Response to interpellation 2024/25:385 on additional costs during the African swine fever restrictions
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns additional costs during the African swine fever restrictions. KD argues that the containment was a success 1 and that those affected can seek compensation through Jordbruksverket 1. KD emphasizes that the government follows trials and has allocated 7 million kronor for municipalities and civil society 1. KD argues that municipalities can find internal systems for compensation 2 and that waste collectives should review their facilities. KD argues that existing legislation has functioned well 3 and that those affected can have decisions reviewed 3. S argues that the epizootic law is insufficient as it does not provide compensation to all affected 4. S argues that the waste collective should not bear costs following a request from a state authority 4. S argues that the government has budget tools to compensate those who have taken responsibility 5. S argues that the government has withheld 6 billion kronor from the municipal sector 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! Åsa Eriksson has asked me if I intend to take any measures so that companies and other organizations shall be compensated for the additional costs that arose due to a state authority's decision on restrictions.
On September 6, 2023, African swine fever was detected in Sweden for the first time ever. The outbreak itself was serious, and a continued spread of the infection risked causing further consequences. Powerful measures were therefore necessary in the initial stage of the fight. Thanks to these efforts, Sweden was able to be declared free of the infection on September 25, 2024. I can state that the fight proceeded in record time from an international perspective, and I see this as a great success for Sweden and the country's infectious disease control work.
The Animal Diseases Act (1999:657) and EU regulations in the field of animal health entail obligations for the Swedish Board of Agriculture to decide on measures and restrictions to combat serious animal diseases such as African swine fever. These measures can have consequences for the companies and private individuals affected, and therefore there are provisions regarding compensation in the Animal Diseases Act.
Those who consider themselves to have been affected by costs or losses as a result of the Swedish Board of Agriculture's decision have the opportunity to apply for compensation. The Swedish Board of Agriculture shall examine the compensation claims. Those who are dissatisfied with the Swedish Board of Agriculture's decision have the opportunity to appeal the decision to an administrative court. Through the Swedish Board of Agriculture's and the courts' review, it can be clarified who is entitled to compensation according to the provisions of the epizootic diseases act. The Government is following the review that is ongoing.
The activities that voluntary associations carry out in forests and on land are significant both for private individuals and for society as a whole because they create community and strengthen nature values. Following the government's proposal in the autumn budget for 2024, 7 million kronor were therefore allocated to mitigate the consequences for the affected municipalities and civil society in these municipalities.
During 2024, the Government commissioned Tillväxtverket to analyze the economic consequences for the business sector in Fagersta and Norberg as a result of the outbreak of African swine fever. In the reporting of the assignment, Tillväxtverket draws a number of conclusions based on literature studies, analysis of statistics, and interviews with those concerned, including that – based on available data – there is no noticeable impact on the business sector as a whole. Aside from the possibility of applying for financial compensation, there has also been an opportunity for companies to apply for other types of support, but this is an opportunity that has been utilized to a small extent or not at all. The report and its recommendations are currently being prepared within the Government Offices.
I am incredibly happy that the outbreak could be fought so quickly and thus resulted in consequences that can be assumed to be significantly milder than if the infection had instead continued to spread. It can be seen as a testament to the good cooperation between authorities, municipalities, companies, associations and other actors – not least hunters – who are part of the Swedish model.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! It is not the first time the Minister and I have stood here and debated compensation for those affected by the swine fever restrictions. I have also debated this with the Minister for Enterprise. We Social Democrats believe that it is not enough to refer to the epizootic disease act, because it does not provide compensation to all those who have been affected, who have been unable to conduct business and who have been forced to take extraordinary measures during these restrictions.
The Minister and I are in complete agreement that the cooperation in connection with this infection and the fight against it has been very successful. Fantastic efforts have been made, but it has also come at a cost. I and the Social Democrats believe that those who have incurred large costs in connection with the restrictions that the state has imposed on various actors in northern Västmanland should have the right to receive compensation for their additional costs. Here, however, the Minister and I are apparently not in agreement.
Madam Speaker! Vafabmiljö is a municipal association that carries out socially important activities through waste management. Vafabmiljö is responsible, among other things, for the Sänkmossen waste facility in Fagersta, where it is believed that pigs may have become infected when they ate waste.
Vafabmiljö took a large number of measures when the African swine fever broke out. Among other things, they closed the waste facility I just mentioned. They also activated their crisis management, redirected transports to other waste facilities, disinfected vehicles, and built fences around the entire facility. They did it well and quickly. I believe this was a major reason why the infection could be contained so quickly, but when Vafabmiljö subsequently applied for compensation from Jordbruksverket, they were turned down regarding most of their expenses.
Madam Speaker! Just as the legislation stipulates, Vafabmiljö is a tax-funded municipal association. Why should the tax collective – that is, the waste customers, meaning everyone who lives in Västmanland, Heby and Enköping – bear costs that have arisen following a request from a state authority? I do not understand this, and I would like the Minister to answer that.
Just as the Minister said in his answer, we all know that the infectious disease control work was successful thanks to rapid measures and good cooperation. In that case, it is well within reason that the money returns to the actors who have carried out this work.
We in Västmanland are grateful for Jordbruksverket's swift actions. We also thank Vafabmiljö for their swift actions, just as we thank the hunters, entrepreneurs, municipalities, associations and private individuals in northern Västmanland who together did the work. We do, however, mean that everyone who followed the state's restrictions and thereby incurred extra costs should be compensated for their expenses and other economic damage.
Taxekollektivet will now have to bear the very largest part of the costs because the association followed the state's restrictions. What does the Minister intend to do about that?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! As I said in my first answer, we have legislation that is to regulate these parts. As a member of Parliament, I shall not go into individual cases. In some cases, a review of the legislation we have is also ongoing.
As the member and I spoke about the last time we discussed this, the Swedish Board of Agriculture's decision has had different types of impacts, and it is varying easy to link them directly to the decision. The procedure is quite simple if one needed to cull animals or was not allowed to farm their field for a certain period. It is more difficult in other areas, where it is more unclear.
Therefore, my urging has been all along that those who experience that they have been affected by costs or lost revenue due to the decisions made in connection with the outbreak of African swine fever should apply for support from Jordbruksverket. If one is not satisfied with the decision and continues to consider that the costs or the lost revenue are a direct consequence of the authority's previous decisions, there is indeed an opportunity to have the matter reviewed. We have a regulatory framework that we use, and I do not believe the members want any other arrangement either.
With this said: At every such occasion of crisis, and one may still call it that when we for the first time receive such a serious disease in our country, we must draw lessons. That is why we have given the assignment to Tillväxtverket and also determined that we need to increase the funds to Jordbruksverket for, among other things, veterinary field operations during this type of event.
But the basis is the legislation we have, that is to say that one shall have their case reviewed by the authority, and if one is not satisfied with this review, one has the opportunity to appeal the decision.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! That those who are not satisfied with the Swedish Board of Agriculture's decision and have not received compensation for their expenses can have the case reviewed in court, we have heard before. That is obviously the case, but then the small businesses that have been affected and also the municipal association Vafabmiljö wonder who will bear the cost of this legal review. It also costs money. As a sole trader, one risks facing additional costs for which one is not compensated. Few are prepared to take this risk when they do not have economic muscles but, on the contrary, struggle with the consequences the restrictions caused and the lack of compensation for the expenses they have incurred.
Madam Speaker! I believe that the Minister, I, and most other assessors in Sweden agree that this was the first time Sweden had an outbreak of African swine fever, but probably not the last. The question is when it happens again and where. What we know is that if the spread of infection had been larger, the costs would most likely have been significantly higher. Why would companies, municipalities, associations, and municipal associations next time there is an outbreak of African swine fever make an effort to contribute to limiting the spread of infection, follow restrictions, and do everything they can to stop the infection when they now see that they do not receive compensation for their costs? That is what I wonder. Is the Minister aware that by doing this, a standard is being set where, at the next outbreak, regardless of where in Sweden it occurs, we risk that companies, municipalities, associations, and municipal associations do not follow the state's restrictions and requests because they know they risk being left with the bill, having to pay the cost, and not being compensated?
Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats stand for a different policy. We know that it is the government that has the budget tool and the ability to, if the epizootic law is not sufficient, make other investments that can compensate those who have taken responsibility, helped out, and incurred extra costs. With our policy, Sweden tackles challenges together, pools resources and helps each other, and everyone shall be able to rely on being compensated for it.
How does the Minister intend for other waste collectives to act the next time African swine fever breaks out in Sweden?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! First and foremost, I expect that all waste collectives, or however waste is handled in the municipality, have reviewed their facilities so that this type of waste or food waste is not accessible, which it should not be, because if it did come from there, we do not want to see similar courses of events anywhere else.
Let me also remind that in addition to the compensation under the epizootic disease act, which has de facto been paid out, the government has sent 7 million to two municipalities, which they have been able to use to mitigate the effects. One can, of course, also find systems within the municipal administration to compensate, for example, for community life or other actors who have incurred significant costs.
I also want to point out that the government made several decisions during the ongoing control in order to increase the authorities' capacity to manage the outbreak but also to learn from what had happened. Some examples are an amendment to the Swedish Board of Agriculture's regulatory letter which enabled the payment of compensation to a broader group of actors and the assignment to the Swedish Transport Administration to erect fences around the core area itself. Tillväxtverket was also assigned to analyze the economic consequences for the business sector, and Naturvårdsverket received an assignment regarding wild boar management. The latter included, among other things, documenting certain experiences from the control of this outbreak.
Even though I am very proud of Sweden's successful work in combating this infection, we must not forget that it also involved a great effort for several parts of society, and therefore it is important to analyze the measures that were taken and, of course, draw lessons for any potential new disease outbreaks, something that both the government and the authorities are currently working on. A research project is underway at the Swedish Veterinary Institute, SVA, to improve the management of future outbreaks, and the Swedish Board of Agriculture and SVA have received support from MSB to evaluate the management.
Tillväxtverket submits two recommendations in its report. One is to investigate the supply of support and the need for additional support during epizootics, taking into account the specific characteristics of different industries. The other is to task one or more actors with creating a consolidated overview of which different supports and interventions can be sought during epizootics and to create methods and ways of working so that this information also reaches the affected companies. I have heard directly from affected companies that they did not have access to all the information, so we need to ensure that they get it. The report is currently being prepared within the Government Offices.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! I think it is incredibly bold of the Minister to say that the municipalities can provide compensation to associations and others who have been affected when the Minister's government has failed to inflation-proof the state grant and thus withheld 6 billion kronor from the municipal sector. The municipalities are bleeding and are on their knees, but the government instead lowers the tax for them with the highest income. The money exists, so the government could have compensated associations, Vafabmiljö, and companies affected by the swine fever if they had wanted to. But I hear that the Minister does not want to.
I also hear that the Minister has no other message to the residents of Västmanland, Heby, and Eskilstun than that it is the tax collective that will have to bear the costs that Vafabmiljö incurred in connection with following the swine fever restrictions and doing what the government and everyone else asked to be done to stop the infection. It is a bitter message to take home.
It is also a bitter message to all those who at some point in the future will have to consider what they should do when African swine fever breaks out again in Sweden.
This was not what I expected, but I realize that I will not receive any other decision.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I urge the member to go back and listen to the debate and hear what I am saying, not what the member wants to hear. These municipalities have received an extra grant due to their situation. That was what I spoke about, nothing else. I thank you for having words put in my mouth.
Let us state that the Social Democrats seem to have as much money as they want for everything except ensuring that ordinary people have more money left in their wallets. We stand for a different policy. We do not pursue a social democratic policy; we are not a social democratic government. We see that there is a value in people being able to keep more of their wages, but the Social Democrats do not seem to see that.
We also have legislation at the base, which in several cases has functioned well. But as I have said a few times during this debate, we naturally ensure that the experiences we take with us from this outbreak will make things even better. As I just said, Madam Speaker, Tillväxtverket has received such a mandate and also provided recommendations, and this is currently being prepared in the Government Offices.
I want to repeat to any listeners of this debate that if one has been affected and is not satisfied with the decision one has received, there is the possibility to have the decision reviewed. That is the order we have, and I do not believe that the Social Democrats are actually capable of pursuing any other order than that. I believe that would become very messy.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.