time of crisis and division, we instead see a government that turns a blind eye to these needs.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats are clear in our opposition to this erosion of culture's place in society. Instead, we want to see a cultural policy that strengthens the infrastructure for cultural life throughout the country and that creates conditions for artistic development. We need a policy characterized by trust in the cultural creators and which, at arm's length from power, safeguards artistic freedom.

We Social Democrats propose an increase of the culture budget by 1.7 billion, and according to the Minister's answer, it is a significant portion. This is a necessary step to secure the future of culture, especially in the countryside and in smaller regions such as Värmland. By doing this, we ensure that future generations get access to culture and sports and that our children and young people get the opportunity to shape their lives and society.

Madam Speaker! Therefore, I want to ask the Minister: What measures does the Minister intend to take to secure the future of regional culture in Värmland and other regions? How does the Minister view the concern that has been expressed regarding a potential dismantling of cultural activities during this mandate period?

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

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by extending a warm thanks to Kristoffer Lindberg for a very important interpellation.

I requested the floor in this debate because I want to emphasize the value of culture and thus also what we lose through a dismantling of culture. I also want to highlight some regional and local examples regarding highly current threats to culture.

A strong cultural infrastructure is a prerequisite for a flourishing democratic society where people want to live, reside, develop, and contribute. A safe and equal society has a well-established and accessible arts and cultural life. The cultural sector contributes to education and public health. In countries where freedom is restricted, the first attack is almost invariably directed against the freedom of culture, against artistic activity, and against popular education and journalism. The most effective way to dismantle a functioning democracy is to limit and, preferably, forbid culture.

Social Democratic cultural policy is anchored in the conviction that class divides and social injustices are expressed not only through economic gaps but also through a cultural inequality.

Madam Speaker! Inequality sometimes shows itself clearly in culture, perhaps especially among children and young people. It is about who has access to it, who gets to take a place on a stage, and whose story is depicted and in what way.

I do not believe that one can create an equal society with only active cultural policy. We also need to provide a good, equal school, an active labor market policy and safe residential areas - that is, the opposite of this government's budget, where rich men are the winners. But through an active, inclusive cultural policy for everyone, we can contribute to more people gaining access to cohesion, a sense of belonging, common points of reference, education, co-creation and the opportunity to flourish in a way that only culture can nourish.

I am thinking about the culture here in Gävleborg, Member of Parliament Lindberg, and my constituency and the county where we live. Here are the important institutions that contribute to engagement and education for our county residents of all ages and with all backgrounds. The Symphony Orchestra, Länsmuseet Gävleborg, Hälsinglands Museum, and Folkteatern Gävleborg are institutions that have an entirely special power and a special place in society and in our hearts. Here, we county residents can meet and be enchanted, delighted, and horrified. These are places where several of the county's children have their very first cultural experience.

That the Sweden Democrats in the regional leadership in Gävleborg conduct culture-hostile politics is well known to the inhabitants of my home county. In Gävleborg, we see what the result becomes on a regional level with the Sweden Democrats and the Moderates in leadership. The right to freely express one's opinion and the right to criticize and form opinion have been repeatedly hindered, and the principle of the arm's length distance has been challenged.

I am participating in this debate today because I am deeply concerned about the development of a slow slaughter of culture, nationally and in my home country.

Let me therefore repeat Kristoffer Lindberg's question: In what way does the government's budget represent a brightening for cultural life outside the major cities?

In this speech, Kristoffer Lindberg (S) agreed.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Madam Speaker! Residents of Sweden's major cities are millionaires and, moreover, winners when the Tidö parties have agreed on their budget. Not only do the millionaires get exorbitant tax cuts – now the state is also going to borrow money to lower their taxes. When the Minister for Culture initially says that one must be cautious with state expenditures, it seems to apply only to Sweden's culture budget.

For children and young people, cultural life outside the major cities, regional county museums, county theaters, performing arts, study associations, art galleries and public libraries, there is a monumental lack of interest from the Minister for Culture and the Tidö parties. Two years into the parliamentary term, it has been shown that there is a lack of will, ambition and vision for Sweden's cultural life.

Culture's share of the total budget is now the lowest in 20 years, and even if not everything needs to be counted in public kronor and öre, no work has been launched at the Ministry of Culture regarding the moderate promise to strengthen the business sector's or patronage's financing of cultural life. Even though the Minister for Culture and her State Secretary in every other debate highlight that Sweden has a low share of private financing or patronage within culture, nothing is happening in that area. This was most recently confirmed at the Culture Committee's meeting in the Riksdag a few weeks ago.

So we stand here with reduced public funding and no launched work for increased private financing. Instead, we are told that the tax reliefs are the great salvation. According to the Minister for Culture, the broad tax reliefs shall create space to buy a painting, a book, or a music or art subscription. Cultural activities outside the major cities shall therefore solve the increased wages and rents. Cost developments and long-term operational financing shall be solved with tax reliefs. That, Madam Speaker, will not only make more art and culture creators unemployed in Sweden; it will make our country poorer.

The infrastructure required for democratic dialogue will not be made possible outside of the major cities. As recently as yesterday, we heard on the news that rehearsal rooms for children and young people are being closed down in municipality after municipality.

What culture needs is long-term funding. There must be visionary investments in art, music, theater, dance, and literature. There need to be places where children and young people can turn, even if their parents are not the best off. Therefore, I ask the same question as the interpellor Kristoffer Lindberg. Somewhere, one must consider what the efforts are outside the major cities. How does the Minister for Culture intend to counter the closures and cuts that are occurring regionally now?

Sweden is larger than Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö, but even Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö are having a really tough time with the weak funding provided to the municipal sector and the regions. Somewhere one must understand that without a vision or ambition, it will take a long time to counter the effects of this culture budget. I hope that the next culture budget can mean measures, but very little suggests that.

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

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Madam Speaker! One might wonder if the Social Democrats have missed that every fourth krona for culture comes from private households. Those kronor come from hard-working people who work for their money. It is not the state's money that we give back to people. It is the people's own money. Through the tax cuts, we enable people to keep more of their own money in their wallets. For me, there is a logic in this. If every fourth krona that goes to culture comes from households, from private individuals, it is also reasonable that we enable them to keep more of their own money in their wallets. Then we increase the freedom of choice regarding what they spend that money on.

The autonomy and self-government of municipalities and regions is also important to highlight in the debate. Their self-government cannot be elective as it suits. That they are autonomous is an incredibly important part of the democracy we are all here to protect. It is important for the opportunities that regions and municipalities themselves should be able to make priorities and see what is needed in them.

That the state finances a third of the cultural cooperation model with nearly 1.7 billion kronor, while we have increased the general state grants for municipalities and regions by over 10 billion kronor, should reasonably enable municipal politicians and regional politicians everywhere in the country to also finance culture. Furthermore, the government's successful inflation fight will be able to contribute to lowering the costs for municipalities and regions in the coming years by up to 50 billion kronor. Taken together, these are major efforts, partly to enable municipal and regional culture, and partly to create the possibility of making priorities among those who have the primary responsibility and decision-making mandate, that is, among the municipalities and regions themselves.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

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

I suspect that even if the government's lack of interest in culture seems bottomless, there must still be an ounce of commitment from the Minister for Culture for the cultural policy goals to be achieved. The state is involved in financing parts of regional culture to achieve the goal of culture for all. The Minister continues to successively withdraw from the state's responsibility for funding and seems, in this debate, Madam Speaker, to demand that the regions – which already take a greater responsibility than the state does – should prioritize further resources to the cultural cooperation model to compensate for the deficiencies in the minister's own budget. I believe that the vast majority of those listening to the debate hear the absurdity in this.

If we are to take the Minister for Culture's view on this issue seriously, I have a follow-up question. Given the healthcare crisis that the government's policy has placed Sweden's regions in - what are they going to cut back on in order to instead allocate more resources to the cultural cooperation model? That seems to be the government's strategy, so at least the Minister for Culture should be able to answer that.

Sveriges kommuner och regioner have flagged that the government's budget for next year continues to mean that the regions are heading towards a deficit in 2025. In his response, the minister referred to Skapande skola, and when it comes to the appropriations there, we are in complete agreement. They are good investments. But to mix them into the discussion on the basic funding for regional cultural institutions is not honest.

Skapande skola is a grant that schools can apply for to provide students with art and culture experiences. It is good. More of that! But if, at the same time, one saws off the branch that is the basic funding of regional cultural institutions, schools will not be able to purchase that theater performance that could never be produced, organize visits to that museum that has been forced to close, or listen to that symphony orchestra whose musicians have been laid off. That is what we are talking about! Skapande skola is good, but if the cultural infrastructure in the regions collapses, large parts of Skapande skola also collapse. I am sincerely shocked that the minister does not see that connection.

In the same way, it is with the argument that emerges here in the debate now, that lower taxes increase households' purchasing power and enable increased consumption of regional culture. We can for a moment assume that it is that simple and adopt that view. If the government then does not take its responsibility in the cultural cooperation model, we risk that cultural institutions all around the country will not exist in the future. Where will people then go to buy their theater ticket, financed with 27 billion in tax cuts from the Minister for Culture? The cultural infrastructure must be in place. The basic funding must be there.

Many of us are concerned. Cultural institutions across the country testify to a deteriorating economy. Major cuts are to be expected. What the minister needs to answer is: Where is the government's thought on equality – that we should be able to participate in art and culture throughout the entire country?

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

Lars Mejern Larsson (S)

Madam Speaker! The logic that tax cuts will solve the challenges of culture makes me lose my train of thought.

We are facing a crisis in the cultural sector, not just in Värmland but in the whole country. Culture has a central role in our society, and in Värmland, we have long protected it. But now we face a situation where cultural institutions, as Kristoffer said, are struggling for their survival due to inflation increases. In that case, the words "more culture for the money" ring hollow. At first glance, it may sound like a wise economic strategy, but let us stop and ask ourselves: At what price?

We risk eroding the quality of our cultural life. Creating more with fewer resources pressures cultural workers and forces commercial solutions instead of safeguarding diversity and artistic freedom. Culture is about more than economics. It binds us together, challenges us, and preserves our heritage. Let us not take the path that threatens its deeper value. We do not just need more culture, but we need better conditions for culture.

Madam Speaker! The Minister has a responsibility to act before it is too late. In a time when culture is needed more than ever, we see that the Minister for Culture's area of responsibility is being deprioritized in the Tidö parties' budget. How can the Minister defend this? How does it feel to be deprioritized? Will the Minister propose inflation protection or other compensation to handle the economic challenges?

It is time to put the future of culture at the top of the agenda.

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

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Madam Speaker! Culture's liberating power is a crucial counterweight to authoritarian forces. Culture and democracy go hand in hand. Kristoffer Lindberg's concern regarding the cuts to the state commitment regarding the cultural cooperation model and what they will mean for public health, community, attractiveness, equality, and democracy outside the major cities is fully reasonable and justified.

It is important to zoom out a bit and see that the government's dismantling is ongoing from several sides. In my home municipality in Gävle, it looks like this: reduced general state grants to the municipality that are nowhere near compensating for the cost increase, which of course largely affects cultural and leisure activities, completely removed appropriations for strengthened libraries, which can affect opening hours and the accessibility of local libraries, halving of the support for the cultural school, which in the long run can mean a reduced range of activities or fee increases, and a precision-political attack against study associations that has major consequences, both in the ability to run their own activities and in the support and administration for, for example, cultural associations.

Columnist Simon Ridell expressed it very well in Arbetarbladet recently: "The music house in Gävle is a small miracle that actually shouldn't be able to survive when Ulf Kristersson and co. shovel away everything that culture and music are called." He refers to the fact that the operation remains despite that Studieförbundet Vuxenskolan has been forced to leave the operation and that about twenty music houses around the country have been forced to close. Rural areas and outlying areas are hit as always the hardest, and now Rockskolan in Norrsundet must be sold.

I can only state, Madam Speaker, that I see no improvement regarding the government's policy for local and regional culture.

In this speech, Kristoffer Lindberg (S) agreed.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Madam Speaker! There will probably be quite a few debates in this chamber concerning regional culture and the infrastructure of culture in Sweden, as it will be severely weakened during the next two years. It will take a long time - until we hopefully get back a Social Democratic-led government - to counter the tax-cut policy that the Moderates, together with the Tidö cooperation parties, are implementing for Sweden.

The Minister for Culture is at least honest about his moderate economic orientation, but let us also be honest in this debate. The big winners in the Tidö budget are the households that earn 187,500 kronor a month. They are the ones who receive the largest tax cuts. The ordinary families with small children, who the Minister for Culture highlights now should be able to consume more culture, may perhaps afford two cinema tickets a month. That is how the distribution curve looks.

The school is not working so well - nine out of ten teachers are worried that they won't keep up. Housing construction has completely stalled. The trains do not run on time. The climate work is, one might have to say, exhausted. Growth is hindered by this policy just as the area that is supposed to provide our children and young people with good role models, which is to be an alternative beyond destructiveness and, in the worst case, crime, and which is to provide our children and young people with education, a rich language, reading comprehension, aesthetic ability, analytical ability, and a meaningful and rich life with good role models. It is this that culture can promote.

I am very concerned that this direction rather spoils the conditions for children and young people growing up in less well-off families, as well as their opportunity to attend an activity, a sports club, a cultural school, and so on, to get more role models, a rich language, and good conditions for a successful life.

It is this policy that has now been presented. We will act with force in opposition to this.

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

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Madam Speaker! From the Social Democrats, it almost sounds as if we on the state's side have retreated completely from the funding of the cultural cooperation model. I still think it is worth mentioning once again that the state pays for one-third of the cultural cooperation model. Almost 1.7 billion kronor go into the model from the state. The cuts, around which the tone is so high, are therefore 15 million kronor of a framework of 1.7 billion, where the state is one of three funders.

One can calculate this based on the number of municipalities and regions, even though I am well aware that the cultural cooperation model does not work that way. It is, so to speak, no straight, linear distribution across municipalities and regions, but just for the sake of the calculation: The 15 million kronor becomes 50,000 kronor per municipality or region. I still think this is worth highlighting.

I must also say that I am astonished when the member says that the government's policy forces commercial solutions. It is for me a worrying insight into how S views culture. It is also a clear ideological difference between the Social Democrats and the government with the Moderates.

I have said on a number of occasions that certain types of culture will always need to be publicly funded. That is the case. But to view an industry that contributes so much to Sweden as having been forced into existence because public funding does not cover everything, I find to be a staggering attitude.

I will also say that I think it is a strange logic that all expenditures in the budget should need to be increased at the same pace as those expenditures that are now increasing significantly. We see and carry out large investments in defense, the justice system, welfare, and support for Ukraine. This results in the total budget framework increasing significantly. But we also invest in the cultural area; during the next year, the culture budget will increase by more than 230 million. We invest in culture, but we also carry out significant investments in other areas, which increases the total budget space.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for an interesting debate!

I do not know where in the debate it was said that the government's policy forces regions into commercial financing. What I said was that the government's policy forces the regions into cuts in the activities that are intended to fulfill the cultural policy goals.

I also want to assert that it is not a third of the cultural cooperation budget that comes from the state, but a quarter, but that we can sort out later.

This is not just about next year's budget - it is 20 million in compensation and then 5 million, so it becomes a reduction of 15 million - but it is also about that the state over time has reduced its share. It is also about the missing price and wage adjustment this year. It is about increased costs even within the cultural sector, such as wage increases and rent increases, which need to be compensated in some way.

To refer to the fact that municipalities and regions can use the general state grants to fill their share in the collaboration model is a statement that in some way testifies to a misunderstanding of how the cultural collaboration model is structured. It is a three-party financing. Otherwise, the minister could simply abolish the entire state funding of the collaboration model and put those funds into the general state grants to the municipalities, and then we can see if there will be any cultural activities for the money or not. Is that how we are to interpret the Moderaternas view on culture outside Stockholm's city center and on the cultural policy goals?

We Social Democrats see the need in the regional cultural activities and therefore propose a reinforcement of 200 million. The government lowers the tax by 27 billion. The government could have lowered the tax by 26.8 billion instead – it would still have been a fairly decent tax cut, but at the same time, one would have avoided the cuts within the cultural sector outside of Stockholm's city center.

Thank you for the debate, Minister!

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

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Madam Speaker! The entries are going so fast that I don't have time to make any notes, so I have to try to wing it, as they say.

I would nevertheless like to start by circling back to my previous post because a question arose regarding what had been said. It was, therefore, Member of Parliament Lars Mejern Larsson who, in his speech, said that the government's policy forces commercial solutions.

Madam Speaker! In this debate, I think it has been attempted to describe it as if the state had in some way retreated from the financing of regional culture, and that picture simply does not hold up. In the budget that we have presented to the Riksdag, we allocate almost 1.7 billion kronor to support for regional and local culture. The state has a responsibility in this, and we take it.

The answer to this question is also not always increased appropriations from the state. We have implemented a responsible fiscal policy that has combated the high inflation. It has reduced the costs for municipalities and regions across the country and given them a greater opportunity to prioritize within the framework of their areas, for example culture.

An important part of access to regional culture is also to ensure that households' purchasing power is strengthened, given that it is ultimately they who are to consume the culture. The government's tax cuts mean that ordinary people actually have more money left in their pockets and can choose to spend it on cultural experiences such as visiting a museum or going to the theater. I think that is good both for households and for municipal and regional culture.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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