Response to interpellation 2024/25:514 on the closure of the State Service Center in Motala
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD considers that state-funded activities should be reviewed and streamlined in order to use tax money wisely 1. KD argues that the authorities make decisions based on the number of visits, regional distribution, and efficiency 2, and that economic and regional policy considerations are required for a balanced budget 2. KD emphasizes that the National Audit Office has seen opportunities for streamlining 3 and that mobile solutions are important 4. KD denies that closures are intended to make people less vocal 4. S considers that the need for the activity remains and that the reduction in appropriations lies behind the closures 5. S argues that the phase-outs affect municipalities and socially vulnerable groups 5 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.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Johan Andersson has asked me how I and the government justify that Motala and other localities are now losing important state services despite a continued great need. He has also asked how I and the government intend to ensure that the people who previously visited the Statens servicecenter in Motala continue to have access to the service they need, as well as what measures I and the government are prepared to take to ensure that state service is available throughout the country and not just in larger cities.
Every tax krona must be used wisely, and state-funded activities must constantly be subject to review and prioritization. Against this background, the service office operations need to be adapted and streamlined. There will continue to be a large number of service offices all over the country, even though the travel distance to the nearest permanent office will become longer for some people.
When it comes to the consequences for individual localities that risk losing their service office, it follows from the Ordinance on the Location of Government Agencies that Statens servicecenter shall, among other things, establish a consequence analysis before such a decision. With these consequence analyses as a starting point, the agency will consult with municipalities and other affected actors during the continued process.
Statens servicecenter is simultaneously working on developing more mobile and flexible office solutions in order to be able to get closer to citizens in more places in a simple and smooth way. This is a development that I am following with particularly great interest.
The Government continues to consider the service centers to be an important activity for providing personal service from state authorities. Service centers shall continue to exist throughout the country to meet individuals' needs for local state service within a reasonable distance.
Johan Andersson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
The reason I submitted this interpellation to the Minister was precisely the early signals that a closure of the office in Motala was being discussed. I actually found out about it from the staff at the office even before Christmas.
The office in Motala has been operational for a number of years. In 2024, there were 13,760 visits, and a total of 15,630 cases were handled. Those who utilize the office's activities are primarily those who are far from the labor market, elderly people with limited digital competence, persons with language barriers as well as newcomers, and that group is overrepresented in Motala if compared with the national average.
The Motala office is also a node in the western part of Östergötland county. There will still be offices in Norrköping, Linköping and Finspång. However, it will be a significantly longer travel distance than one is used to.
When it comes to the migration activities, Motala Municipality, just like many other municipalities, took a great responsibility for, among other things, the reception of refugees during the years when we had large volumes. This also applies to the connection to the labor market, integration into jobs and other parts. It feels quite alarming that this is not also included in this work.
Just as the Minister says, the municipal board will tomorrow make a decision on its statement, which will also be sent to the government, the Minister, and naturally the Statens servicecenter.
Region Östergötland has been very sharp in its statement.
My follow-up question connected to this debate is: Will the authority make trade-offs based on the impact assessment that the government has requested Statens servicecenter to make before a decision is made? It is a question that I am eager to get an answer to. How will it be weighed in? Historically, in the decisions that have been made regarding offices that have been decommissioned, it has not been considered at all. But perhaps there will be a new order now regarding that part.
I think this is a strange handling, not least from the perspective that many political parties in the latest election campaign said that city and country shall live and that one should have the conditions even out in the country, not just in the larger towns, when it comes to state presence.
Now there is a state presence in Motala. We have Försäkringskassan, we have Arbetsförmedlingen and we have Systembolaget. So far, there is a state presence. But was that what the government meant when they wanted to pursue that issue?
Marianne Fundahn (S)
Madam Speaker! Minister Erik Slottner has on several occasions stated that it is Statens servicecenters' own decision to close the service offices.
In the agency's own impact assessment regarding the closure of the service center in Trelleborg, it is written: "The significantly reduced funding level for the years 2025–2027 means that Statens servicecenter must make corresponding cost reductions in the operations during the same period. In order for Statens servicecenter to manage to reduce costs to the extent and at the pace that the Riksdag has decided upon at the government's proposal, the agency needs to both take immediate savings measures and make more long-term efficiencies in the service center operations. This means that the service center needs to be phased out." Statens servicecenter is very clear here.
I believe it is the government's reduction of the appropriations that lies behind the closure of the service office in Trelleborg.
The Minister has also in a number of interpellation debates and also in the response to today's interpellation said: "Every tax krona shall be used wisely, and state-funded activities shall constantly be subject to reassessment and prioritization."
It is obvious that the tax revenue that comes into the state should be used in a wise way. If there are no needs, one should of course shut down the activities. But that is not the case here. The needs remain, but instead, the costs hit the municipalities and the individual. I interpret it as that the priority is tax cuts for those who earn the most, such as the minister and myself.
The service office in Trelleborg had 9,066 visits in 2024. 10,909 different agency matters were handled, of which 4,332 were for Skatteverket and 3,866 were for Försäkringskassan. And that was done during the three days a week that it is open. If anything, that indicates that there is a great need for the operation.
The operations are expected to cease on June 15 this year. Where should the residents of Trelleborg turn then? Other service offices will, according to the agency's own analysis, take cost-saving measures.
The authority continues in its impact assessment of the office closures that closures of service offices in the extent and at the pace required to meet the budget cuts will have consequences for private individuals and companies visiting the office in Trelleborg.
An office decommissioning can, according to Statens servicecenter, "also mean that individuals to an increased extent contact the collaborative authorities via telephone and/or digital services to have their service needs met. It should be emphasized that the service offered by the collaborative authorities via telephone or digital services is not to be equated with the person-oriented service provided at service offices. There is thus an increased risk that more individuals do not have their service needs met."
The burden on the cooperating authorities also risks increasing, which furthermore entails increased costs for them.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! First and foremost, I do not intend to stand here and discuss individual offices. I have received very many interpellations concerning individual offices. But I cannot answer for individual offices, because it is a matter of a decision that has been delegated to the authority.
I have not said that this is a decision that the agency made because they wanted to, but as Marianne Fundahn says, it is clear that the budget plays a role. In the budget for 2025–2027, Statens servicecenter has been given a reduced scope. This is a prioritization that the government has made. This means that a number of offices, 35 according to the agency, will need to be closed during these three years, and that means we will come down to the same number of offices as we had in 2019.
That decision did not come from nothing either, but the National Audit Office has pointed out that there are opportunities for efficiency at the agency. It has been seen that the expansion of the number of offices has not been matched by a corresponding increase in the number of visits, which has caused the cost per visit to increase. This has made the government want to make a saving; we have seen such an opportunity.
We have arrived at a number of guiding principles for the local establishment. For example, the goal is that, in the long run, there should be one office per FA-region, that is, per functional labor market area.
I received a question from Johan Andersson regarding what assessments and considerations the authority makes. I should not answer that as a minister. That question must be directed to the director-general of the responsible authority. Otherwise, I would be stepping into forbidden territory and engaging in ministerial rule. In that case, it could happen that I am reported to the KU for this. I therefore cannot answer that.
I believe very much in flexible and mobile office solutions. Even with the 148 offices that exist today, there are many people in Sweden who do not have very close access to a service office and may need to travel several miles, but still receive some form of societal service. Flexible and mobile solutions are something the authority is working on, and that need naturally grows in a time when the number of physical and fixed offices must be reduced.
Johan Andersson (S)
Madam Speaker! I do not know if I became much wiser from the Minister's account, and this applies especially to his final words.
I have a follow-up question. Municipalities have been given the opportunity to comment. In Östergötland, both Motala municipality and Region Östergötland have commented. What weight will be attached to the comments that are made? I understand that the Minister cannot and does not want to answer that question, but the Minister is still the one who directs the agency via the government and the budget. Some discussion must have been held within the Tidö cooperation when you submitted this proposal and made this budget prioritization regarding what the value would be? Or is it a chimera? Is it a game for the galleries? In Motala, they have actually looked seriously at whether they can utilize the municipality's citizen service. Can it be part of it in some way? Is it worth anything or not? Is it a chimera? Then it is better to be honest and straightforward about how this is handled.
It is clear that people become irritated when they see that the state service is disappearing. I can agree that there are state agencies that are good at using new technology in different ways. Skatteverket is one such agency that is often highlighted. There are many people who use these solutions, but not everyone has that possibility. What this will mean is most likely additional costs for the municipalities, which are dependent on this proximity to the service. There, one can settle their affairs within the social services department or the education department, and one can, of course, contact the service center when there are different applications and other things that need to be done.
I understand that no political decision has been made regarding how the office organization should look, but the Minister points out that the FA-regions are important. Motala in Östergötland belongs to the FA-region Linköping, but with a distance of 42 kilometers, it becomes quite long. Furthermore, Motala is the county sub-center for the remaining five municipalities in the western part of the county, which means that this assessment will be lacking.
Then my question is: Is the authority given the opportunity to make a decision if it is seen that one has submitted a proposal that is not particularly well-reasoned? I do not think that is the case, of course, and neither do the referral bodies that comment, that is to say the municipality and the regional municipality. They point very clearly out that argumentation is lacking. The Minister is trying to highlight the argumentation that the authority now has in this part.
We will, of course, continue to follow this issue to see what becomes of it. Will it really be so positive if one closes a service office and believes that the users who have used it and do use it will automatically find new digital solutions and think that life is wonderful?
Marianne Fundahn (S)
Madam Speaker! Trelleborg Municipality has submitted the following observations: There is a risk of an increased burden on municipal activities, for example libraries and citizen centers, where residents have the opportunity to use computers for government matters. This may entail increased costs and resource requirements for the municipality. Will the government compensate the municipality for this? It is, after all, the work of state authorities that is being performed. Why should the municipalities once again pay for tasks that the state is responsible for?
The County Administrative Board of Skåne maintains in its statement that the service office operations are very important for maintaining the legitimacy and trust in the state authorities. The County Administrative Board also points out that customers who visit service offices are primarily from socially vulnerable groups and are far from the digitalization. Deteriorating the accessibility to physical meetings for these groups could, according to the County Administrative Board, mean a diminished trust in the state and democracy as a whole. How does the Minister view the risk of this?
Statens servicecenter writes that they understand the views that have been received but argue that the closure of the service office in Trelleborg, together with other planned closures, is of very great importance for Statens servicecenter to be able to make cost savings that correspond to the reduction in appropriations for 2025–2027. We have today been told that the Minister also sees the connection to the reduction in appropriations.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! This is how the delegation looks now, Johan Andersson. I must be careful with the formalities. It is the authorities that make the decisions regarding the individual closures. Exactly how the principles are weighed against each other, the authority must answer. I cannot answer that, because I am not involved at that level in the authorities. That is how Swedish public administration and governance look. Three principles are applied. It concerns the number of visits, regional distribution across the country, and efficiency.
Economic efficiency trade-offs are made together with operational trade-offs and regional policy trade-offs. These shall be coordinated and ultimately lead to the budget reaching a balance. It will require that some offices are closed. It is based on those principles that the decisions are made.
Remember that more than half of Sweden's municipalities still lack a service office today. Those municipalities do not receive any compensation from the state for lacking a service office. It is not automatically the case that all municipalities lacking a service office have an amount of increased costs or much higher costs than others for different types of community services, in any case what we have been able to see.
In that case, cooperation between neighboring municipalities is required. Some will have a bit further to a service office than they do today, that is absolutely certain. But even today, there are probably many who have further than, for example, four miles, such as between Motala and Linköping. There, moreover, are quite good connections with public transport and other things, while in some parts of the inland of Norrland, the distances are longer. That is how Sweden looks.
The question was whether an authority can withdraw a proposal for closure after the consultation has taken place. It absolutely can. That is also why one conducts this type of consultation. One wants to receive views and perhaps find arguments there that make it possible to withdraw the proposal that offices should be closed and find something else instead. Again, it is the authority that makes that decision and not the government.
It sounded as if I now believe that if we close a number of offices, they will automatically become digital, and life will feel wonderful. I have never said that, Johan Andersson. Whether life feels wonderful or not, I do not think has much to do with whether one has access to Statens servicekontor or not. There are probably quite a few other trade-offs.
More and more things are becoming digital, and more and more citizens are able to perform services digitally. Many agencies are also receiving services that are becoming increasingly useful digitally. This means that more people are able to perform them because they simply become more user-friendly. That is another important issue for me as Minister for Digitalization. But that is another debate.
Johan Andersson (S)
Madam Speaker! Again, thanks to the Minister, even though I am not satisfied with the answer, but the Minister's point is clear.
I look forward with anticipation to the authority's position once it has taken part of the consequence descriptions. It is truly exciting. I assume that it is a decision that can be followed when it is subsequently made and that one can also analyze the position the authority takes when it arrives.
It is to the highest degree a state authority. Then there should also be a compliance in the decision-making regarding this. It feels a bit tricky with that whole part, because one received the notification so early that the office would likely be one of those to be shut down. That was already before a decision had been made on the budget and other matters.
I hope and trust the Minister that one is playing with open cards. The agenda for the decommissioning of the service centers would be incredibly exciting to discuss. But perhaps we can take that at another time. I have my doubts regarding that.
This is about people who are quite far from society, who have difficulty getting in and who perhaps are not so vocal. It is naturally those who are affected regarding our service offices.
There is a supporting party in the government constellation that has a very clear agenda when it comes to that. Now I am not thinking of the minister's party, but there is another party. I am quite convinced that there are other arguments linked to it.
I look forward to a renewed debate when we see the position of the management of Statens servicecenter on how they will handle the issue of the office in Motala.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I will let Johan Andersson's latest conspiracy theories stand unchallenged for the time being. They were a bit unclear, even though I think I understood where he was headed.
I can only deny that there were any such thoughts behind this, such as that we would make people less vocal and less inclined to vote in general elections. These are rather far-reaching conspiracy theories that are very far from reality or have nothing to do with reality.
We have seen that there is a potential for efficiency here, not least based on the National Audit Office's report. This will lead to a number of offices needing to be closed. This, in turn, will lead to some citizens in Sweden having a longer distance to their nearest office. But that does not in any way mean that the service disappears.
As I have now said a number of times, the agency is also working on more flexible mobile solutions. That assignment also came with today's office network. But it is now even more important. Even with the office network that exists today, many people have quite a long way to a physical office. Thus, this assignment is very important.
When the reduction is now made, we will have the same number of offices as we had in 2019. Sweden was not completely destroyed in 2019, even though we had then undergone a parliamentary term with a Social Democratic government.
Thank you for the debate! We will see each other again.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.