Response to interpellation 2025/26:405 on state grants to sports associations with links to left-wing extremism
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns state subsidies to sports associations with links to left-wing extremism. KD considers that the government has introduced good tools through democratic conditions to act against organizations that violate fundamental values 1 2. KD emphasizes that the sports movement is a cornerstone of democracy and that state subsidies must not go to organizations that oppose the democratic system of government 3. KD considers that associations that engage in violence should not receive state support 4 and that a good balance has been found 4. SD argues that state civil society policy risks legitimizing extremism by providing such organizations with resources 5. SD considers that one must be ready to do more when such organizations are legitimized by the state 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.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Jonas Andersson has asked me what initiatives I have taken to ensure that no state grants to organizations within the sports movement go to the far-left environment and other anti-democratic forces. Jonas Andersson has also asked me what initiatives I am prepared to take moving forward to ensure that no state grants to organizations within the sports movement go to the far-left environment and other anti-democratic forces.
The sports movement is Sweden's largest popular movement with over 3.1 million members and over 18,000 associations. The sports movement in Sweden is built according to democratic principles and constitutes a fundamental pillar of Swedish democracy. In the sports movement's value base, which is included in the Swedish Sports Confederation's, RF's, statutes and is guiding for all activities, it appears that democracy and participation are central and shall be practiced equally and regardless of background.
The government allocates over 2.1 billion kronor annually in support for sports. The support for the sports movement contributes to giving all people the same basic opportunities to be active in sports and to participate in Swedish society. At the same time, it is important that organizations that conduct activities that conflict with society's basic democratic values should not receive state support. This applies regardless of whether it concerns sports clubs or other civil society organizations.
The Swedish Parliament has decided that the RF shall examine issues regarding the distribution of state grants to sports activities in accordance with the guidelines established by the Government. Provisions on state grants to sports activities are contained in the Ordinance (1999:1177) on State Grants to Sports Activities.
The Government decided in January 2025 to introduce in the ordinance on state grants to sports activities that state grants may not be provided to an organization if it, or any of its representatives acting within the framework of the activities, opposes the democratic system of governance. At the same time, strengthened requirements for controls against incorrect payments were also introduced in the ordinance. RF is actively working to implement the revised ordinance, for example by developing the work with control and follow-up of the financial support that RF distributes. It can also be noted that RF has not paid out any state grant to the association referred to in the interpellation.
The Government continuously follows up on RF's work with these issues. The Government also supports this work within the framework of the investment of 10 million kronor per year from and including 2025 to combat sports-related crime. A part of these funds is used by RF specifically to strengthen the ongoing work to ensure that financial support is used correctly. In the guidelines for the state's contributions to sports, the Government has decided that RF shall specifically report on the work with the internal control of the grant management.
Finally, I also want to mention that the government has decided on a unified national strategy against violent extremism and terrorism. It appears from the strategy that society needs to mobilize to strengthen resilience among children and young people. Civil society organizations, such as sports clubs, play an important role here.
Jonas Andersson (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I want to start by thanking Jakob Forssmed for being here. It is good that we in the Riksdag today can focus on how we can ensure that no state subsidies end up in the pockets of extremists.
I have therefore asked Jakob Forssmed how it can be ensured that no state grants to organizations within the sports movement go to the far-left environment or other anti-democratic forces. I am focusing on both what has been done and what is intended to be done moving forward.
Jakob Forssmed's answer to the interpellation is clarifying in some parts, but at the same time, there are remaining question marks for me, which I will come to later.
Mr. Speaker! The specific organization that has led me to choose to submit this interpellation is a sports club in Malmö named Collective Effort IF. The club is explicitly socialist – only this can be considered a bit odd. The club, in any case, operates within various types of combat sports such as muay thai, that is, Thai boxing. But they also engage in strength training, football, and other activities.
In recent months, the association has received media attention in both traditional media and on social media in various ways. And it is not a pretty reading.
In the association's premises, it is full of communist propaganda, for example in the form of posters. It is a pure romanticizing of dictatorship and revolution that one engages in. For example, they have put up Soviet posters in their premises.
Besides the communist propaganda, it is obvious that one has a collusion with the far-left environment in Sweden. For example, in their groups on social media, they post pictures of specially designed baseball caps with the logo of the far-left organization Antifascistisk aktion on them, i.e., a logo with black and red banners.
Furthermore, Collective Effort has been praised in the newspaper Brand, a newspaper which in turn has links to the far-left environment. It is admittedly a number of years ago, but Brand has, among other things, previously been reported to the JK by Säpo, who at that time considered that the newspaper had incited acts of violence.
It is not enough with this. There are also elements in Collective Efforts' activities that it is difficult to see as anything other than a pure encouragement of violence against elected politicians. They boast, for example, with punching bags with Jimmie Åkesson's face on them. They are thus practicing punches and kicks against pictures of politicians. It is possible that there is encouragement of violence against other politicians as well, but this is what I have become aware of.
Mr. Speaker! Why is it then important to bring this up in the Riksdag? Well, besides the fact that it is naturally, in the broadest sense, important that we combat left-wing extremism, it is also the case that there are state subsidies involved regarding this association.
Collective Effort is affiliated with the Swedish Muay Thai Association. Through that, it is also part of the Swedish Sports Confederation's structure, which Collective Effort also states on its own website. The Swedish Sports Confederation, in turn, receives billions from the state, which it distributes further within the sports movement.
Against this background, I ask: Is Jakob Forssmed satisfied with how the democratic conditions have been implemented so far since the introduction this year? And how does the Minister view how the civil society policy has changed since then?
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I am, of course, pleased that Jonas Andersson is glad that I am here and answering the interpellation. I am glad that we can have this exchange of views, which has been initiated by Jonas Andersson. It is very pressing issues that are being raised here.
We have a civil society policy based on the idea that we should support the important civil society in Sweden – which builds democracy, which builds participation, which builds community, which builds movement, which builds all that which creates the wonderful Sweden that we love. But for us to be able to do that in the long term, with credibility and in a way that gives the support legitimacy, we must have clearer tools against those who do not contribute to upholding basic values but who instead violate them. I think we have done well in that.
We now have better tools for authorities to act. We have clearer rules for the associations regarding what they must live up to in order to be eligible for state subsidies. I think that is excellent. For example, when it comes to the religious community policy, we have already seen a number of communities and congregations that have lost their state subsidies in light of the new rules. Without reviewing any individual decisions, I think it is good that there are now tools to be able to do this.
It is difficult for me to take a position on what should happen regarding this specific association. I can state that it has, therefore, not received any state subsidies. Whether the activities conducted there and which Jonas Andersson describes should be the subject of the attention of law enforcement authorities, I cannot judge. There is legislation regarding a number of issues when it comes to terrorism or incitement to violence against elected officials and those types of things. But I cannot judge – and shall not either – whether any laws have been broken. It is up to law enforcement authorities to do that.
I can state that we know that extremist forces in different ways want to eat their way into different types of social structures. This applies to left-wing extremist forces. It also applies to right-wing extremist forces, which for example move around and in some supporter environments with active clubs and other things. It is important that we ride a barrier against those who want something other than to uphold the democratic ideals upon which our society rests. It is therefore an important task to do – to support civil society but also to ride a barrier against extremism.
Jonas Andersson (SD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Jakob Forssmed, for the answer!
I also raise these types of questions because I know how important civil society is for Sweden as a country. Swedish association life is in many different ways a cornerstone of our society. That is also why I think it is important that we ensure that money does not go to the wrong forces.
I naturally understand what Jakob Forssmed points out: that as a minister, he cannot step in and say that a specific association should not receive grants and so on. That is why I am asking the questions a bit more generally, based on the proposition that the Riksdag decided on earlier during the term.
I think, in any case, that some positive information emerged in Jakob Forssmed's response to the interpellation I have submitted. I am thinking, among other things, of the fact that the new democratic conditions for state grants to civil society have been implemented in the ordinance on state grants to sports activities. I was actually already aware of that, but I still want to emphasize that it was good that Jakob Forssmed brought it up as an example of a change that has occurred.
If the new democratic conditions had not been implemented, it might have been an explanation for how an organization like Collective Effort, with both left-wing extremist and violence-promoting elements, can be part of an organizational structure that receives state subsidies. But now the democratic conditions have been implemented. That makes the whole thing very strange, I think.
For me, it is extremely remarkable that an organization with such clear far-left and violence-promoting elements can be part of an organizational structure that, therefore, receives billions of amounts from the taxpayers, from the state.
Jakob Forssmed mentions that the Swedish Sports Confederation has not distributed state grants directly to Collective Effort. It is, of course, good if that is the case. It is a matter of course for me that not a single krona of the taxpayers' money should end up in the pockets of violence-seeking extremists.
Mr. Speaker! I mean that Collective Effort and what they do is unfortunately still legitimized by the state policy right now. Through its connection to the Swedish Sports Confederation, Collective Effort becomes part of a state-recognized structure. It becomes like a type of quality stamp. Even if Collective Effort does not receive its own state grants, it seems to operate within a system that is financed with tax money. One gains access to resources, networks, platforms, and so on.
What I wonder is: Does Jakob Forssmed agree with me that there could be a risk that the state's civil society policy legitimizes extremism, even if it does not occur through direct state grants?
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! My perception is that we are doing something good with the new democracy conditions. We are, in fact, giving both authorities and the Swedish Sports Confederation a greater opportunity to act against associations and organizations that violate society's fundamental values, that discriminate, that infringe, or that in other ways act in a violence-oriented or terror-romantic way, or whatever it may be.
Then I cannot take a position in the individual case, but I can state that we now have sharper tools in place. We have sharper requirements for the authorities and for the Swedish Sports Confederation to act against associations that violate the basic conditions for granting grants. This is what the democratic conditions mean. I think that, fundamentally, it is good.
I think Jonas Andersson has a point in what he says. It is a background to why we have the conditions for granting subsidies that we have recently made decisions on and which have been implemented in a large number of ordinances – I believe we have implemented these conditions in about forty ordinances.
Jonas Andersson (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I will start by saying that I am also pleased with the work we have done regarding the democratic conditions and that they have been introduced. At the same time, I realize that it can sometimes be difficult to hit exactly as right as one wants with this type of legislation. One must, therefore, always be ready to do more, I think.
A phenomenon in Swedish society that has created a heated political debate and demands for measures is so-called active clubs, which I believe Jakob Forssmed himself mentioned just now. When that phenomenon has been described in the media, it has been spoken of as a kind of cells with links to political extremism where people gather for martial arts and strength training. They build up a type of potential for violence, one could say. The active clubs that have been highlighted in the Swedish debate have had their political home on the other side, if one compares them with Collective Effort IF, which I bring up here in the debate. But if one thinks about it: What is it actually that distinguishes Collective Effort from the active clubs that the media have written about?
The case with Collective Effort is undoubtedly about political extremism. At the same time, one trains in martial arts, strength training and so on together. One develops one's skills and, if one so wishes, one's potential for violence. In a way, the case with Collective Effort is more far-reaching than the activity clubs on the right wing that have been mentioned in the media, this given that one is under a state umbrella that receives billions in state subsidies.
Against the background of what has emerged in this debate, I would finally like to ask Jakob Forssmed if he is prepared to further review the democratic conditions for state grants to civil society. How does Jakob Forssmed actually view the democratic conditions moving forward?
It is admittedly only just over a year since the democratic conditions came into force, but I believe it is important to always be ready to do more. When organizations with such clear left-wing extremist and violence-promoting elements are legitimized by the state, we cannot be satisfied.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Jonas Andersson, for this!
Associations that engage in violence, call for violence, or in other ways wish to act violently in our society shall, of course, not receive any state support for this. I view with concern that violence is used or glorified in various ways in associations, and the violence itself can sometimes radicalize people. This is far from martial arts in the rest of society, which rather is a fantastic force, not least in vulnerable areas where activities are carried out in an extraordinary way in various contexts.
There are always reasons to follow how legislation and other measures are implemented. It is about both the democratic conditions and the importance of predictability for associations so that uncertainty is not created – something that some have flagged – as well as whether the tools are sharp enough to actually strike against the activities that in various ways threaten our society.
I think that we have fundamentally found a good balance. This has been in effect for a fairly short time, and there are always reasons to follow the development. One should never be averse to taking the measures required to achieve the goals that one wants to achieve, namely to provide broad and good support to civil society, religious communities, and the sports movement. At the same time, we must ensure that we safeguard its legitimacy and ensure that those who want to overthrow our societies do not receive any part of the state support.
With that, I would like to thank you for this interpellation.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.