Response to interpellation 2024/25:698 on the reconstruction of civil defense
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that the government has invested historically large funds in civil defense 1 2 and that municipalities and regions have a municipal responsibility to prioritize preparedness 1 2. M argues that the municipalities have municipal self-government and the opportunity to regulate their expenditures 3 as well as that the state is already a co-financer through agreements with SKR 3. M emphasizes that the capacity in civil defense is now increasing on a broad front 4. S argues that the state must be an active enabler and co-financer so that municipalities and regions can meet their obligations 5 6. S believes that the state should offer long-term and predictable support 7 8. S argues that the government can propose changed taxation to strengthen the total defense.
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)
Madam Speaker! Hanna Westerén has asked me how the government and I intend to respond to the appeal from Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner to enable and co-finance the reconstruction of the civil preparedness and thereby of Sweden's total defense.
The Government has invested in the work of municipalities and regions with civil defense during the mandate period. In the budget bills for both 2023 and 2024, the Government allocated funds to strengthen the work of municipalities and regions.
The significantly deteriorated security situation and experiences from Ukraine have clarified the need for a strong civil defense. Municipalities and regions have a crucial role in ensuring that society's functionality can be maintained throughout the entire threat spectrum. The Government considers that the work to develop and strengthen civil defense must continue with a higher level of ambition and speed.
With the budget bill for 2025, an additional 2 billion kronor was added to strengthen civil defense on a broad front. In total, civil defense is allocated 8.5 billion kronor during 2025. For 2028 and onwards, expenditures for civil defense are estimated to amount to approximately 15 billion kronor per year.
Within the civil sphere, the government proposes additional funds for 2025 totaling 110 million kronor for municipalities' and regions' work with civil defense (funds via MSB based on agreements with SKR), 20 million to regions and 90 million to municipalities. The government is also investing 76 million kronor in leadership positions in 2025, funds that will also benefit municipalities and regions. Furthermore, municipalities and regions will receive funds through investments within the various preparedness sectors.
Municipalities are central to preventing, resisting, and managing serious incidents both in peacetime and in the event of war. Until June 1 this year, MSB has had the mandate to support the municipalities by developing and adapting the methodological support that exists for the municipalities' crisis preparedness so that the work with civil defense is also covered.
Municipalities and regions are central in the work to strengthen and develop Sweden's crisis preparedness and civil defense, and these actors shall have the right conditions to contribute to this work. In September 2024, the Government received the report from the Inquiry on the basic responsibilities of municipalities and regions before and during peacetime crises and high alert. The report constitutes an important basis for the Government's continued measures aimed at strengthening the capacity of municipalities and regions.
The government is investing in protecting the civilian population during high alert and war. This involves, among other things, the upgrading and modernization of various types of shelters as well as strengthening the municipal rescue services' capacity. For this, reinforcement of both personnel and materiel is required during the coming years.
As support to be able to develop municipal rescue services during high alert, agreements have been signed with 25 rescue service organizations, where MSB has contributed financial means so that both planning and training resources could be employed within the rescue service organizations. The support also covers competence development and method development as well as equipment procurement, but also mobilization planning and preparatory planning for the use of civil-obligated persons in readiness or war service. 25 so-called war rescue units have been established linked to these agreements, each with 120 civil-obligated persons, where the first 600 civil-obligated persons have been trained and war-placed.
The development within the rescue services during high alert will continue.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! It is true that I have asked Carl-Oskar Bohlin how he and the government intend to comply with this request from Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner. This stems from the discrepancy I perceive that we have in Sweden today. Politically, we are very much in agreement that we need to strengthen the military defense and the total defense, but the path there differs. I believe that we need to talk a bit more about just that.
Carl-Oskar Bohlin himself said that ”municipalities and regions have a decisive role in ensuring that society's functionality can be maintained throughout the entire threat spectrum. The Government believes that the work to develop and strengthen civil defense must continue with a higher level of ambition and speed”. We are then in a situation where – and I have been in the chamber and spoken with Carl-Oskar Bohlin about this previously – municipalities and regions are under very heavy pressure. The question then becomes: How is one to achieve higher speed and ambition when one is so heavily pressured and the resources are so limited? I do not quite understand how that is going to happen.
We had a debate here earlier. I did not participate in it myself, but it was a debate that Karin Sundin had regarding crisis preparedness and persons with disabilities. At that time, Carl-Oskar Bohlin himself said that "crisis preparedness has, in some respects, been non-existent." I hope that I quoted correctly. That makes the question even more how we are to address this challenge. How do we lift those who in that case are lagging behind?
I believe that the majority of those who may be listening to this debate or engaging in these issues are clear on what Carl-Oskar Bohlin highlights in his response regarding the fundamental responsibility. The question, however, is whether it is realistic, as SKR (Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner) does not seem to consider it under current conditions. I believe we must talk more about this difference, this discrepancy, and this vision of the way forward.
When it comes to the shelters, I think we really have a lot to do given the sharpened security situation. It is also interesting to note that there are representatives for quite large real estate holdings in Sweden who are skeptical about exactly this distribution of responsibility and the way forward. My question to Carl-Oskar Bohlin then becomes: Does the plan hold? Will we get the shelters the population needs, and will they be in the condition they deserve? I feel skeptical about both the distribution of responsibility and the way forward.
I want to conclude with what the entire interpellation began with, that is, exactly what Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner highlighted to flag how critical this is. ”To meet these challenges, long-term and predictable state support is required. The state must once again take an active role, both as an enabler and a co-financer. Targeted investment grants and value-secured state grants are crucial for the municipalities to meet their future commitments.”
Despite the ambitions that the government describes, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner do not seem to feel secure about the future. I mean that this insecurity jeopardizes the total defense. I then wonder how Carl-Oskar Bohlin intends for us to close this gap.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! We have a great need in Sweden to build up and strengthen our total defense in the critical situation we find ourselves in.
I also want to start with the statement that Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin made in the previous debate, when he said that it is non-existent in many places in regions and municipalities. My perception is that the Minister has quite strong criticism towards what municipalities and regions are doing anyway to build up the total defense, which we all know that municipalities and regions are given a great responsibility for – and now we are talking primarily about the municipalities. They do have an important role.
We also know, however, that this is not exactly a clear exchange where one can point out that municipalities and regions are now to do this and that. The national policy, that is, we, and above all the government, have a great responsibility to provide the conditions that municipalities and regions need to build up various things – including total defense.
When I speak with many municipal politicians, civil preparedness is a topic they almost always raise – every time I meet municipal politicians across Sweden. They are worried. They want to take on a great responsibility, but they are worried about the lack of resources.
It is not just about receiving a message from the Minister and the government that "this is what you need to do." It is also about being given the conditions, and in this case, for example, resources, to be able to do what needs to be done.
Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner has now submitted a letter. It was exactly this that my colleague Hanna Westerén accounted for. There, they describe precisely what I and many others with me hear very often. ”Please, help us! Let us do this together! We need resources and conditions to build up the civil defense that we all see we need to do.” When the Minister points out and says that ”this needs municipalities and regions to do” it also implies a responsibility for the government to do this together.
I also recall that during the pandemic we had quite a few debates and discussions. At that time, there were representatives from the then-opposition – who are now ministers in the government – who had very many views on the then S-led government. They felt that the government should step forward. It was said that when it is something that concerns the nation as a whole, one cannot demand that every region or every municipality develops and carries out its own work. It was pointed out that a firm leadership from national politics is required.
Just in this question and just in this situation, I am inclined to agree. Clear and firm leadership is required here – but also an understanding of the very large challenges that many municipalities have right now. They are not only to save elderly care and the school. They must also build up a civil preparedness. Are you prepared to help them, Minister?
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! It appears there are many Social Democrats who do not quite want to quote me correctly here today. What I said in the previous interpellation debate was that the capacity in many places was non-existent at the municipal level. That is no longer the case, and it certainly did not look that way everywhere. Different municipalities have come different distances, and this is an expression of the fact that there are different political wills.
We have a municipal self-government in this country that I do not hear any municipal councilor question. We also have an order where the municipalities have their own right of taxation, which we almost always seem to forget in such contexts.
This government provides historically large state grants, and I can state that there are many municipalities that take the work of preparedness very seriously – including Eva Lindh's own home municipality, I believe, namely Linköping. Linköping is one of the country's best municipalities in this area. I had the privilege of meeting Linköping Municipality as recently as today, together with the said EU Commissioner, and I can state that they take almost full responsibility for their own continuity planning.
It is about supply preparedness for care services, supply preparedness for school meals, backup power and so on, and so on. It is a municipal responsibility to live up to the requirements that the Act on Extraordinary Events sets out. It is therefore not optional to live up to these requirements, but it requires political will.
This government manifests political will for civil defense – which, unfortunately, one must say, previously shone by its absence in Sweden. One only has to look at how the investments in civil defense have historically looked, or perhaps rather have not looked. But that prioritization must naturally also be made at the municipal level.
Is the government prepared to help? Yes, we absolutely are. We are adding, among other things, approximately 2 billion kronor to the preparedness sector health and healthcare, and much of those funds are channeled to the regions. There is an agreement between MSB and SKR that distributes funds for investments in civil defense. Are the needs greater than the allocated funds? Yes, probably, because the needs are large. But there is, therefore, also a possibility at the municipal level to prioritize these issues.
My clear message is, and has been, that it is clear that the state should be involved and take responsibility for this, but it cannot be in such a way that one as a municipal politician can neglect these issues for a long time and then expect the state to solve all the problems. It will not happen; instead, it must be a joint effort.
I therefore gladly highlight Linköping as a very good example. Linköping has succeeded in doing this. There are many other examples: Västerås is one, and earlier today I visited Vaxholm, which is another example of a municipality where planning for supply preparedness for the municipal core activities is being undertaken. It is completely central, very important, and a municipal responsibility.
I was asked whether we will have the shelters we need. The answer is that we have the shelters we have and that eight parties in the Defense Preparation Board have stated that the situation is satisfactory. The assessment is therefore made that in capability-enhancing measures we do not need to prioritize the new construction of shelters because we have 7.5 million shelters. If we had the benefit of hindsight, would it have been better if Sweden had not stopped building shelters during the Persson government? Yes, it naturally would have been, but now we are where we are.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Carl-Oskar Bohlin, for the report and the answers!
I can start with the shelters. I believe – or rather, I am sure – that I did not say that we were to build any new ones. What I tried to remind everyone of instead was that there are quite a few property owners who are asking how we are going to solve this collectively. In that case, it is primarily about maintenance and upgrading, and there we are perhaps not entirely reasonable.
When it comes to this call or letter from Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, it is what we are talking about is quite basic, I can say – but also very important. If you are an old local politician, you usually talk about the what, the how, and how to move forward together. We still seem to be clear on the challenge of building a strong Swedish total defense, but we differ when it comes to the how. We know what we need to do, but when it comes to how and under what conditions, it diverges a bit.
I think it sounds reasonable that the state should be a co-financer and enabler, and I believe that total defense must be something that we build together if it is to be robust and hold over time – if we are to achieve the resilience that we all strive for.
Carl-Oskar Bohlin mentioned municipal self-determination and the municipal right of taxation, and it is interesting in this context that it is pointed out. In that case, I take the liberty of reversing the perspective: The Government also has the opportunity to propose to the Riksdag changed taxation to meet the requirements of the total defense.
That possibility exists, but it is relinquished in order to instead – if I do not remember entirely incorrectly – tax in a different way and lower the tax for those who earn very well. It is a prioritization that is made. One could, for example, have imposed a readiness tax to lift and strengthen the total defense.
It has sounded a bit as if some want to get away. I do not think that anyone wants to get away. I think that everyone wants to be involved, and I think that Swedish municipalities and regions are currently working extremely hard to fulfill their tasks within the framework of the total defense. It is there that I think the government has a chance and an opportunity to join forces, seize on everything positive that is being done and strengthen it. One has a chance to be that enabler.
I do not quite understand why one does not want to be an enabler and co-financer. I also think it is a pity that one is forgoing the opportunity for taxation.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Of course, it is always very pleasant when Linköping is taken as a good example. As a resident of Linköping and a former municipal councilor, one is proud of one's municipality, so it is clear that I am happy about it. I am proud and happy that Linköping Municipality manages its mandate even on this level.
I would nevertheless like to remind the Minister that the conditions do not look the same in Municipal Sweden. Some municipalities have tough challenges, and others have even tougher challenges. This applies particularly to municipalities in sparse and rural areas and smaller municipalities, which have quite tough conditions right now.
I want to remind that there is, of course, a desire for those conditions to be leveled out a bit. It is a small side note: If one reviews the equalization system – the one that has been presented – perhaps one can also provide more equal conditions for the different municipalities around the country.
Of course, all municipalities have the right to levy taxes, but every time a municipality raises its tax, there is a very great anger from certain parties in this Riksdag and in the government. They become very upset about it. It is not easy to raise the tax.
Here we are talking about municipal politicians who truly want to. They want to strengthen civil preparedness and are fully aware of the challenges we face and the need to do this. But they are struggling with very many different issues, and resources are needed for much. That is why they are writing this letter and saying: Let us help each other, together!
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! I have by this point had several interpellation debates on similar themes, and it is always fascinating to see how late the Social Democrats seem to have woken up and realized the need to strengthen civil defense. Very little happened in this area during the eight years when they held government power.
It is naturally good that the insight exists, but the tone is sometimes unnecessarily high. I am asked if the state intends to be a co-financer. The state is already a co-financer; I just explained the agreement that exists between MSB and SKR. Just to take an example of this, we can return to Eva Lindh's hometown, where the state, through MSB, has co-financed, for example, an alternative management position. But that this can be done depends on there being a political will at the local level to prioritize it, because it is co-financing.
This illustrates that there are many municipalities that are now waking up to the realization that they must work with these issues. It is very good – it is never too late to start, even though it should have been done earlier. There are also resources from the state in this area, both targeted funds and historically high general state grants.
I am not standing here arguing that someone should raise the tax, but I state this because it is a principled basis for the mandate a municipality fundamentally has to exercise its municipal self-government. One has the opportunity to regulate its revenues. One also, just as at the national level, has the opportunity to regulate its expenditures and, through expenditure reductions, finance that which is prioritized.
The development of civil defense and our security is generally a priority for the government, and I will, of course, argue that politicians with local autonomy should draw the same conclusions given the changes in the world around us. If they do, the state stands ready to contribute and co-finance.
Then we can absolutely discuss what the proportion should be between, on one hand, targeted government grants for measures for civil defense and, on the other hand, general government grants. I have not yet met any municipal council member who does not prefer general government grants. But then one must also be able to make this prioritization and see that preparedness is part of the municipal core mission. One must live up to the basic expectations that already exist today in accordance with the legislation that has existed since 2006.
I only made the historical record just to state that this, in many cases, may have been a budget regulator. The crisis management mandate has not been seen as prioritized in relation to other things. It is, I believe, time to rethink that point. Many municipalities have already come very far in that work.
To further address the issue and more clearly clarify the relationship of responsibility between the state and the municipality in this regard, the government appointed an inquiry. The investigator Carl Fredrik Graf has submitted his report, which we are currently working on and preparing within the Government Offices. I naturally hope to be able to return to that.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! It may sound tedious, but it still feels like it is in its place in this type of debate to remind that no chain is stronger than its weakest link. We know that Swedish municipalities and regions have incredibly different conditions and are of varying strengths. I myself come from Gotland, a region with incredible challenges given our position. We are also subject to an enormous military buildup where the civil defense must keep up.
It is here that Carl-Oskar Bohlin gets the excellent opportunity to, as it is so popularly called, build capacity. That is what it is about – to meet the municipalities and regions where they are, promote what is already being done and build us stronger.
The message from Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner is crystal clear. Carl-Oskar Bohlin refers to the fact that we are already co-financiers. Despite that, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner says – I quote once again: ”To meet these challenges, long-term and predictable state support is required. The state must once again take an active role, both as an enabler and a co-financier. Targeted investment grants and value-secured state grants are crucial for the municipalities to meet their future commitments.” It could hardly have been expressed more clearly than that. Here I mean that there is a crack in the Swedish total defense that Carl-Oskar Bohlin has an opportunity to seal.
Statsrådet Carl-Oskar Bohlin (M)
Madam Speaker! The short point of this long speech is that the capability in civil defense must continue to increase on a very broad front. In a previous context, I have compared the capability development in civil defense to a lying hockey stick where, for a very long time, we only moved along the shaft, but now we have finally reached the blade, where the capability begins to increase. After 2015, there were many lost years when the capability development in civil defense basically just stood still, and that is naturally serious given the very serious security policy situation we now find ourselves in.
Now we can see that the capacity is increasing in all ten preparedness sectors. We can see how municipalities are starting to work with these issues across the board. I will not single out any individual municipality, but I recently encountered representatives from a municipal administration who said: These issues were not on our agenda two years ago. But now we have understood how important and urgent this is, and we are working with full force.
That is how it looks in many municipalities. It is clear that the state should be involved in supporting and helping. That is why, among other things, there is the agreement with SKR. Might it need to be revised in the future? I absolutely do not rule that out. Is it important to have long-term political agreement on the issue? Yes, it certainly does not hurt.
This government is clear in its ambition to build up the total defense. In this area, we have delivered historical reforms that contribute to building Sweden stronger.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.