Response to interpellation 2025/26:320 on compensation to landowners for damages during installation of fiber networks
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns compensation to landowners during the installation of fiber networks. KD argues that the government cannot be liable for damages as the responsibility lies with the company that received the investment support 1 2. KD emphasizes that the expansion takes place through civil law agreements where disputes are to be adjudicated in court 1 2 3. KD points out that a new payment model has been introduced to reduce risks from unscrupulous companies 2 3 and that stronger protection cannot be given to those who receive state support 2 3. KD is skeptical about creating precedents through preferential treatment 3 and argues that there are no current discussions regarding financial compensation 4. C argues that small landowners lack the financial muscle for court proceedings 5 6 and demands that the authority be tasked with correcting the situation 5 6. C believes that the government could make decisions on compensation and investigate the damages 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.
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Anders W Jonsson has asked me in what way I and the government will act so that landowners can receive compensation for damages they have suffered in connection with the installation of fiber networks that have been carried out with state funds.
Access to fast connectivity is completely fundamental for housing, business, and welfare throughout the country. Over 98 percent of all households and workplaces can today access fast broadband. The Government allocates 3.8 billion kronor to broadband expansion until and including 2027, and with these efforts, the access to fast broadband continues to increase throughout the country. Currently, work is ongoing with over 950 support-financed broadband projects around the country, and so far, the broadband support has led to 45,500 buildings gaining access to fast broadband.
The Swedish Post and Telecom Authority, PTS, administers the national support for the expansion of broadband. Companies and other organizations that intend to build broadband can therefore apply for and be granted support from PTS.
It is important to emphasize that the expansion is not carried out on behalf of PTS. The responsibility for the project lies with the company or organization that has received support. It is the one performing the work that is responsible for ensuring that necessary permits and agreements are in place. How the work is to be carried out on a property is regulated through civil law agreements or rights of management between the property owner and the network owner. If a dispute arises between the parties, it can ultimately be adjudicated in court.
With this said, PTS sets as a condition for the allocation of broadband support that the construction shall be carried out according to the industry standard Robust fiber. The standard contains requirements on how networks shall be laid to ensure robustness and operational reliability. It also contains requirements regarding the restoration of ground after completed work. PTS reviews and follows up on the projects that have been awarded support, continuously during the projects' progress, among other things to ensure that the networks meet technical requirements.
During 2024, the Government introduced a new payment model for broadband support. The support is now paid out in installments instead of in advance. Payment of the support occurs only after PTS has confirmed that the project is progressing in accordance with the conditions. PTS receives and documents all information regarding deviations from PTS conditions. PTS has been contacted regarding about fifty cases where landowners or private individuals have approached the authority with complaints. If any deviations from the conditions are not rectified, the payments of support can be stopped entirely, and any funds already paid out may be required to be returned.
Anders W Jonsson (C)
Madam Speaker! In Lingbo parish in the northern part of Ockelbo municipality in Gävleborg county, joy was high in the air a few years ago. Finally, one would get access to fiber! Thanks to the state initiative with money via PTS, a provider had said they were ready to dig down fiber in the area. It was extremely important for the residents in this area.
Agreements were to be signed. Many landowners received a document stating that it was a state initiative. The PTS logo was included. In that situation, of course, most, virtually all, landowners chose to quickly sign these contracts. They wanted to ensure that the area got access to fiber and fast broadband. There were even some who already had access to fiber who chose to sign these agreements in order to get this started.
The disappointment has been extremely strong for some years now. One can travel around the area and look at what this company has accomplished.
A field that previously could be used to grow grain is now underwater because the company in question removed all the drainage. It costs very large amounts to restore it.
Another farm has a haul road that runs alongside the farm, and one is completely dependent on it to be able to manage the fields a bit further down. There, this company has placed a cabinet right in the middle of the roadway. There is no interest whatsoever from the company regarding restoring this.
There are, as the Minister has reported, very precise rules for how one should behave when burying fiber. Despite that, I have seen that in watercourses, this fiber can lie and float completely freely at the surface.
The residents in the area, the landowners who have been affected, and those who have not been granted access to fiber because this fiber obviously does not work, are making repeated attempts to contact the company in order, firstly, to get functioning fiber and, secondly, to have all the damages that the company has caused rectified. They receive no response whatsoever.
I attended a meeting with both PTS, LRF and several of the landowners. The company did not show up at all. It is no longer possible to reach them.
Then one can, as the Minister does in his answer, say that if a dispute arises between two parties, it can be settled in court. But this is, therefore, about small landowners who do not have the possibility, the financial muscles, to go in and drive a process in court which may also be appealed.
It has been written on the basis that it is the state that guarantees the money for the project. We get fiber in our region! Furthermore, it is the PTS logo. It is clear that one signs as soon as possible.
Now one stands there in Lingbo without access to good fiber and with ruined land, flooding due to damaged drainage and fields that cannot be used.
Therefore, I ask the government: What will be done? It is so obvious that this is not just a dispute between two parties, but here the state is involved to the highest degree.
The answer from the responsible minister – who is not the Minister for Rural Affairs, which perhaps they should be – is that if a dispute arises between two parties, it must be settled in court. Thank you very much for being disappointed – disappointed in the company and disappointed in the state agency, but above all disappointed in the Riksdag and the government for not being prepared in this situation to stand on the side of the weaker party.
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I naturally share the frustration that the member expresses. It is a terrible situation that these landowners, private individuals, and operators have been subjected to. One has believed that one would get fast broadband and fiber buried. Instead, one is subjected to this. I truly have all the sympathy and empathy for these people and businesses that are affected.
But the chairman also says that the state is highly involved and that someone's logo is on some paper. I cannot determine whether the PTS logo should be included or not on this paper. I cannot really comment on that. The state is involved in the sense that the state provides an investment grant, and it is PTS that pays out this investment grant. But once it is paid out, it is actually up to the involved parties to ensure that what they receive money for is implemented.
We have now introduced the price model or payment model that I described, where one pays during the project's progress and does not pay out the support before the work is completed. There, we have a very effective way to strengthen the incentives for serious companies and reduce the risk of unserious companies getting in.
What is described in this interpellation shows that unserious companies have managed to enter this industry. It is very unfortunate. But it cannot be the state that is liable for damages; it must be the company that has breached relevant agreements and potentially violated relevant legislation. But it will not be the government that decides that; it must be up to the actors in the legal system through civil law agreements or, ultimately, a court to decide this. It cannot be the government that provides that support.
The agreement in Ockelbo that the member describes is, I assume, an agreement concluded before the new pricing model was introduced. My view is that with the new pricing model with payment after delivery, we have truly minimized the risks of this happening again.
Once again, I want to say that it is not PTS that is responsible for the project or responsible for the project, but this is an investment support that we have also seen in some other sectors. There has been investment support in the rental housing market. There has been for elderly housing and for secure housing. But the responsibility for the construction taking place in accordance with what has been agreed lies, naturally, with the developer and the construction company. If they break the rules, there is a legal system that takes over.
Anders W Jonsson (C)
Madam Speaker! First, I just want to say that I am highlighting the example of Lingbo, but this exists in a large number of places in Sweden. Smaller rural areas around the country are suffering because of a poorly designed state investment support and an agency that has not followed up on it.
I can also take responsibility from the Center Party's side. We saw that it was extremely important for the Swedish countryside to achieve these strong supports for fiber expansion. We perhaps did not realize then that it is important to have security checks.
I welcome that since 2024 there is a more sensible way to pay out, but nevertheless, there are a number of small landowners far out in the rural areas of Sweden who have been hit very hard. This applies primarily to those who have not been granted access to fiber in the way they should have.
There is the cold-blooded answer from this government: You have to handle that yourselves. It was a state investment grant. It was a state agency, PTS, that was involved. But legally speaking, this is a civil law agreement between a landowner and a contractor, and from the government's side, we will not lift a finger to support those who are affected.
In some way, it is significant for how one views Sweden. One lives as a minister in Stockholm's inner city. When it starts to snow in Stockholm, the Prime Minister is quickly out to help with the snow shoveling. But when a severe storm hits the northern parts of the country, nothing happens. The question is how it would have been if someone had dug out a villa plot in Djursholm, whether it would have been the same attitude from the government's side.
This is an exceptional case. It is small landowners who have been hit incredibly hard. The government actually has the opportunity to step in and see how such a situation can be resolved. Strictly legally, it is exactly as the Minister says: It is a civil law agreement between landowner and contractor, and the government has nothing to do with it. But if one looks deeper into this and sees which regions in the country have been affected, there should be a different attitude from the government's side, rather than: Now we have restructured the system so that it will not happen again.
No, it will not do that. But all those who have been affected are sitting there with ruined fields, with non-functioning fiber, with excavated roads, and with drainage pipes that have disappeared. And they have no possibility whatsoever of obtaining financial compensation, because the company in the case in question cannot be reached at all.
In that situation, and considering that it was such a large investment from the state, one must task the authority to look through this, see what paths can exist forward and how it can be corrected now that those companies are essentially disappearing from the market and from which it is not possible to obtain any financial compensation. Can we in some way support these poor landowners so that they do not end up being the ones left holding the bag?
Madam Speaker! As I understand the government's response, they unfortunately say: We have compassion and feel empathy – and all the beautiful words the Minister said – but we will not lift a finger to help the landowners who have been affected by a failed state initiative that went so wrong when unserious companies stepped in and took a large part of the cake.
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I do not want to go so far as to say that it is a failed government initiative. On the whole, the broadband support is a success story for Swedish broadband expansion and Swedish internet policy. If I have not misread completely, it was a Center Party minister who was responsible for initiating the broadband support, which this government has continued with and which we are doing very well. We shall now develop it and see if the support can also go to wireless technology, so that it becomes more technology-neutral. But it is a broader broadband issue that we are not going to discuss in this interpellation debate.
There are now about fifty conflicts, which are in different stages. What the government has done to reduce the risk of this happening again is to switch to a new payment model where we pay out the support in arrears instead of in advance. I repeat again that it minimizes the risks that unserious companies will submit bids and enter the market.
I really hope that the new payment model, which is still quite new, will lead to us seeing fewer such incidents in the future. I want to say again that I obviously feel a great deal for the landowners and people who are affected.
Then there will be some remarks that we probably would have reacted if this had happened in Djursholm. No, we actually would not have. We naturally make no distinction as to whether it happens in Ockelbo or in Djursholm. On the other hand, no broadband support has been needed in Djursholm, because there have been market conditions there.
But it could also happen in Djursholm, which is located in Danderyd municipality – for those who do not know that. It could happen to a landowner even in Danderyd municipality. But should they be left without legal protection just because PTS has not granted an investment grant? It also becomes an unequal treatment. We cannot give stronger protection to actors who receive investment grants from a state agency than to those who do not. We must treat residents equally.
PTS becomes involved in this precisely because of the investment support. Since market conditions are lacking to expand broadband in certain places in Sweden, we have a broadband support, and it is PTS that channels that support to the company. But after that, PTS's responsibility for this ends. But the payout of the broadband support is now being conditionalized, and PTS must, of course, ensure that those conditions are met. If they do not, the support is not paid out.
When it comes to damages to the landowners' land, it must be handled in accordance with the existing legal processes and the civil law agreement that has been concluded.
If one is to grant special treatment and make exceptions in just these cases, it could create strange precedents. It would create precedents for other cases, and as soon as the state provides some form of investment support, other rules would suddenly apply in order to increase protection for landowners and others. I don't know exactly, but I am perhaps a bit skeptical about going too far in this.
I also do not see any concrete proposal from the Center Party on how this support should be paid out.
Anders W Jonsson (C)
Madam Speaker! It is obvious to me that the Minister would need to go outside the Stockholm city limits, perhaps visit some of the landowners at home in Lingbo and see how the land has been damaged. They signed agreements in good faith, with PTS's logo on them, and thought that it was important for the region.
Furthermore, it is not just any areas in Sweden that have been affected. It is the most sparsely populated parts of the country that have received the investment support, exactly as it was intended.
If there were any will on the part of the government to do something about this, they could do it. There are all the possibilities for a government to make decisions ex gratia and so on. They could at least task PTS with looking into what went wrong. How large are the damages? What is this about? One can obtain a proper basis.
When I met many affected landowners, I took on the task of at least trying to tell the responsible minister how deplorable the situation has become and about the consequences of the lack of controls, in the hope that there would be any will at all on the part of the government and the minister to look at this.
After this debate, Madam Speaker, I can nevertheless state that the Minister expresses his empathy and his compassion – there were other beautiful words as well. But beyond the changes that were made in 2024, the government will nevertheless not lift a finger for the affected landowners in Sweden's most sparsely populated areas.
It makes me disappointed, though not surprised. But those who will be very disappointed by the Minister's answer to these questions are, of course, the affected small landowners in the most sparsely populated parts of Sweden.
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! First, I want to say to Anders W Jonsson that I often find myself outside the mythical boundaries of Stockholm. I am also a municipal minister and responsible for county administrative boards and county governors, whom I visit often. I am, therefore, often outside the boundaries of Stockholm, even though I happen to have a residence inside these boundaries.
I have absolutely nothing against looking further into this. I am not closing those doors. But I do not want to stand here in the speaker's chair and give hopes that a rain of money will now be paid out to the affected property owners. That is something I cannot promise. I do not even want to give a hope that it can happen. There are no such current discussions in the government today.
I do not, however, rule out in any way giving a mandate to PTS to look into what has gone wrong and how we, through contract design and other means, can avoid such things happening again.
I also want to repeat, for the third time, that the new payment model, which we have decided upon and which is now implemented, where we pay after and not before the project's work, is a measure to prevent such things from happening in the future. Thus, we eliminate or in any case significantly minimize the risk of unserious companies entering the market. It has been too easy for unserious companies to obtain this investment support. We are now largely closing that possibility with this payment model. It is nevertheless a concrete measure that the government has taken.
I cannot here and now promise financial compensation from the government's side to those who have been affected. But we hope that this will be resolved through the justice system we have.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.