Response to interpellation 2025/26:302 on the possibility of remote-controlled drones for the police in Stockholm

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! Mattias Vepsä has asked me what concrete measures I, the government, and the Ministry of Justice intend to take to ensure that the Police Authority is given the conditions to use remote-controlled drones in Stockholm's airspace in the same way as in Malmö.

As appears from my recent answer to a written question on the same subject, the Police Authority's use of drones is increasing at a rapid pace. Drones are often used in connection with crime scene investigations and public gatherings and events, but also at public assemblies, for example demonstrations, and in the search for missing persons.

The Police Authority's operations with drones are conducted according to specific conditions issued by the Transport Agency. There is also an ongoing dialogue between the authorities on these matters.

The Swedish Police Authority assesses that the pilot project with remotely controlled drones in intervention activities in Malmö, which has also been called Drones first on site, is very successful. The authority has therefore decided that this method shall be introduced nationwide, starting in the police regions Syd, Väst, Öst, and Stockholm.

The conditions for this drone activity vary depending on which restrictions and limitations exist in the current airspace. The airspace in Stockholm specifically is complex, among other things with a control zone where the Bromma control tower manages the airspace over large parts of the city. The Police Authority is working together with Luftfartsverket to handle the issue of how drones can be used in such control zones. For this purpose, a joint pilot project has recently been initiated within the Norrköping control zone.

The Government views the authorities' work to find a common solution for how drones can be used safely in such control zones very positively. I am, of course, continuously considering the need for additional measures to ensure that the police can use drones in a safe and effective manner.

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

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister!

I had to rewind and go back to the written response I received in January on approximately the same question, regarding what the government and the minister intend to do so that Stockholm also has the chance to use drones in police operational activities.

For those watching this debate, it sounds like something that is already being used. That is true to some extent. Today, drones are used, just as the Minister says, for surveillance of large-scale events and the like.

What we in Stockholm are requesting, however, is what is currently happening in Malmö, where one can work with drones to speed up intervention activities. In order to be able to act quickly in the event of a crime, there are drone stations on rooftops all around Malmö. This means that drones with blue lights can be on site quickly to ensure that one can track a potential perpetrator, interrupt crime, and increase safety.

We in Stockholm think that it sounds like a quite interesting and important part of the police's work in order to specifically increase safety and be able to be on site quickly to interrupt ongoing crime. Not only that – one can also direct and use that resource so that other operational efforts become more effective.

It is against that background that this question has now been raised, both in the form of a written question and as an interpellation. Our understanding is, in fact, that when we ask the police, we are informed that precisely Bromma Airport and the control zone are part of the difficulties in Stockholm when it comes to the possibility of using this resource in an effective way.

In the previous discussion here in the chamber, conspiracy theories were discussed. But it is no conspiracy theory to assert that the government has, with precision, pursued a Stockholm-hostile policy for nearly four years. Our view is that Bromma Airport should have been closed. We could have had 16,000 more homes, a more dynamic labor market, and a transformation of our city.

Not only that – we also see that Bromma Airport is being rejected by the aviation industry itself. From having just over a million passengers in 2019, it is now down to around 10,000 passengers or trips per year.

Mr. Speaker! I believe that the delay is due to the fact that it is Moderate politicians who are behind the agreement that the state has with Bromma and Stockholm. The agreement was, in fact, written by a Stockholm majority led by the Moderates nearly 20–25 years ago and means that today one pays approximately 8,000 kronor per month in rent for the land. That is a shockingly low sum of money for land that is valued at 30 billion and which we could derive great benefit from. I believe that everyone listening to this debate realizes that.

It can be stated that the Moderates' failure regarding land policy and the planning of airports has cost and will continue to cost. For everyone listening, I can say that it also costs resources and opportunities for us to increase safety work, something that is incredibly important. I know that Gunnar Strömmer and I share the view that we must increase safety work. Why, then, is the government putting spokes in the wheels? Why is action not being taken?

According to the response in January, the government is following up on the work to establish drone possibilities even in Stockholm. A simple way would have been to listen to us, remove Bromma Airport and thereby provide this opportunity. Another way would have been to clarify the missions for the police and Luftfartsverket; this is something that is missing in the regulatory letters. I ask again: What is the government doing so that we can fly drones even in Stockholm?

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the opportunity to discuss these important issues today.

If any Stockholmer listening to Äventyrs thought that Mattias Vepsä is engaging in the safety of Stockholmers, it must be said that he is revealing himself now – fundamentally, it is therefore a question about closing Bromma Airport. It is a question that the Socialdemokraterna have pushed for a long time. All roads may not lead to Rome, but many times Socialdemokraternas roads at least lead to just that question.

Speaking of anti-Stockholm policy: As a citizen in Stockholm, one can observe that with the S-rule in the City of Stockholm and in the region, one has received many thousands of kronor more in increased taxes. From a safety perspective, one has received fired security guards, underfunded social services, experiments with removed barrier controls in the subway, which has had very serious effects in the form of crime for nearby business owners, and withdrawn bus lines, which means that one cannot travel home safely in the evening. Regarding anti-Stockholm policy, it must be said that the local S-governments are setting some kind of record.

Well – that does not prevent there being a very important question in this mass of words from Mattias Vepsä. It is, after all, about the drones. It is quite true that the police in Malmö, in their pilot activity, have found a way to use drones for the purpose of preventing and combating crime. I myself have been down there several times. The first time I really saw this in operation was in connection with Eurovision in Malmö. It became a pilot in many different respects regarding the security work, not least regarding the drones. The conclusion is unambiguous from the police's and my side: This is a tool that we really should expand and that should benefit as many Swedish citizens as possible. Of course, the citizens in the capital region are truly served by receiving the protection and prevention that this tool entails.

It is also a reality that different geographies have different challenges. It is quite true that the issue of control zones, which is admittedly not entirely unique to Stockholm, poses challenges when it comes to implementation. But I want to emphasize that we are in close dialogue with the police and that the Swedish Police Authority does not consider that the government needs to take any further measures.

Now, in Norrköping, there is a pilot project concerning the use of drones in this way in an environment where there are control zones. On that basis, the intention is to scale this up, so that the people of Stockholm will also benefit. I am following it very closely. I truly believe that all citizens, not least the people of Stockholm, are served by being able to take part in everything that has been built up with such great success by the police in Malmö.

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

TALMANNEN

I remind that an interpellation debate concerns the minister's area of responsibility. This is worth mentioning for both debaters, who have now had to comment on Stockholm policy in their respective remarks. Now I intend to return the question to the subject of the interpellation.

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

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Mr. Speaker! I will take that request most seriously. But before we return the debate to the drone issue, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to also speak about Stockholm here in the chamber. It is important. Here in the Stockholm region, a quarter of Sweden's population lives, and we are severely affected by the government's policy in a way that is worth highlighting.

What is being said in this debate about that safety work has been destroyed during the last mandate period, one can certainly have a number of different opinions about. We know that the open drug scenes have decreased by ten. We know that the number of vulnerable and neglected residential areas is decreasing. We know that the investments in and around Stockholm and in our most neglected districts – in more social workers, more point-markings of children and young people on the move, better school activities, school breakfast, leisure club activities, jobs for young people and opportunities for everyone to live a good life in Stockholm – yield actual results. It is going in the right direction.

We are happy to extend our hand. We also see that more police officers, stricter sentences, and the opportunity for the police to do their work even more effectively are needed. In the City Hall's budget, there are resources allocated to build drone stations on roofs around the city. Something that is incredibly pleasing is that, regardless of the majority, we have a good cooperation with the police locally to increase safety around Stockholm.

This question has been raised not only by city hall politicians but also by the police. Two problems are pointed out.

One thing is the flight control zone associated with Bromma. We have submitted a proposal for a solution, but we do not need to agree on that specific proposal. We have heard that it is possible to arrange pilot activities in Norrköping – great for Norrköping. We might also be able to arrange pilot activities in Stockholm in order to get started here. There are resources and will.

The second problem, which was presented in Mitt i just a few weeks ago, is that according to the police, resources are lacking. The air traffic control issue perhaps we can solve in the long run; we would very much like to ramp up that work and do it faster. But resources are lacking. Now that I have the Minister for Justice here, who is responsible for police issues, resource issues, and the budget, I want to ask: Does the government intend to follow up on the issue to see whether it is a matter of resources? How can that be the case, and what does the government intend to do about this?

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! I answer the last question immediately. Let us look at the years that have passed and at the time until 2029. We are adding approximately 1 billion to the police in an investment in an increased number of drones and cameras. Then, of course, the police must themselves decide how best to allocate those resources, but there is no doubt that we are making a historic investment so that the Police Authority can use new technology. Should it turn out that there are additional needs, I am always ready to listen, but I state that that billion is unique in its kind and its size and that the police have very great operational freedom to use the resources in the way that the police deem appropriate.

Regarding the control zone, the attempt in Norrköping is a way to test the operation on a somewhat smaller scale in an environment similar to that in Stockholm. Based on that experience, it will be possible in Stockholm, at best, to not only launch a pilot in the near term but also to seriously implement the model in full operation. One must see that it hangs together.

Regarding Stockholm – I will, of course, deal very carefully with the issues concerning my portfolio – I can state that we took over in a situation where the city had not been provided with a single new police officer for almost a decade – very concerning from a safety perspective. Pleasantly enough, we see that Stockholm is now being provided with hundreds of new police officers and that there is a patch on the leak at Södertörn's police training. These are, of course, fantastic announcements for the people of Stockholm. It means that for the first time in modern times, I was about to say, one gets to see police growth on our streets and squares. This is, of course, intended to increase safety for the people of Stockholm in everyday life in a very important way.

I also rejoice that the open drug scenes are now being crushed. The tool used to achieve this is the preventive stay-away orders, which the government has pushed through following a Danish model and which are yielding fantastic results. In the city of Stockholm, perhaps the strongest example is Rågsved, which has lived under some kind of local terror regime. Small business owners in Rågsved's center say that it has been terrible. The open drug scene has, of course, been a part of this, and a great deal of other crime has circulated around it. When it comes to the preventive stay-away orders, I believe that Farsta Police was second in the country to demand this – the police in Botkyrka were first out. This happened already during the first few days after the laws came into force. This tool has had enormously positive effects.

We can also gladly see a sharp decline in the shooting deaths. There has been a halving at the national level, but the decline has been even greater in the Stockholm area. It is clearly an incredible success that can, of course, be attributed to many actors, not least the police, who have received new tools to, among other things, work preventatively against violence.

It is clear that we see great safety gains for the citizens in Stockholm. I dare to assert, however, that they can to a very high degree be linked to the efforts being made nationally by the police with the tools and increased penalties that the government has delivered with the support of a majority here in the Swedish Riksdag.

To this, we will now add a drone capacity which will also benefit the people of Stockholm. The messages from the Swedish Police Authority are encouraging enough that we are well on our way to achieving this.

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

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Mr. Speaker! Fundamentally, we agree that we need both. We need better tools, more police, and stricter legislation when required for the fight against organized crime and to address the new recruitment and gang criminality.

It is the subject of another debate. We can absolutely discuss whether it is a tool from the national level that has solved the problems with open drug scenes in Stockholm. I would say that we are confident that the work involves a broad effort. It concerns everything from upgrades and work for those who live in the most neglected areas to more social workers, a better school, and making the path to and from the preschool safe and secure for those who live in those areas.

Then a breadth is required. I know that the people of Stockholm understand that. We realize that, together with better tools and more opportunities for the police to do their work, this will solve even more of the challenges that we both fundamentally understand are great. This applies particularly in a large city and in Sweden's largest city, Stockholm. When it comes to the fact that we will get opportunities in Stockholm to be able to do an even better job and get drones, I look forward to the government perhaps increasing the pace a little.

I share the view that it took too long, has taken too long, and is taking too long to catch up on the shortage of police that we see. We therefore opened a number of police training programs and ensured that we invested more resources to get more police. Now it is having an effect. I am glad that the government continues that work.

But that does not justify that one is not clearer here and now than to say that one will monitor the issue regarding the drones or to say that one is following the developments. It would be appropriate if the minister and the government could already now point out that as a priority for Stockholm. This applies especially against the background of what we are going through this year with an election year and the increased intensity on streets and squares. We need more safety work together.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this important issue today.

I perceive that Mattias Vepsäs's sharpest answer to the question of what we should do to get these drones ready is to shut down Bromma Airport. I believe the pace of the process that the police are now involved in is a notch higher.

I am in constant dialogue with the police as well regarding this very concrete issue. The message at the current moment is that the government does not need to make any further decisions. The police say that they will carry out the pilot project involving a check in Norrköping so that, based on the experience, they can also implement the system in Stockholm.

The decisions have already been made, and all of this is in motion. Now it is just a matter of achieving a successful result in the trial being conducted in Norrköping and being able to implement it in Stockholm on that basis. At the current moment, I believe that we from both the government and the Riksdag should avoid stepping in like elephants in a china shop. It is a matter of trusting the police when they say that all relevant decisions have been made and that all processes are underway.

Now we are acquiring the experiences we need to be able to ensure on a large scale that the citizens in Stockholm get access to the fantastic protection and the fantastic opportunities that this model has proven to have. This applies in particular based on the experiences in Malmö.

I also see that, together with a long series of other parts that we can, however, influence nationally, it will be possible to increase the citizens' security in Stockholm. This applies in particular to continuing to develop the tools we have spoken about so far, such as the preventive stay-away orders which have had such an outstanding effect, not least against the local drug scenes in the Stockholm area.

I just want to emphasize for the sake of the matter that this must, of course, be complemented and integrated with other and more socially oriented preventive measures. It is in that light that the removed confidentiality barriers, the new Social Services Act, new tools for social services, the review of LVU, and everything else that is also being delivered at a high pace during the parliamentary term should be seen.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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