Response to interpellation 2025/26:219 on the announcement regarding the future of ICLD
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 future of ICLD and how aid funds should be distributed. M believes that it is important to cooperate with effective actors 1 and that Sida should assess which activities should be prioritized to reach the goals 1. M argues that tax funds should be used effectively 2 and that the total aid budget should be reduced 3 so that resources can go to healthcare, elderly care, and school 3. M believes that aid to Ukraine should be increased significantly 3. S believes that ICLD is a well-developed model for democracy aid that must not be phased out 4. S argues that ICLD converts resources into concrete results 5 and that local democracy is the foundation for functioning societies 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! Hanna Westerén has asked me how I and the government view ICLD's role in Swedish democracy support and in the aid policy moving forward, what long-term conditions I and the government intend to provide ICLD in the form of funding, mandate and structure, and how I and the government intend to ensure that the operations can also be conducted in Visby in the future and that Gotland is not affected by a weakening of state presence.
Democracy, human freedoms and rights, and the principles of the rule of law are crucial for freedom and security and for society to develop. At the same time, we see how the clouds of concern in the world are gathering. Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is a clear example.
Hanna Westerén particularly highlights in her question the importance of support for local democracy actors in Ukraine and their capacity to adapt their exercise of authority to the EU's requirements for accession to the European Union.
Here I want to emphasize that Ukraine is the government's single most important foreign policy priority. Sweden's support for Ukraine's EU accession process is an important investment in the peace, security, and stability of Ukraine and all of Europe, which requires reforms and hard work in many areas.
Sweden today provides extensive support to Ukraine's reform efforts, which include, among other things, support for decentralization projects of importance for strengthening local democracy in the provision of services to Ukraine's citizens.
Democracy support is therefore still an important and prioritized issue for the government, not least in Ukraine. Today, approximately one quarter of all aid via Sida goes to democracy and human rights.
Regarding the question of ICLD's role in Swedish democracy support, I want to emphasize that it is Sida, as an independent agency, that is responsible for implementing the strategies that the government has decided. This includes making an assessment of which activities should be prioritized under each strategy in order to achieve the objectives in the government's reform agenda Aid for a New Era.
For the government, in accordance with the reform agenda, it is important to cooperate with the most effective actors to achieve the best possible results.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! It was, however, hardly surprising, not the answer I had hoped for. I perceived it as a detached answer that breathed a degree of disinterest and possibly, unfortunately, also a bit of ignorance about what we are actually debating here today.
I can quote the minister: ”For the government, in accordance with the reform agenda, it is important to cooperate with the most effective actors to achieve the best possible results.”
What ICLD has done, on Sida's and thus on the government's mandate, is to work with democracy and human rights at the institutional level that comes absolutely closest to people worldwide, namely the municipal and the regional. This is what the government is now going to dismantle, and I cannot comprehend the reason for that.
We can start with Ukraine, which the Minister himself highlighted as the government's most important foreign policy priority. If that is the case, how can one then deprive the Ukrainian communities of the interventions that ICLD has made?
Swedish municipalities today contribute to strengthening local governance, the rule of law, and democratic structures that are crucial for Ukraine's future and a future EU accession. For what reason is the government divesting itself of that tool? Does it not risk Sweden's other efforts for peace and freedom in Ukraine?
If I have understood correctly, the Minister has consistently refused to meet with both ICLD and Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner to justify the decision, and even in the response to me, reference is made to Sida. But this happens on the government's mandate. And it does not happen by chance but for a reason, unclear which one. It is truly unclear, as governments regardless of political color have financed ICDL via Sida since 2008. But now the support is ceasing, and I do not understand why.
Mr. Speaker! Everyone at ICLD is warned, and it is a great loss for my constituency Gotland, which also once received the ICLD establishment as a compensation for other removed state activities. What is the government's plan here? It is 15 state jobs that are disappearing from Gotland, a small labor market. What is the government's message to Gotland? That question remains unanswered. I have understood it as that we in Sweden are to have a geographical distribution of state jobs and not solely concentrate them in the capital region. Is this something the government is still working for?
Mr. Speaker! What ICLD does, no one else does. ICLD is the organization that the government and Sida themselves have created to give Swedish municipalities and regions the opportunity to carry out international development work in their own right. Through ICLD, municipalities can act as agents of change, share experiences, build capacity, and strengthen democracy and human rights at the local level, i.e., where democracy is actually practiced and applied in people's everyday lives.
If ICLD is phased out, it is not only an organization that disappears, but also a well-developed model for democracy assistance. We cannot afford that when the world is so restless.
I wonder therefore once again: What is the government's plan? Who shall do what the ICLD does in the future?
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! I completely agree that the world is very uneasy, not least related to many of the aid challenges we see across the world. Russia's full-scale invasion continues with attacks on both military and civilian targets, and families are being torn apart and children are being kidnapped. In the area of democracy, we also see a regression around the world as authoritarian leaders and states tighten their grip over their populations. In the humanitarian area, the challenges are greater than ever in modern times. This is the result of primarily two things: that the number of conflicts in the world is at a record high and that the USA is withdrawing so clearly.
In all of this, Sweden must, of course, adapt the suit based on where the needs are greatest. The Government had a press conference about two weeks ago when we presented our decision to phase out several aid countries, and tomorrow we will come with new announcements linked to next year's aid budget. The Government is ready and also makes tough decisions as a result of what is happening in our global environment.
It is now more important than ever before that Sweden's aid funds are used in the most effective way. We have therefore made the decision that almost 20 percent of the total aid budget next year shall go to Ukraine, and democracy, anti-corruption and decentralization are important elements here.
It must, however, be our independent aid agency Sida that makes the final decision on exactly which interventions are best suited to achieve the goals of increased decentralization and increased democracy at local, regional, and national levels. Here, SKR obviously plays an important role, but there are also other democracy movements around Europe and the world that perform very important tasks.
In the current global situation, it is more important than ever that we have control over Sweden's aid funds, which are fundamentally tax revenues, and ensure that the money is used in the most effective way, which is what Sida has the task of doing.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Mr. Speaker! I perceive that Minister Dousa is piling arguments on top of each other for why ICLD should be allowed to remain, given that we live in such a restless world where we truly need to strengthen human rights and efforts for democracy. But then come claims about efficiency versus inefficiency. I think the Minister here will be obliged to answer. Has ICLD in any way been inefficient? Is it possible to provide evidence that these funds would have been better used elsewhere? I have not found any such information, and I do not hear it in the Minister's response either.
Mr. Speaker! Democracy and human rights are not something one can just pull out of thin air. It is qualified state administration and efficient use of resources that contribute to a better world in a time when so many countries are moving in a direction unfavorable for democracy and security.
I still do not understand why the government wants to deprive itself of this opportunity to achieve something that is truly important and that makes a difference with relatively limited means.
Let me mention some global effects from ICLD's perspective. There are 136 municipalities and regions participating in the ICLD project, and 42 partnerships have been entered into in international networks for democracy and resilience. Given what both I and the Minister spoke about, both democracy and resilience must be promoted and strengthened, for that is how we build a safer world. Furthermore, 191 researchers from 47 countries have participated in the Local Democracy Academy since 2019. In addition, ICLD promotes and participates in international leadership programs for women, which to me sounds like soundly invested funds in a restless time. The conclusion is that ICLD converts resources into concrete, measurable results.
We can strengthen democracy around the world, strengthen preparedness and save lives through initiatives like ICLD. The projects clearly show that international partnerships do not just build competence. They make a real difference in people's everyday lives.
The question remains: Have I just enumerated a value? Is it effectively used means?
I also wonder: Is someone else going to achieve the same thing? Or are the municipal partnerships as we know them now going into the grave? It actually sounds like that.
Something new is underway. Tomorrow we will receive more news about a reshaped Swedish aid. I do not even dare to imagine what it will mean. I know that what the ICLD has done over a long period has made a real difference, and I do not understand this turn. As mentioned, governments have since 2008 consistently prioritized the ICLD's activities because they have considered that the ICLD has made a real difference. But now it is over.
Mr. Speaker! Let me conclude by reminding you of my question regarding the state jobs. Human rights, democracy, and the municipal partnerships that are being lost are the primary issues here, but I also remind you that in a time of unrest, 15 state jobs are disappearing in my constituency.
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! Sida handles tens of thousands of projects and initiatives every year, including forwarding projects and forwarding initiatives.
We have in Sweden chosen a model with a public administration based on Axel Oxenstierna's principles that the authorities shall be independent and make their own decisions. It would be completely impossible for me and my staff at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs to go through all these thousands of interventions and personally assess which ones are good.
There are likely very good reasons for municipalities to carry out aid efforts around the world. What is relevant is the significance in relation to other relevant efforts that can also receive funds to strengthen local democracy and independent and free media. One can imagine support for civil society, UN organizations, and direct institutional collaborations, i.e., that we send experts and second personnel to various agencies in other countries. It is in relation to other potential efforts that we create efficiency, and this is what Sida compares daily.
Ultimately, it is our responsible authority, in this case Sida, that assesses which of all the potential interventions we can finance achieve the best possible results in terms of local democracy, free media, the principles of the rule of law, and so on. It is the model that we have chosen.
Regarding the question of state jobs, it is clear that it is very important for the government that there are state jobs throughout our country. This is important for several reasons, such as ensuring that the supply of skills functions well and that we strengthen the economy in all parts of our very large and elongated country.
The number of state jobs is growing so much that it's cracking, not least within the Prison and Probation Service and the Armed Forces, which employ very many people. It is a continued important issue for the government that state jobs exist throughout the country, not just in metropolitan regions.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Mr. Speaker! I have listened intently and tried to understand what the announcement is. When it comes to the state jobs, the answer is obviously that no special efforts are being made.
When it comes to the assessment, I understand that Minister Benjamin Dousa does not sit and read individual applications – obviously not – but the collective assessment of ICLD's activities in 2025 must have shown that it is radically different this year compared to every year since 2008, because one has now suddenly decided to shut it down.
ICLD's core support will disappear from and starting from the turn of the year 2026/27. What has been added? What is new? I still have not received any answer. I do not understand in which part it has been found that ICLD's efforts for democracy and human rights would be ineffective or unimportant.
I mean, Mr. Speaker, that local democracy is not a special interest. It is the foundation for functioning societies, trust, and stability in Sweden and internationally. To institutionalize democracy and human rights and to build the capacity of local authorities is perhaps the most important contribution that Sweden can give to create countries that can stand firm without outside help.
To phase out ICLD at this time is not a saving. It is to dismantle one of the tools that Sweden has to contribute to strengthening democracy where it matters most.
I believe that a continuation for ICLD would be of benefit for Ukraine, of benefit for Sweden and of benefit for the world. Therefore, I believe that ICLD should be allowed to remain.
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! I agree completely and utterly that local democracy projects are not some kind of special interest. It is definitely a public interest that people have freedom of speech, that they are allowed to influence local and regional and, for that reason, national policy, and that they are allowed to take responsibility for and are given the freedom to decide over their own lives, their own regions, their own municipalities, and their own realms.
What is important and central here is what other potential interventions Sida and, through it, the Swedish people can finance. In that case, it is not us who go through individual applications, but in Sweden we have a model – not only in the field of aid but in the Kingdom of Sweden at large – where it is independent agencies that make administrative decisions.
The result of the fact that major changes are now occurring, where organizations that previously received Swedish aid funds no longer receive them, is an extension of the reorganization of Swedish aid policy that we are in the full process of pushing through.
It is, for example, about reducing the total aid budget. I know that we in the government and the Social Democrats have different views on this. We believe it is important that hard-working people get to keep more of their own money. Swedish healthcare, Swedish elderly care, and Swedish schools also need resources.
From the turn of the year, we are now making a reduction of 3 billion kronor. It is about us increasing the aid to Ukraine significantly. This year alone, we will almost reach the same level as 2022, 2023, and 2024 combined. From next year onwards, it will be 10 billion kronor in civilian support to Ukraine.
We constantly safeguard the humanitarian support, which concerns clean water, food parcels, tents, cots, vaccine syringes and other life-saving measures. All of this results in that the money must come from somewhere, and that is where Sida assesses which interventions are the most prioritized and which interventions do not receive funding.
Merry Christmas and have a good rest of the year!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.