Response to interpellation 2025/26:249 on the long-term planning and financing conditions for non-governmental organizations
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned the long-term planning and financing conditions for the voluntary defense organizations. M argues that the organizations are important for the total defense and public engagement 1. M emphasizes that the government has doubled the support over five years and that work is being done to reduce the administrative burden so that the organizations can focus on their core activities 1 2. M is open to longer contracts if the authorities identify a need, as the Swedish Armed Forces' needs shall guide 3 4. S argues that the demands on the organizations are increasing rapidly and that they need stability and financial sustainability 5. S proposes three-year contracts to enable long-term investments and planning 6 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! Lena Johansson has asked me if I intend to take the initiative to introduce multi-year agreements or other long-term planning and financing models for the voluntary defense organizations.
The voluntary defense organizations are important for the collective capability within the total defense and for public anchoring. They constitute a strong contribution to the Swedish will to defend. In addition to this, they contribute to the staffing of the total defense. The Government stated in the total defense bill (prop. 2024/25:34) that it is necessary for these organizations to receive sufficient financial resources both to meet the increasing needs within the total defense and to create long-term operational conditions for the organizations' own development.
The government has consistently increased support for the voluntary defense organizations. In 2021, the total support amounted to around 250 million kronor. For 2026, the support has increased to around 500 million kronor, which means a doubling over five years.
The support is distributed in the form of mission compensations and organizational support, which are distributed by the Armed Forces and the Swedish Civil Defence Agency. The organizational support is distributed according to a distribution model that the agencies have developed together with the voluntary defense organizations. The model has recently been revised, among other things to improve the long-term operational conditions for the organizations' own development.
The exact design of the model is a matter for the authorities, who shall take the organizations' needs into account. I have confidence in the process and at this point have no intention of taking any initiatives to change the order. I am, however, following the issue closely.
Lena Johansson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Defence for the answer, which was very clear and good.
I want to start by saying that I share the Minister of Defence's basic view on the importance of the voluntary defense organizations. They are a crucial part of our total defense – for staffing, for training, and for the popular anchoring of the will to defend the country.
I also want to be clear that the work the government has done so far is important and has been good. That the support to the voluntary organizations has been increased and that a review of the funding has been carried out are necessary steps in the right direction. It is nothing that should be downplayed.
At the same time, we are in a situation where the demands on the organizations are increasing faster and their opportunities to plan long-term are being tested. Sweden is now preparing the total defense and is being integrated more deeply into Nato. The voluntary organizations are expected to be fast and flexible, to adapt quickly and deliver with high operational quality. This is fundamentally positive, and it shows what confidence the state has in the voluntary forces. But it also places demands on stability, foresight, and economic endurance.
What I want to contribute to this debate is therefore not criticism for criticism's sake, but a reasoning on how we can together ensure that the investments being made achieve full impact in practice. Ultimately, it is about the voluntary organizations being able to do their best – not just next year, but over time.
My question is: In what way does the Minister for Defence believe that the current changes in the support system, that is, the general conditions for mission compensation to voluntary organizations, contribute to long-term sustainability?
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! In my speech at Folk och Försvar in Sälen a few weeks ago, I highlighted the importance of the voluntary defense organizations for the will to defend and total defense awareness, but also for being able to achieve the capability goals. I meet them repeatedly; it happened both in Sälen and a couple of months before.
We now have a large growth. We have many more conscripts than a few years ago and are expanding war units. This means that it is starting to get quite crowded at the garrisons. Something that worries me a little is that the voluntary defense organizations will not get good training opportunities; they will fall further down in the order of priority. We have held a dialogue with them about what we could do – both so that they can conduct the right activities, which I will return to, and so that they can get the right conditions. It is about whether one should work with simulators, get access to new training fields, and so on.
It is very important that we strike while the iron is hot. We have seen an increase over time in the vast majority of voluntary organizations. There was, naturally, an increase immediately after the full-scale invasion, and since then it has gone up and down a little. But the voluntary defense organizations are growing overall, and they are important for the Swedish Armed Forces' operations, including the Home Guard's.
Regarding what we have done to create conditions for these organizations to grow, as mentioned, we have doubled the grant over a few years. But we have also steered through various assignments. One assignment for 2023 concerned the distribution of the funds between the 18 organizations, which are naturally linked by a regulation but are quite different in size and character. The purpose was that there should be a somewhat more even distribution between the larger and the smaller ones. We took this measure so that everyone would have similar access to, among other things, the organizational support. To be able to run their activities, one has a baseline that is not based on any form of non-profit activity. It was a measure that we took to create better conditions.
During a longer session we had in the autumn, the organizations pointed out the problem with administration towards both the Swedish Defence Ready (MSB) and the Swedish Armed Forces. Therefore, we have also given a mandate on how the administrative burden, which today is not quite adapted to what they need to do, can be reviewed. Today, they need to grow and be given the best possible conditions. The Swedish Armed Forces and the Swedish Defence Ready have been given a mandate to see if they can find more efficient processes, so that these organizations not only get better training activities but can also focus their efforts on core activities rather than administration and management. It is important and urgent.
These are some of the initiatives we have taken in addition to providing more funds.
If I am to highlight any activity that I consider particularly important, I naturally want to mention the initiative with the GU-F's, the military rapid formations. They are good. Sometimes it has taken a bit too long from the application until one has been selected. It could have taken as much as a couple of years. I know that work is being done to shorten that time. They also conduct a very good and fine youth activity in many of the voluntary defense organizations.
Something that I find inspiring and that I highlighted in my speech at Folk och Försvar in Sälen is that Frivilliga Flygkåren is now developing a drone corps and adapting to new technology. At the same time, the core activities in the voluntary defense organizations remain. I think it is a prime example of how voluntary defense organizations can truly contribute – not only to public support but also to real defense utility.
Lena Johansson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer, and in many respects I agree with what he says. I also meet with voluntary defense organizations around the country. What they primarily take up with me is the long-term perspective and stability – naturally also the funding, but the appropriations have been increased.
I have looked at the general terms. If I have understood it correctly, they have adjusted the number of application opportunities slightly and some other minor things. This might contribute to reduced administration and somewhat better possibility for planning with reporting responsibilities and so on when it comes to the funds that are granted. It concerns the requests that the Armed Forces have on the voluntary organizations and that they should be able to plan their activities over the longer term. When the Armed Forces grow, the voluntary organizations need to retain certain competencies, for example regarding the training of those who engage within the voluntary organizations and the procurement of the materiel that is needed. More long-term investments, I believe, could be a viable path. One could have slightly longer contracts in those parts, for example three-year contracts.
My question is: Does the Minister see any possibility of developing it?
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! The long-term perspective of the voluntary defense organizations' activities is characterized above all by the growth in the total defense. It is that which constitutes the basis for the demand signal, to put it plainly. It is very strong. This is the largest social reform of all categories that Sweden has undertaken in the last many decades. The need, they probably feel, is there.
The second thing that indicates that the model we have had so far has worked is that these organizations have been 17 or 18 in number for a very long time. But I know that in the beginning and middle of the 2000s, it was extremely tough times for several of them. I actually think the Armed Forces handled them quite harshly at that time. They tried to starve them out. So the Armed Forces does not work that way now, but in my speech at Folk och Försvar in Sälen, I urged the Armed Forces to use the voluntary organizations even better. I was also at the Home Guard's "parliament". There, they discussed how the Home Guard handles dialogues and how processes can be made more efficient.
The Armed Forces has assessed that there should be annual agreements. But if the review that is taking place, where administrative processes and routines are to be simplified, were to indicate that there are other ways to organize the relationship between the Armed Forces, the Civil Defence Agency, and the voluntary defense organizations, and that there is reason to have other types of contractual arrangements, perhaps with longer agreements, then neither I nor the government will definitely stand in the way of that. From a political perspective, I have no views on whether it should be one year or three years. Our mission is, above all, to ensure that there is a balance between goals and means. I think we have worked quite well on that, given that we have approximately doubled the budget for the voluntary defense organizations.
It is important that we do it. If there is a strong desire to be able to contribute to the defense, either by doing military service, being a home guard soldier, or being in the voluntary defense organizations, we shall take advantage of that.
It is an enormous strength for Sweden that we have a strong will for defense. Much of the image of that comes from the voluntary defense organizations.
Lena Johansson (S)
Madam Speaker! I begin where I ended in my previous contribution. It is in the common conversation that much is resolved. The Minister for Defence has today expressed a positive attitude towards long-term perspective regarding both financing and planning, and one is open to various proposals that contribute to exactly this. We can then, at a rapid pace, build a strong, sustainable and robust total defense in the time we have, that is to say, none.
I am pleased with the answer I have received from the Minister of Defence. I look forward to three-year agreements eventually. That is what many defense organizations have expressed to me that they want. I believe it is a good and feasible path for long-term perspective and planning.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Lena Johansson, for the debate!
If the Armed Forces and the Civil Preparedness Authority should identify a need for longer contracts, we are open to that. It lies with the authority. The basic principle is that it is the Armed Forces' needs that must govern the forms for it.
The long-term operating conditions are also affected by the Armed Forces' budget, which has become significantly higher than it was a few years ago. The voluntary defense organizations, just like other parts of the Armed Forces, will be characterized by significant growth for a long period ahead.
We are changing and simplifying conditions, and we are also simplifying administration, so that they can have the prerequisites to focus their efforts on what they do best. It is community engagement and, not least, educating different types of instructors. They do a very important and fine job for the defense of Sweden, for which I am sure that both Lena Johansson and I are deeply grateful.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.