Response to interpellation 2024/25:608 on the expanded costs of the ground network
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M states that the government will soon submit a proposition for public service 2026–2033 based on a committee's proposal 1 2. M emphasizes that extraordinary network costs due to other media companies leaving the network should not be included in the regular funding allocation 1 3. M underlines that the Riksdag should make a decision on the funding allocation for the entire license period to secure public service's independence and long-term perspective 4 2. M points out that there is an opportunity for the Riksdag to make separate decisions on extra funds for unforeseen costs 1 4. M claims that the proposal is not a cut but an increase to over 80 billion kronor 2.
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! Lawen Redar has asked me how the increased terrestrial network costs for the public service companies' broadcasts shall be financed and how I shall ensure that the companies do not need to use the ordinary funding allocation to cover sharply increasing distribution costs when commercial actors have left the terrestrial network. The background to the question is that broadcasts of pay-TV in the terrestrial network have ceased and that the public service companies' transmission costs will therefore increase.
The Government will shortly submit a bill to the Riksdag with proposals regarding the conditions for public service during the next license period, 2026–2033. The bill is based on the proposals from the parliamentary public service committee. The committee assessed that if other media companies leave the terrestrial network during the license period and this results in significantly increased terrestrial network costs for the public service companies, this should be seen as an extraordinary cost and therefore should not be included in the funding decision concerning the license period.
An important starting point for the financing of public service is that the Riksdag makes only one decision on the allocation of funds which applies to the entire license period. However, as the committee also points out, it does not exclude the possibility for the Riksdag to make separate decisions on extra funds for unforeseen costs. The committee also refers to preparatory statements where it appears that extra funds should be handled restrictively and come into question only in exceptional cases. Furthermore, it appears from the preparatory statements that any decisions on extra funds during an ongoing license period will lie outside the framework of ordinary allocation and will require special preparation and separate decisions. These conditions for the allocation of funds to the public service companies also apply during the current license period.
At the current stage, it is difficult to estimate with certainty the cost increases for the public service companies due to the fact that the pay-TV channels have left the terrestrial network. Several factors complicate such an assessment, including to what extent the terrestrial network will be used by others than the public service companies during the coming years.
The Government has appointed an inquiry into the distribution of radio and TV in a new media landscape. The inquiry shall, among other things, describe the conditions for the distribution of radio and TV in the terrestrial network over the coming years in terms of financing and costs, technology and regulation, with a particular focus on public service. The assignment shall be reported by September 30, 2025, at the latest.
Lawen Redar (S)
Madam Speaker! This interpellation debate is about media policy and public service, but I want to begin by reading the journalist Joakim Medin's lines from the Silivri prison on April 1, 2025, here in the chamber of the Swedish Riksdag. He wrote: "Journalism is not a crime. Not in any country."
Today, the trial against Joakim Medin begins. He is charged on unfair and false grounds and risks, according to his lawyer, up to twelve years in prison for his journalistic work of monitoring and depicting. Joakim's words about the importance of journalism are moving. They are extra moving because we know they were written during a time when he is deprived of his freedom.
We know that freedom of speech is restricted in many places in the world and not infrequently in places where one does not want the truth about power to emerge. The 2024 report from Reporters Without Borders is a serious read. In 2024 alone, 54 journalists have been murdered globally, of which 31 in conflict zones. It is a record-high figure. During the same year, 550 journalists have been deprived of their freedom by various regimes around the world. These are journalists who are being held imprisoned by a state for having reported on a social problem or refused to praise the leaders in the country.
The same report describes that 95 journalists are reported missing in 35 states around the world. It is inconceivable but true. Many journalists pay a high price for their professional practice, just like Joakim Medin.
Free journalism and public opinion are not given phenomena, nothing that can be taken for granted. The dismantling of free and independent media is unfortunately proceeding unexpectedly fast in many places around the world, but also here in Europe.
Regarding Joakim Medin's case, the government must intensify its efforts and immediately demand his release. Journalism is not a crime, not in any country.
Madam Speaker! The question I have asked the Minister for Culture fundamentally concerns public service's upcoming licensing period. It is a divided public service committee that has presented the proposal in its report. The primary reason for the disagreement is the Tidö parties' budget proposal, which will entail drastic cuts in program offerings and public service's broad mandate. It cannot be interpreted in any other way when we last had the public service companies come to the Riksdag's Culture Committee to explain how they view the report and the effects of the proposed budget for the upcoming broadcasting license period.
It appears from the report, as the Minister for Culture said, that SVT shall broadcast in the terrestrial network and remain there throughout the entire permit period 2026–2033. That is necessary because SVT is a part of Sweden's total defense. But one month before the end of the referral period for the proposal, Tele2 announced that they intend to leave the terrestrial network, which already means that the cost will increase by 19 million for this year. From 2026 onwards, we are talking about cost increases of 155–160 million, according to Teracom. These extraordinary terrestrial network costs are something that the Tidö parties have not accounted for in their proposal for the public service budget. Furthermore, they represent a significant cost increase for not least SVT.
What I want to know is how the government intends for the market network costs to be financed. Does this mean further cuts are awaiting public service? Will the Minister for Culture present another proposal, so that public service can maintain its broad ongoing work?
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! The conditions for public service during the next licensing period will be set out in the bill, which is to be submitted to the Riksdag before the summer. As I mentioned in my response, the proposals are based on the parliamentary public service committee's report. The committee correctly judged that if other media companies leave the market during the licensing period and this entails significantly increased costs for the public service companies, this should be seen as an extraordinary cost which therefore should not be included in the funding decision concerning the licensing period.
With this said, the government is therefore doing a number of things right now when it comes to maintaining and strengthening public services' ability to operate. On one hand, we are preparing the bill, which is to be submitted to the Riksdag before the summer. On the other hand, we have the Distribution Inquiry, the purpose of which is to specifically look at how the distribution network is used and what the costs surrounding it look like.
Furthermore, we have large and rapid technological leaps to face in a global environment that is moving at an ever-faster pace. This naturally also affects the transition for the media companies. It is about their needs but also about their opportunities to remain in certain networks or switch to others.
All this combined means that there is absolutely reason for us to produce a new broadcasting license for public service here and now, which will be valid for eight years. But we will also continue to work on the issues regarding the terrestrial network and the terrestrial network's future and costs, not least in the distribution investigation for which we await an answer at the end of September.
Lawen Redar (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Culture, for the answer!
The costs for society's information and media preparedness are now increasing very drastically due to technological development and AI. There are a lot of questions that Sweden faces – as all democracies face – in a time of antagonistic regimes that use the information and media landscape to unfortunately spread disinformation or falsehoods. They do this in order to be able to target efforts to polarize a population.
I truly believe that the government takes the new situation and the new security situation into account in its argumentation, but regarding the reality we face, I judge that the media support needs to be reviewed when it comes to increased resources for daily newspapers and digital newspapers. But it is also about the public service committee's work. The final result unfortunately meant that an agreement was not reached because of the budget. A Minister for Culture could, before submitting a bill to the Riksdag, seek out the opposition to discuss the issues where an agreement was not reached. Some are about the broad mandate. It is about the financing. It is about how public service should be able to work in the new landscape as part of the Swedish total defense.
The issues that we primarily did not agree on concerned precisely the budget for the upcoming permit period. The Riksdag will make decisions this autumn. I mean that it may perhaps be the Riksdag's most important media policy vote in the coming decade.
To have a free and independent public service that broadcasts from all over Sweden, which can exist in the information landscape and which can counter disinformation by having the verification desks that it has – considering the disinformation coming from Russia and other states and which is directed at Sweden – is extremely important.
I am pleased that the Minister for Culture today confirms that the increased costs that public service, not least SVT, will incur when other actors leave the terrestrial network shall constitute extraordinary costs. They shall not be included in the budget proposal that is submitted for public service. It is a new announcement, which I welcome. What the Minister for Culture is therefore saying here in the chamber is that the increased costs coming from 2026 onwards – Teracom assesses it to be 155–160 million kronor – shall not be added to SVT in the existing budget, but they shall be taken aside. Is that correctly understood?
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! I must begin by clarifying myself, if the member has perceived me as unclear. I will start by saying that it is neither my nor the government's task to make decisions about anything that is to be extraordinary or beyond. It is, after all, this assembly, that is to say the Riksdag, that is to make those decisions.
We see that the possibility exists in the proposal that the committee has submitted. If the assessment is made that extraordinary costs are incurred, there is therefore a possibility to take it beyond the funding allocation that public service receives via the broadcasting license.
But let me step back to why we have the budget model that we have actually decided on when it comes to public service. Ultimately, it is about securing public service's independence. That is why we link the allocation of funds to a decision, and that decision occurs in connection with when we grant the broadcasting license. It is about ensuring that politics does not have opinions on the budget for the public service companies every year, and that public service itself shall have a long-term perspective in its work and know its conditions well in advance.
It is what our parties have agreed on. All the parties in the Chamber have agreed that it is an order that we must care for and be protective of, because it is linked to the independence of public services.
I have great understanding for the committee's assessment when it comes to the extraordinary expenses that are considered to potentially arise. That the government only makes a decision on the allocation of funds, which applies to the entire permit period, is fundamentally central to independence. But that said, there is a possibility for the Riksdag to make a decision on an extra allocation of funds. It requires a separate preparation.
In the current situation, there are many uncertainty factors that affect the costs that we have to, so to speak, calculate. It also concerns the future costs of being able to broadcast in the terrestrial network. It is also for that reason that the government has not only begun the work of preparing the bill for the new broadcasting license but has also appointed the Distribution Inquiry.
Lawen Redar (S)
Madam Speaker! The independence of public services depends on a government and a Riksdag that emphasize that independent media shall exist in the public service.
It is about a government and a Riksdag that want to safeguard the independent and objective gathering of information for the Swedish population, but who also see that there is a great societal value in having a public service that does not solely emphasize news reporting across the entire country and which has local newsrooms throughout the country. It is about opportunities for broadcasts, even in times of crisis or potential war. But it is also about uniting the population during very difficult times.
It can be done through a program offering that is broad, which contributes to popular education and which contributes to cohesion. It is well that the broad mandate is what has made Sweden have a world-unique public service, with broad support in the population. It is a government and a Riksdag that in many previous terms have ensured that it is in this way that public service shall work.
Unfortunately, in the political debate in the Swedish Riksdag in recent years, public service has been attacked – it is argued that it does not maintain its independence due to ideological motives. In this way, the debate that should be objective in this chamber has been weakened.
It is also that which has caused us to see a tendency where there is a drastic desire to cut the finances of the public service companies. It concerns the proposal that currently exists. We had a parliamentary committee that, if it had worked in accordance with tradition, could have landed on some kind of unifying conclusions. But now this is actually the first public service committee in a long time that is deeply in disagreement. That is because of the budget cut that the Tidö parties propose.
I am concerned that we will see a public service that will have to cut back. That is what the companies and the referral bodies express when they comment on the proposal for the report.
But today I have received notice regarding this extra allocation of funds for the ground network. Therefore, I am grateful for this interpellation debate.
Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)
Madam Speaker! I want to start by thanking Lawen Redar for an interesting debate!
Let me be clear in this debate and in this chamber. The government has since the first government statement been clear and established the importance of a strong and independent public service, which has long-term conditions and which can build an operation from there.
Shortly, the government will submit a bill to the Riksdag regarding the conditions for public service during the next assignment period, 2026–2033.
The proposition is based on the proposals from the parliamentary public service committee. We will, of course, also continue to work on the issues regarding the terrestrial network and the costs for the terrestrial network. An important starting point for the financing of public service is that the Riksdag makes only one decision on the allocation of funds which applies to the entire license period. It is important for the independence of public services, and it is important for long-term planning.
Our political parties may disagree on the level of the central allocation, but let me be clear once again: The proposal that came from the committee and which we have to take a position on in the drafting of the bill is therefore not a reduction, but it is an increase of the funds to public service which will mean that public service will receive over 80 billion kronor over the eight years for which the broadcasting license shall be issued.
It is the proposal in the report, the proposal that we work from to produce a government bill. An important starting point is, as said, the long-term perspective. That requires independence.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.