Response to interpellation 2024/25:653 on strengthening civil defense
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the strengthening of civil defense and the role of healthcare in crisis preparedness. M believes that the government is carrying out the largest upgrade of the total defense since World War II 1 and that resources for civil defense are actually reaching the target under the current government 2 3. M emphasizes that the state is responsible for robustness such as national security stocks 4. S argues that underfunding of healthcare in peacetime constitutes a security risk 5 6. S maintains that a well-functioning welfare system is a prerequisite for crisis preparedness 7 8 and criticizes the government for not helping local politicians build up the civil preparedness 9.
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 Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Mr. Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me the following: Does the Minister consider healthcare to be an important part of Sweden's civil defense? How will the Minister act within their area of responsibility based on their view on the question? In what way will the Minister work together with other Nordic countries to strengthen civil defense?
We find ourselves in a serious security policy situation. The reconstruction of the total defense is being carried out with high ambition, and the government is implementing the largest upgrade of the entire total defense since the end of the Second World War. Through the defense decision 2025–2030, the civil defense receives an addition of over 37.5 billion kronor.
The Government has, within the framework of the previous defense decision, allocated funds to the sector for health, care, and elderly care. Within the framework of the current defense decision for the period 2025–2030, the sector is allocated additional funds, and from 2028 onwards, the sector will be allocated a total of 2.5 billion kronor annually for the work on civil defense.
Health and medical care is an important societal function that has a central role in the civil defense's ability to support the military defense and create resilience.
In recent years, the government has worked systematically and intensively to strengthen preparedness within health and medical care. A purposeful care capacity under normal conditions is a prerequisite for meeting the demands posed in the event of a crisis or war. During 2025, the government allocates 7.5 billion kronor so that the regions can increase care capacity.
Regarding cooperation with our Nordic neighbors, the government intends to prioritize measures that generate concrete capability increases during the defense decision period 2025–2030. Within the framework of this development, Sweden's commitments as an ally in Nato shall be taken into account. The work should, where possible and appropriate, be conducted within the framework of EU cooperation and in cooperation with our Nordic neighboring countries.
The Nordic defense cooperation creates conditions for a deeper and closer Nordic security and defense policy cooperation that includes joint operational planning and cross-border operational activity across the entire spectrum of conflict from peace to war.
The Haga cooperation has since 2009 aimed at building a stronger rescue service cooperation in the Nordic region with the capacity to prevent, prepare for, manage, recover from, and learn from serious hazards and crises. Based on our common Nordic experiences and previous actions, the need to continue strengthening the Nordic coordination and the political guidance within the area of civil preparedness is emphasized. Our common resilience shall be seen in a holistic perspective, including the Nordic civil-military cooperation. The importance of the cooperation is also reinforced in light of the deteriorated security situation and an increasing number of hybrid threats and attacks.
The Government further considers that Sweden should develop its already established cooperation with the other Nordic countries to strengthen Sweden's preparedness for supply. In connection with the joint government meeting in Stockholm in September 2024, a letter of intent was signed between Finland and Sweden regarding joint planning within the area of preparedness for supply. The letter of intent also highlights that both Finland and Sweden view it positively to eventually also include the other Nordic countries. The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency has now, in order to develop the letter of intent, been tasked to initiate preparations for joint planning with Finland within the area of preparedness for supply.
To meet events of an extraordinary nature across the entire threat spectrum, we in the Nordic region must be able to mobilize joint efforts. The trust and common interests that exist between our Nordic countries are of great importance, and the government will continue to work to find more areas for deepened cooperation.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! We find ourselves in the most serious security policy situation since the Second World War. In that situation, building up a stronger defense is, of course, a matter of course. That we agree on. What we are discussing today is the civil preparedness and the importance of this. Defense does not only consist of cannons but also of a civil defense – being able to take care of people in crisis and war, being able to manage a society in times of crisis and war.
Sweden's civil preparedness is about the local, about the local community's ability to prevent difficulties – but also to manage them when they occur. It is about healthcare, which I have primarily focused on in this interpellation, but it is also about infrastructure, food preparedness and everything that is important to manage – the basic needs – in times of crisis and war.
The SD-led government has on several occasions said that this is very important. That is something we also completely agree on. But words are not enough. Action is also needed.
When regions are now forced into savings all over our country – for that is the current situation in Sweden – it is naturally difficult to manage the healthcare, to be able to assure the citizens in the region of good care and to manage the queues that exist. Then it is also difficult to manage to allocate resources, time, and effort to building up a civil preparedness.
It is also against the background of what I have asked the question about. I think the Minister for Civil Affairs in previous debates we have had with him has been a bit evasive on this. When we governed during the entire pandemic – a major crisis for Sweden and the world – we saw that what worked in normal times also worked better in times of crisis.
When we build up our civil preparedness, it is about building up what is required specifically, and it is about having a good foundation. Good healthcare in normal times is a prerequisite for it to function in times of crisis and war.
Since the situation in the world is not improving, we have prioritized these issues in our spring budget. It is about strengthening civil preparedness. It is also about providing resources to municipalities and regions to be able to build a stronger welfare state, not weaken it. They are connected.
In our budget, we have consistently allocated more resources to healthcare and to the municipalities to build a stronger welfare. And now we are also allocating specific resources to the civil preparedness to manage healthcare preparedness, pharmaceutical preparedness, and food preparedness.
Can the government see that an underfunding of healthcare actually also jeopardizes the civil preparedness in the future?
Hanna Westerén (S)
Mr. Speaker! I am from Gotland, and it is completely irresistible to participate in a debate on civil defense. Gotland, this strategic jewel, embraced across the entire political spectrum, is the subject of the reconstruction of the military defense at an exceptionally high pace. Yes, in terms of the reconstruction of the military defense, it is going like a house of cards. But this does not align at all with the upgrading of the civil defense and thus of the total defense.
Carl-Oskar Bohlin can repeat as many times as he likes that we must all take responsibility when his government nevertheless consistently underfunds Swedish healthcare year after year. When Swedish healthcare is on its knees in peacetime, how on earth is it going to be able to gear up in the event of a crisis or war? Or as Carl-Oskar Bohlin himself said in his response to Eva Lindh's interpellation: "A purposeful healthcare capacity under normal conditions is a prerequisite for meeting the demands that are placed in the event of a crisis or war." I agree. That is how it is.
In the constituency I represent, Gotland, Carl-Oskar Bohlin really does not need to doubt the commitment to building a total defense. The work is proceeding relentlessly every day. Gotland has, however, been identified as a strategic location for a field hospital. Fantastic – but perhaps not entirely realistic. Gotland's healthcare is consistently underfunded by hundreds of millions every year. How are we going to squeeze out a field hospital?
In our Social Democratic budget proposal, we take this into account. Eva Lindh mentioned it as well. What the government takes into account is unclear to me. It doesn't add up, and it doesn't hang together.
Mr. Speaker! I consider Swedish healthcare to be an important, if not indispensable, part of Sweden's total defense and thus of the civil preparedness. I consider that the consistent underfunding of Swedish healthcare in itself becomes a security risk. It makes us more vulnerable. It makes it so that the healthcare system does not hold together and that there are gaps. That Carl-Oskar Bohlin, given today's answer, does not consider it, I experience as very worrying.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Mr. Speaker! Let me, for the sake of an accurate historical record, begin by stating that it is under this government that the resources for civil defense are actually being provided. It has been ten years since the Riksdag in this chamber decided that total defense should be revived. Under the previous Social Democratic government, almost no resources were added to civil defense. That is the bitter result after your eight years in power.
When this government took office, 2.7 billion was allocated per year to civil defense. This year, that sum is 8.5 billion. In another couple of years, we will reach 15 billion per year. It is important to include facts in the debate.
One does oneself a disservice when one constantly tries to let the discussion on civil defense slide into a general debate on welfare. We can absolutely have a welfare discussion, but if one constantly tries to shift the debate on civil defense into a general welfare debate, one also misses what are the specific requirements of civil defense, which then become sidelined. It is perhaps that which made the Social Democrats, during their time in power, never chose to prioritize civil defense clearly enough.
What are the civil defense's special requirements? Well, it is about dimensioning an operation to meet the requirements of war, that is to say, protected command posts, emergency power, redundancy of various types that do not fit within the framework of ordinary operations – supply readiness. It is a question of the supply readiness that was missing in healthcare during the time the Socialdemokraterna ruled the country, which became painfully clear during the pandemic. There was a shortage of face masks, hand sanitizer, and medical technology equipment in almost all of Sweden. The conclusion of this is, naturally, that we must begin to build up that type of supply readiness, which is now being done – just as we have, for the first time, procured national security stocks with trauma care equipment to be able to handle a mass casualty event on Swedish territory. This has not existed before, and nothing was done about this during the eight years the Socialdemokraterna held power.
The serious security situation means that we must prioritize these issues in a clear way, and that is what this government is doing.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the unpleasantness that Carl-Oskar Bohlin engages in.
Of course, we understand that it is not just about building up the welfare, but that other things are also required. That is exactly what both I and Hanna Westerén raised. It is clear that other measures are also required to strengthen the total defense when it comes to, for example, healthcare preparedness. What we are talking about is having a fundamentally well-functioning healthcare system, a fundamentally well-functioning public service, which can additionally be built upon with what is required in times of crisis or war.
Carl-Oskar Bohlin says that one does oneself a disservice when it is only about the general welfare preparedness. We understand that it is not only about that, but that it is also about the general welfare preparedness. We do not feel that the responsible minister even realizes this. That is why we ask the question. We realize that it is about both. It is about both strengthening the general welfare and reinforcing the extra that is needed in times of crisis and war. But the responsible minister seems to only focus on one of them.
We are concerned that what is happening in healthcare now is not only bad for care here and now, in the so-called normal times, but also undermines the conditions for a good preparedness in times of crisis and war.
Every time I speak with a municipal or regional politician, they raise the concern that they cannot do what they realize would be needed, just as my colleague Hanna Westerén raised. It is not that they say: No thanks, we are not going to do this. They ask: How are we going to do it when we do not receive the resources to be able to build it up?
The Government has given the various authorities several assignments. But municipalities and regions also have an incredibly important role in building up the total defense, and they are not receiving resources to do so, but rather have fewer resources to manage what they are supposed to even in normal times. That is exactly what we are talking about.
For example, reports show that we have a shortage of medicines already today. How will it work then if we end up in crisis and war? The Government points out that we did not have face masks during the pandemic. No, we were aware of that. Once upon a time, we did build up a preparedness for medicines and medical technology equipment. But certain parties removed the pharmacy monopoly, and then several said that when there were more who were entering the pharmacy market, one had to build up a preparedness for times of crisis and war. Who would then take the responsibility? Then it was said that it would sort itself out. We saw how that went.
We ended up in that situation because responsibility had not been taken. Now we see that this needs to be done.
Finland took after us and therefore had a better preparedness. Now we need to take after Finland. The Nordic cooperation will be important in the future.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Mr. Speaker! Carl-Oskar Bohlin accounts for what has happened since this government took office. I also want to remind what has happened since this government took office. The security policy situation has intensified. I believe we agree on that. The demands have increased on all of us, given the situation we find ourselves in. Thus, the questions that I and Eva Lindh pose become even more relevant. What will we be able to achieve together in the event of a crisis or war?
That healthcare is able to deliver and does not go to its knees in peacetime is crucial for our collective resilience. I believe it is a common concern that Swedish healthcare is able to deliver and function in the event of a crisis or war. But when it is so strained in peacetime, it is clear that a concern is raised about how it will function in the event of a crisis or war.
When Gotland's healthcare, which I personally hold close to my heart, runs a deficit of several hundreds of millions every year and at the same time there are demands and promises that we are to have a war hospital, it is clear that I carry a concern. How are we going to be able to deliver, given our circumstances?
I do not intend to broaden this into a general political debate. I wanted to debate the underfunding of healthcare and how it jeopardizes Sweden's total defense and exposes our vulnerability.
Of course, we all want to participate in the defense of Sweden and the reconstruction of the total defense. But when the reconstruction of the military defense proceeds so much faster and does not align with the reconstruction of the civil defense, of indispensable Swedish healthcare, I believe we have a problem.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Mr. Speaker! It is fundamentally good that there is a great interest in the entire Swedish Parliament, including among the opposition, for the reconstruction of the civil defense.
What I tried to explain was that very little happened in this area before 2022. It is simply regrettable. We need to catch up on a security policy development that has moved in the wrong direction for a very long time. The reinforcements are now being made primarily within six prioritized readiness sectors. Healthcare is one of them. As I mentioned, that sector is being provided with a fully expanded 2.4 billion SEK per year. But those funds must be prioritized for specifically robustness-enhancing measures.
We can absolutely have a discussion and a debate about the general healthcare, but in that case, the interpellation is addressed to the wrong minister. What is important to remember here is that it is fundamentally the regions that have the responsibility for ordinary healthcare. What the state takes responsibility for is to build in more robustness in this system.
One also needs to be clear – the interpellor perhaps overlooks this slightly – that healthcare in wartime is something completely different than healthcare in peacetime. The government is now doing a number of things to address this; I mentioned, among other things, the procurement of national security stocks to be able to handle mass casualty incidents.
I recently visited a large healthcare exercise with 500 participants in Västra Götalandsregionen where the Swedish Armed Forces participated. The exercise leader put his finger on what it was about. He said: Today we have practiced giving as little care as possible to as many people as possible.
It is, therefore, the opposite of ordinary healthcare activities. In the event of war, healthcare resources will need to be used in a completely different way. But then there must be planning prerequisites for that. These resilience-enhancing measures must exist so that healthcare can transition.
The general debate about healthcare is absolutely worth having. As I mentioned, the government adds 7.5 billion in general state grants. The regions are responsible for healthcare and have their own taxing rights. But that is another discussion.
The discussion about what we do so that healthcare can meet the demands of war is about which specific measures must be taken so that healthcare can have these transition conditions. That involves reinforced supply readiness, which the government is now prioritizing. It involves the assignments to Socialstyrelsen. It involves, for example, being able to activate civil service, and that is something that this government has taken steps to be able to do also in health and medical care.
I hope that the Social Democrats welcome this. But I can state that it would naturally have been much better if it had happened much earlier.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! I will not enter into any historical debate. I just want to remind that it is not so long ago that Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine began. It is clear that we all realize that it is a much more complicated situation after that when it comes to security policy.
I am actually not less worried after this debate. The Government continues to say that healthcare and how it functions in normal times is something completely different from building a preparedness. Obviously, we have not succeeded in our attempts to have this discussion. This is not, in fact, a general debate about the situation in healthcare today. We are talking about actually building both parts, that is to say that a healthcare system that functions in normal times has better conditions to function in times of crisis or war. Naturally, one must also build up war hospitals and everything else that we are talking about and that Hanna Westerén raised.
But the question is: How are we to prepare for war when cuts are being made in healthcare? That is what many say, not just me. They feel a frustration over how it is going to happen. I have not spoken to any municipal politician or regional politician who is uninterested in building up the civil preparedness. They want that too. They are just asking how.
It is strange: When one sits in opposition, one speaks about how the government must step forward in a crisis situation that encompasses the entire country. Where is that government today when local politicians ask and request help to build the total defense together?
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Mr. Speaker! Eva Lindh says that she does not want to give a history lesson. But when she notes that Russia's aggression against Ukraine occurred just recently, I still feel compelled to give a history lesson. It actually began in 2014 with Russia's unjust invasion of eastern Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea.
It is naturally always easy to be wise in hindsight, but one obviously did not feel the urgency that one should have felt in these issues at a much earlier stage. In 2015, when the defense decision stated that the total defense would be revived, no special funds were added by the government at that time to the civil defense. It was to be conducted within the framework of ordinary operations. How many operations then had the possibility to prioritize the construction of the civil defense in competition with ordinary operations? It was quite few.
Now we are getting substantial investments in civil defense. MSB notes in its capability assessment that the capability is increasing in all ten readiness sectors. It would need to go even faster, and this government works hard every day to ensure that it happens. But for it to happen, funds are also required, and those funds are now being provided in a large extent for the first time in a long time. This applies to healthcare, food preparedness, and the energy sector. It also applies to the rescue services, where, thanks to this government's fast tracks, we have already begun training civil-obligated individuals. None of this happened under the previous government, but it is happening now.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.