Response to interpellation 2024/25:675 on Sweden's compliance with the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

Statsrådet Nina Larsson (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank Nadja Awad for the interpellation and the opportunity to discuss these important issues.

Nadja Awad has asked me what measures I and the government have taken to live up to the recommendations and requirements from the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, CERD, what measures I consider remain to be taken to live up to the recommendations and requirements, and how I ensure that the measures that have been taken, and those that will be taken, occur in close dialogue with civil society and other relevant actors.

I would like, as I said, to begin by thanking you for the question and for the member's commitment to these important issues.

The measures taken to comply with the recommendations from the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination are set out in the 24th and 25th periodic reports that the government submitted to the CERD Committee in January 2023 (A2022/01221). At the committee's recommendation, this report constitutes a follow-up to previous reports. Under each respective article, the measures that have been taken during the latest reporting cycle are reported.

After that, the government's work in several areas has contributed to compliance with the convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination in accordance with the committee's recommendations. Among other things, the government decided on a new action plan against racism and hate crimes in December 2024 (A2024/01394). Reports and reviews from international human rights monitoring bodies have constituted important foundations in the work with the action plan.

Dialogues with civil society regarding people's vulnerability to different forms of racism and the need for measures have been conducted regularly since 2016. Representatives from civil society have played an important role in identifying challenges and the need for measures against racism and hate crimes and have thereby made important contributions to the action plan. Civil society's knowledge and experience will also continue to be valuable when the action plan is to be implemented and followed up. Dialogues with civil society are also conducted regularly in other issues that bear on the CERD Committee's recommendations, for example, issues concerning the rights of national minorities or issues regarding religious communities.

In December 2023, a consultation was organized regarding the national work against racism with about twenty civil society organizations. The purpose of the meeting was to obtain a picture from civil society organizations of what is important to preserve – or what is missing – in the current work, which areas of society and measures should be prioritized, and in what way a child and youth perspective can be strengthened in the upcoming work.

As part of the follow-up on the recommendations from CERD, the Government Offices invited a number of civil society organizations to a consultation on Sweden's 24th and 25th periodic reports in December 2022, which the member also mentioned. Civil society organizations were also invited to a consultation that took place on May 22 this year.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer and for the fact that we can have this important debate, even though it has been the summer break here in the chamber!

Madam Speaker! In August, the UN will review how Sweden fulfills its commitments under the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The review will take place in Geneva, where Sweden's government will have to answer questions on what the work against racism and discrimination looks like in the country. Then, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination will give recommendations on how Sweden should work moving forward to improve the work against racism and discrimination. The last time Sweden was reviewed was in 2018.

The UN's International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination prohibits all forms of discrimination based on race, skin color, descent, or national or ethnic origin. It protects the right to equal treatment in areas including education, health care, work, the justice system, and housing. The Convention also requires states to ensure that discriminated persons have access to remedies and protection.

Sweden's national institution for human rights, which was established in 2022, testifies that the legal support in Sweden is lacking in cases of hate crimes and discrimination. Many also testify that it is difficult to obtain redress after having been subjected to racism. It is also reported that there are racist undertones in the political discourse and in several political initiatives, which causes great concern and risks normalizing racism both online and out in society.

Children and young people are exposed to racism in school, and racist expressions are becoming an increasing part of everyday life for children and young people. Discrimination and racism occur in contacts with school, social services, and health and medical care. It has a negative impact on the right to social security, housing, education, and health. This is stated by the Institute for Human Rights.

The state has a responsibility to condemn, counter, and abolish racism in Sweden. The Institute for Human Rights views positively that a new action plan against racism and hate crimes has been developed by the Swedish government. But they also raise a number of different problems with the action plan. In the meetings they have had with organizations and rights holders, several have highlighted problems with how the action plan was developed. They point to a lack of inclusion and consultation with civil society. It also emerges that the action plan primarily treats racism as an attitude or as something that occurs between individuals, and that the measures are therefore not accurate for addressing structural racism.

All agencies working to follow up on the government's action plan against racism and hate crimes have time-limited mandates, which the Institute for Human Rights criticizes.

The questions that the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination may come to pose to the Swedish state are actually the same questions that I want to pose to the Minister. If the Swedish government acknowledges that structural racism exists, does the government consider the action plan's measures to be accurate enough in terms of addressing that structural racism? That is the first question.

The second question is how the Swedish government will involve civil society and rights holders in the implementation of the action plan.

Finally: What measures is the government taking to ensure that the work against racism and hate crimes becomes long-term and that it does not, as before, largely base itself on short-term projects?

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is pleasant that we have the opportunity to discuss this important issue even though summer is just around the corner. I want to participate in the debate because I recently started a new network in the Riksdag that deals with human rights in Sweden. There has long been another network here called the MR-nätverket, which focuses very much on the situation for human rights in other countries. But several have highlighted the need to focus on human rights in Sweden as well. I was in contact with a large civil society network before the launch. They encouraged me to start this new network. All the other debaters here today are also members of that network.

It is obvious that the issue engages several of us. At the last meeting, we discussed the upcoming UPR process. It is linked to several things. One can see what will probably be taken up when Sweden is reviewed from the outside regarding the convention on racial discrimination. In the UPR process, there are also several countries that strike down on issues that concern exactly that.

The most common observations from other states to Sweden concern racism, hate crimes, and discrimination. There are also several who point out a lack of systematic approach and a lack of structure when it comes to the follow-up of Sweden's commitments, including what concerns the racial discrimination directive. Some request a national mechanism for reporting and follow-up and not only the type of consultation that often occurs, where civil society is given the opportunity to present its views. It is then very difficult for them to follow up on the issues and know what happens with their proposals. It is difficult to know if they are adopted by the government and become reality, what is taken further, and how one can be able to follow that.

The need for an updated strategy and action plan for human rights has also been pointed out. It could become a slightly clearer national mechanism. I bring it up in this discussion because all of Sweden's commitments, including those under the convention on racial discrimination, suffer from the same lack of clear structure for how the work should proceed. It should be clear for all rights holders and all governments. Ideally, it should be constant over time, regardless of which parties are in government. Then it becomes easy to follow up and continue the work.

The current MR strategy, for example, is from 2016, and there isn't really any action plan. It would have been good to have a better functioning structure here, of course. Then it would have been easy for a new government to hook into that work.

I have also read the report from the MR Institute. It is very pedagogical and provides recommendations to the committee on what it could ask Sweden about. In addition to what was mentioned earlier here by Member Awad, I would like to raise the question of equality data, which engages many – myself, among others. There are different opinions on whether it is a good idea, but the MR Institute also chooses to highlight it in its observations to Sweden, which they think the committee might be able to point out to the government.

I am also very curious about how the government plans its presence in Geneva in August. Will the State Council be the delegation leader, or have you not decided yet? I would like to know more about that, so that we and civil society can plan our work.

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! Today I stand here not to read out yet another formal statement but to awaken our collective conscience. This is not an ordinary interpellation; it is an emergency. I am tired of standing here year after year talking about these things and having to shout about the obvious.

I will focus on Afro-Swedish Muslims. Afro-Swedish Muslims in Sweden are treated as less worthy and as second-class citizens.

I am tired of reading DO's reports and other reports that confirm what we already know, namely that our children are bullied, suspected, and dehumanized in schools that claim to stand for equality. I am tired of women in hijabs being assaulted, harassed by racists, and discriminated against in the labor market. I am tired of mosques being desecrated and burned down and of hate crimes increasing. This happens without anyone in the government reacting at all. As long as the Sverigedemokraterna are satisfied, the silence is total.

I am tired of authorities like the social services in Gothenburg. We saw this week that they, in full public view in their so-called educational material, used racist caricatures that have historically been used to dehumanize Black people. It is nothing less than a scandal and a humiliation. It is a reminder of how deeply normalized racism is even in the rooms that claim to want to help. But as long as the Sweden Democrats are satisfied, the silence is total.

We can also talk about the labor market, where meritocracy is said to prevail but where skin color in practice determines who gets the chance and who is sorted out. This is shown by a report from Uppsala University. Afro-Swedes who are born in Sweden and have three years of higher education have almost 50 percent lower disposable income than other Swedes. The few Afro-Swedes who reach managerial positions receive on average 25 percent lower salary than their colleagues.

This is not just discrimination, but it is systematic exclusion from influence, security, and faith in the future. It is structural racism in its most concrete form.

Madam Speaker! Racism does not end at the school gate or the workplace. It follows us all the way into healthcare. A study from Uppsala University shows that Afro-Swedish women are discriminated against in Swedish maternity care. They testify that their pain is ignored, that their anxiety is downplayed, and that they are stereotyped precisely when they are at their most vulnerable. It is not just disrespectful; it is a matter of life and death. To be a Black Muslim woman in Sweden and pregnant means not being able to trust that one will be listened to, even when life is at stake. But as long as the Sverigedemokraterna are satisfied, the silence is total when it comes to that question as well.

How many children will have to be called the n-word in school before the government acts? How many women will be denied work because of their faith before you act? How many mosques will be burned? How many threats will be ignored?

I have to carry a personal alarm wherever I go. There are people who hate me, but not because of my political convictions, but because of my skin color. Many others are subjected to this all the time, Madam Speaker.

Let us speak plainly: Sweden violates the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination every single day, according to the UN's repeated criticism. It is not just an ethical failure, but it is also a state-sanctioned assault on human dignity. It is not a minority problem, but it is a moral collapse that we see today in Sweden.

When the state allows people to be treated differently because of skin color or religion, the idea of human rights is nothing more than a beautiful lie. Therefore, I ask the government minister what concrete, not symbolic, measures are being taken against structural racism and specifically Islamophobia and Afrophobia. Will the government develop a national action plan specifically against Islamophobia and Afrophobia? If so, when?

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! I welcome Minister Larsson. We have not had the chance to debate with each other yet. I am also a member of the aforementioned MR-network, but I spend my everyday work in the Committee on Employment. All types of labor market issues are close to my heart.

The Swedish labor market is, as said, heavily segregated. We have a very high unemployment rate. In that case, it is important to know who is unemployed and why. Instead of focusing on individual individuals, one can quickly see clear patterns.

I delved a bit into a report that the County Administrative Board prepared a few years ago. Unfortunately, almost all the data is still frighteningly relevant. Jallow touched on this a bit in his speech, namely that Afro-Swedes are the group that is always most vulnerable in all areas, even within the labor market area.

One always has a significantly lower salary than the rest of the population. In the private sector, it is approximately 36 percent, but it looks the same in the public sector and within the county councils. The same applies regarding unemployment. Afro-Swedes have many more days of unemployment, regardless of education level. The crazy thing is that if an Afro-Swedish person is to be able to reach the same income as the rest of the population with a three-year post-secondary education, it practically requires that one has a doctoral degree. It is not just an exclusion, it is a dead end.

As we have heard before, Afro-Swedes are always heavily underrepresented in managerial positions, other high-status occupations and so on. One practically never reaches the same positions as the rest of the population, even though one has the same education. It is a glass ceiling that is built of prejudice and racism, nothing else. It is not about individual cases. It is structural racism and discrimination.

The government must obviously act forcefully here, not only for the individual persons but for the whole society. Discrimination in the labor market must never be a profitable business.

The report I am referring to has many different proposals on how one could address this. We have previously talked about equality data. Large parts of the world realize that this is the absolute best way to see and measure different types of discrimination. If you do not ask for anything, you will also never know the answer. This is incredibly important, especially for the most vulnerable groups.

My questions are: How does the government view addressing the structural discrimination in the labor market so that everyone can utilize their potential and reach their goals in working life? When will we introduce equality data in Sweden?

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

Statsrådet Nina Larsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Many thanks, Nadja Awad, Ulrika Westerlund, Malcolm Momodou Jallow and Ciczie Weidby, for the comments, questions and the opportunity to discuss these incredibly important issues.

Racism and discrimination are completely unacceptable. It is a fundamental issue of democracy and human rights. There is no doubt about that. It is crystal clear that this government, previous governments, and future governments will need to work extremely hard to ensure that racism does not occur.

Polarization in society is increasing. We have a geopolitical situation that is immensely complex. The threat to our democracy, our freedom, and our human rights is tangible, and it is difficult to navigate. Much can happen in a very short time.

This makes these issues even more important, I would say. It makes the question of a clear and distinct anti-discrimination legislation, which can actually be followed, completely central. For it is this that holds our society together. We want a society that holds together. We do not want people to feel that they are treated differently depending on ethnicity, gender, disability, or whatever ground of discrimination it may be. It is completely unacceptable.

Such a development leads to our resilience decreasing, the support for our institutions and our democracy being jeopardized, and the vulnerabilities in our democracy increasing. This means that these issues therefore also constitute a security issue. It is incredibly important for our democracy that we can truly maintain a rock-solid effort against racism and discrimination, regardless of where this occurs.

In my earlier response, I pointed out a few things. That being said, my starting point regarding the goal of the policy for human rights is to ensure full respect for Sweden's international commitments on human rights, just as several of the questioners have also touched upon.

Views and recommendations from international review bodies are not legally binding, but they constitute an important guidance for how we can further the work of ensuring full respect for Sweden's international commitments on human rights. These reviews show, as has been said, that continuity and perseverance are required – something that we certainly need to discuss, continue to monitor and further develop so that we have a long-term perspective when it comes to these issues.

The Government has taken several measures that contribute to the work of living up to the recommendations. One example is the establishment of the authority the Institute for Human Rights, which fulfills the tasks that an independent national mechanism has according to Article 33.2 in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and, among other things, also has the task to monitor, investigate and report on how human rights are respected and realized in Sweden.

In addition to that, we also have the action plan, which we adopted during the previous year.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Madam Speaker! I want to continue from where I left off in my previous contribution. The Minister is referring to the established Institute for Human Rights 2022. In the report that both I and Member Westerlund referred to, they have mentioned a number of issues that this government will probably face when the inquiry takes place in Geneva in August.

The question remains. If the government considers that structural racism exists, we also need to talk about which measures counteract that structural racism. Then we must talk about what all members have mentioned here: how it is made impossible, how obstacles are created, how a "us" and "them" is created, and so on in the labor market, within education, in the housing market, and within health and medical care, the school, social services, and so on. It is in these societal sectors where it is clearly shown in a number of different research bases that racism and discrimination occur. This is what is structural racism.

This government needs to demonstrate through this action plan how it will, in the long term and with powerful measures, counter this type of racism and discrimination within the various sectors of society. That is why I asked whether the Minister considers the action plan's measures to be accurate. But I am not really getting an answer. Nothing in the Minister's previous contribution showed that one is actually paying attention to the MR-institute's proposals for measures to counter structural racism. I still want an answer to the question: Which measures does the Minister consider to be accurate?

I am also thinking about the question of involving civil society and rights holders in the implementation of the action plan. What should this look like going forward? As the MR Institute has mentioned, organizations and rights holders feel that they were excluded from the process when the action plan was developed. This is very serious, because it is not least them who can put forward how this government and the state can work to condemn, counter, and abolish racism and discrimination in Sweden. I would therefore, once again, like to know how the Swedish government will plan to involve civil society and rights holders when it comes to this issue.

What did emerge in the Minister's previous statement, which is positive, is that one wants to see a long-term perspective and that one notes that even future governments will need to work on this issue. I do not just want to receive a confirmation that one wants that long-term perspective, but also more concretely know how one will ensure that the work continues.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I will also continue a little bit on what I took up in my previous contribution.

But I first want to mention something that happened this week and received quite a lot of attention, namely the case of the two murdered children, whose perpetrator was now sentenced for the murders, which occurred in the summer of 2023. This perhaps received the most attention because the mother of one of the children had called the police and received what I would call a racist response. This was the reason why I requested that the Commissioner of the Swedish Police should come to the Committee on Justice and explain how the police intend to work so that this type of incident does not continue to be repeated.

One had not taken an interpreter there despite it having been needed, and one also disparaged the mother's lack of Swedish, it can be said, in their response to her. The Police Commissioner stated that this is not a sign of a general problem but wanted to emphasize that it concerned an individual instance.

At the same time, the police commissioner said that the police do not actually have any routines or structures for producing reports on such incidents. For example, a large report has been produced concerning the police's failure regarding men's violence against women. But in this case, no report has been produced. This is an example of how clearer measures could be taken at a structural level instead of continuing to think that racist incidents and obvious examples at various Swedish authorities are individual cases rather than examples of structures that we should try to address and attack.

The MR-institute is a national mechanism that fulfills the Paris Principles. But my question was about the mechanism that the government oversees, for reporting, follow-up, engagement with civil society and so on, which could be included in an updated MR-strategy and an action plan that deals with exactly this.

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! I can only state that I have not heard the Minister mention Afro-Swedes or Muslims even once, despite several debaters having mentioned that group as particularly vulnerable. It would be appropriate to say exactly what one intends to do to protect that group's human rights.

Let us speak plainly: The Government and SD are responsible for a large part of the polarization we are talking about. It is very important that one also looks inward.

Hate crimes against Afro-Swedes have increased by 29 percent in a single year, but only 5 percent of the reports lead to prosecution. What does that say? That our lives, our safety, and our humanity do not count. But it is not just about statistics. It is about people. It is about names, about faces, about lives extinguished in the shadow of society's indifference. And the most frightening thing is not the hatred from racists and extremists, but it is the silence from the authorities. We are talking about Afro-Swedish Muslims. The authorities do not say a single word about that group.

What I and my colleagues highlight here today is a legal certainty problem, a human rights problem, and a democratic problem that we as legislators can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to. It is about how violence, threats, and hate crimes against Muslims, Afro-Swedes, and other racialized people in Sweden are repeatedly downplayed, trivialized, or ignored – especially when the perpetrator is a right-wing extremist racist belonging to the majority society.

It is also a security problem, Madam Speaker. We know that when the perpetrator is a Muslim, there is talk of radicalization, terrorism, and security threats. But when the perpetrator is white and far-right, there is talk of mental health, lone wolves, and individual traumas. This asymmetry is not only unfair; it is life-threatening. It undermines trust in the justice system.

Let me conclude with this: I do not stand here today solely as a member of Parliament. I stand here for the children who learn that silence is a way to survive, for the parents who must explain to their children why their surname makes them suspects, for the Afro-Swedish and Muslim women who, every time they are about to give birth, risk not being listened to and thus risk their lives, and for the Muslims who are threatened, hated, harassed, and dehumanized and carry their pain in silence while the state turns a blind eye.

Take responsibility and answer! What do you intend to do to protect these people's rights?

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister Larsson, for your attempt to answer all our questions! For some, four minutes is a very long time, but I understand that it slips away when one has to answer all the questions.

I believe, however, that it is important, not only for those of us who are asking the questions here today but for very many of those who are following the debate now or will see it later, that the Minister addresses more of our concrete questions and, above all, that she answers what one actually wants to do from the government's side.

One must admit that there is a structural racism, that is, say those words, and thereby also produce action plans for it. The Minister stated in his previous statement that racism and discrimination are a major democratic problem. In a free and democratic society, we act freely without discriminating against one another.

Civil society can also very well step in here. The government does not always need to do all the work itself. It can have a close and good dialogue with civil society, with associations, with anti-racist networks, with trade unions and so on to see and know what is needed for us to address different types of discrimination and racism – especially in the labor market, which I am very passionate about, so that all people do not just hear that they should participate and contribute and work without it also being something that they are allowed to do and that their knowledge and education are welcomed and count. I really hope that the minister will answer a bit on how we are to do so that all persons have that right in the labor market.

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

Statsrådet Nina Larsson (L)

Madam Speaker! I continue on the question regarding the action plan which I have mentioned and which is an important part of this.

The action plan against racism and hate crimes is a central measure and a mobilization of forces in the work to combat racism in general, but also to, through various measures, make visible and counteract racism against groups that are, among others, mentioned in the CERD Committee's recommendations. It is anti-Muslim racism, antisemitism, anti-Black racism, anti-Roma racism, and racism against the Sámi. The action plan shall create a structure for the national work against racism and hate crimes, but it shall also be able to contribute to the work at local and regional levels.

In Sweden's report to the committee 2023, it is also described that the Equality Ombudsman has initiated work to change the direction of its activities with the starting point that DO shall investigate more reports so that more people who have been subjected to discrimination shall receive redress. This is also a continued important direction for the authority and something that I see as extremely positive.

The anti-discrimination legislation also involves proactive measures to promote diversity and equality, which should not be underestimated. It is also an incredibly important part that the Equality Ombudsman has the resources, capacity, knowledge, and ability to actually pursue the individual cases. Even though that is not what the questioners are referring to, it is incredibly important for several reasons. It is important so that one can obtain redress when one has been subjected to it as an individual. But it is also an important signaling tool towards society at large and towards employers regarding how they should behave when there are different gray areas depending on safety clothing or whatever it may be. It is incredibly important.

The questioner Malcolm Momodou Jallow may think it is a symbolic issue. The member requested larger measures, after all. But a mandate that this government has recently given the Equality Ombudsman is to increase information about discrimination legislation towards operators who provide services in a pub environment, for example restaurants, but also towards the general public. What is required when one is subjected to discrimination? How should one proceed when reporting? It is a matter of ensuring that the Equality Ombudsman receives the best possible basis in the reports that come in so that it can lead to a conviction when one has been subjected to discrimination. It is a small but also important issue in this context.

When it comes to labor market issues, the anti-discrimination legislation affects the functioning of the labor market in large. Here we are now working further with a proposal for a new work environment strategy, where these issues are also central. Ensuring that every individual in the workplace can reach their full potential lies, so to speak, in the employers' interest. It is also a question of competitiveness. Alongside the significantly more important question of democracy and human rights, it is also a question of competitiveness.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the debate! Just when it comes to the question of structural racism and how one can repel this racism, it presupposes, as the Minister touched upon slightly, that institutions such as authorities, municipalities, regions and so on – and the government – are actually tasked with developing a strategy for how one can be able to repel racism and discrimination within society's various sectors. Resources must also be allocated for this to be able to be done.

So, a plan is needed, and a resource is needed to be able to do this. Different institutions receive resources today. For example, the Equality Ombudsman repeatedly states that it is difficult to push back against the discrimination of Afro-Swedes and Muslims within Swedish schools. Who are it is that drives those cases of discrimination, and how do you resolve those cases when resources are lacking?

Then it will not be possible to judge in all cases, and everyone simply will not receive the redress they deserve – as a rights holder and as one who has been subjected to racism and discrimination.

That is also why we have had this debate with the Minister now – to remind that both mandates and resources must be allocated to different institutions to enable the work so that structural racism and discrimination actually disappear from all parts of Sweden's societal sectors.

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

Statsrådet Nina Larsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Many thanks to Nadja Awad and the other members for the opportunity to debate and discuss these very important issues! I really want to emphasize that human rights and the work against racism and against discrimination is completely central. It is a completely central democratic issue.

It is also a completely central defense and security issue, because it is about a society that needs to hold together. We have an incredibly difficult geopolitical situation, and the threats to our democracy are many. This makes this area even more important than it already is.

I want to say a few brief words about the involvement of civil society. I did not manage to touch upon it in previous speeches. I share the interpellant's ambition – it is an incredibly important part. My view is that we truly involve civil society on a number of levels. We do so partly in various consultations, and partly in various meetings where we highlight specific issues in different round-table discussions.

Not least, all our authorities also have a very large exchange with civil society. Civil society is given the opportunity to put forward views linked both to the situational picture and how the current situation looks, and to possible measures and proposals for the way forward. It is an important work to continue with.

I take with me the question of whether we need to strengthen our follow-up methodology and our long-term perspective regarding how we can more sharply follow up on these issues. The Swedish state apparatus can always refine its work in those areas. As someone with a background in the business sector, I am very keen on setting goals and achieving results. I agree with that. But we will certainly have to return to that question as well. I thank you so very much for the opportunity to debate.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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