Response to interpellation 2025/26:460 on the state's cultural heritage and the maintenance of grant properties

Finansmarknadsministern Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! Pia Trollehjelm has asked the Minister for Culture if the Minister intends to take the initiative for a comprehensive mapping of the maintenance needs in the state's grant properties as well as a long-term plan for how this need shall be managed.

The work within the government is distributed in such a way that it is I who shall answer the interpellation.

Statens fastighetsverk is responsible for managing a certain part of the state's real estate, including certain properties with high cultural-historical values. The agency's regulation letter for the budget year 2026 states that the government's goals for the operations are, among others, that the properties shall be managed so that good resource management and high economic efficiency are achieved, and that the properties' values shall be preserved at a level that is long-term suitable for the owner and the user.

Statens fastighetsverk disposes of a special appropriation in the state budget to finance maintenance costs and ongoing operating deficits for so-called subsidized properties. These are properties where the rental income cannot cover the costs in the long term.

The Government has taken several measures to ensure a long-term solution for the financing of the subsidized properties. Since 2024, the appropriations for these properties have been allocated a total of 530 million kronor over three years in order to be able to increase the scope of the planned and preventive maintenance of the properties. According to the regulation letter for the 2026 budget year, the agency shall report how the increased funds have been used and, above all, how the level of ambition for the maintenance of properties with special cultural-historical values has been raised. The Government has also tasked Statens fastighetsverk to report on measures taken in order to adapt the property portfolio.

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

Pia Trollehjelm (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer to my interpellation on the state's cultural heritage and the maintenance of the grant properties!

I appreciate that the government clearly highlights the importance of planned maintenance and preventive maintenance and that resources have been added for this work.

I also want to say that I really appreciate the government's investment of a total of 530 million that has been added to the grant properties during the period 2024–2026. It is a significant reinforcement that shows that the government sees that the issue needs to be taken seriously.

At the same time, I argue that larger investments make good follow-up and a clear current situation assessment even more important, something that the minister also accounted for in his answer, because it is only then that we can fully assess whether the measures are sufficient and whether the maintenance debt actually decreases over time.

I also believe that we fundamentally share the view that these properties have a value that extends far beyond the economic. Ultimately, it is about our common cultural heritage. These are environments and places that tell the story of who we are and where we come from. These are values that cannot be recreated if they are lost.

Madam Speaker! What I primarily want to highlight today is also actually about long-term governance and follow-up, and in that regard, I perceive that the government has taken important steps forward.

During the past year, we were in contact with Statens fastighetsverk regarding these very issues. My impression from that conversation is that there was not quite a unified opinion on how large the total maintenance need actually is. I saw that as a deficiency, because if we do not know how large the need is, it also becomes difficult to know if the measures being implemented are sufficient or if the maintenance debt in the agency itself continues to grow despite increased efforts. We then risk working with individual measures without really knowing if the development is heading in the right direction over time.

I mean therefore that this is fundamentally about creating a clear structure, a consolidated baseline, long-term perspective, and an ongoing follow-up that enables both the government and the Riksdag to follow the development over time.

The National Audit Office has also pointed out the need for long-term governance, better follow-up, and sustainable conditions for the grant properties. It reinforces the picture that the issue needs to be handled more systematically going forward.

Madam Speaker! My ambition with this interpellation is not to seek conflict but to try to contribute to a long-term work where the government has already taken several important initiatives. I am passionate about the Swedish cultural heritage, for the environments and stories that help us understand who we are and where we come from.

I would therefore like to ask the Minister to elaborate on how the government views the need for a more unified and ongoing monitoring of maintenance needs over time, so that it can be ensured that the measures taken actually have an effect.

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

Finansmarknadsministern Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! When it is an interpellation debate, one naturally tries to find something to debate or find something that one disagrees on. I listened very carefully to Member Pia Trollehjelm's contribution and tried to find something that I and the government do not agree with. It was unfortunately very difficult, so I cannot promise any fiery debate here.

We in the government, together with the Sweden Democrats, have also shifted the policy in this area. It is a record amount of money this year that is working for our cultural heritage.

I believe that I and the member share the view that this has become even more important as we in the country have become more different from one another in the sense that more people from many different countries have come here, each with their own ability and their own circumstances, but with the important challenge of finding a common future. It is indeed much easier to be on the way somewhere if one knows where one comes from and has firm ground under one's feet.

We have worked in good cooperation on many things to achieve this. These are things such as more ways into work and that one should have a work community and colleagues who can tell about the new country. It is to tell how things work and how things were before in order to create this image of Sweden that one wants to build upon together. It is a cultural canon – not necessarily to rank certain books as better than others, but to show that we come from somewhere and that we on this patch of earth have done something together that we have a responsibility to further develop for future generations.

It is also the large budget increases we have made for our cultural properties, of course so that those who have lived here for generations or as far back as one can see can be able to take part in what has been done previously, what kind of country Sweden is and how it became as it became – much was right; other things could perhaps have been significantly better if one had done differently, just as it is here and now – but also so that all those who have come to our country can get an idea of what kind of country they have been given the opportunity to live in. Through that they have also, I think, committed themselves to reflecting on how to develop and make it better for future generations, for Swedes who are born here, regardless of where one is from originally.

We are very much in agreement that cultural heritage is very important. It is important in so many different dimensions. A sense of community and a common idea of where one comes from also makes it much easier to be on the way somewhere together. It creates a society where more people can be cared for, get their due, and do well.

That is why we have also made these large increases. The most binding limitation has been that there has been a lack of money. I could return to how underfunded this has been. Together, we have powerfully increased the funding for this. I agree with the member that it may perhaps mean there are reasons to consider how the work should look a bit more systematically. As the member mentioned, there have also been both such assignments and such inputs from authorities. It was perhaps not such a great idea to do it when there was such a large shortage of resources, but now these resource additions have been made.

What will be included in future budgets is still a matter for the upcoming budget process. But I appreciate the member's point here, and we share it. The resource supplements needed to be made, and there may be reasons to review how we can work a bit more systematically with this now that there are, or at least have been, funds. How much money there will be moving forward is a matter for future budget processes and, who knows, perhaps also for the currency expenditure. It seems to differ a bit between the blue-and-yellow team and the left-wing experiment in terms of how much one thinks it is worth to invest in our cultural heritage.

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

Pia Trollehjelm (SD)

Madam Speaker and the Minister! What I want to point out, and which I did not think the National Property Board of Sweden could answer, is how large the total maintenance debt in Sweden is.

I can take an example. In my municipality, we had a huge asphalt debt. For decades, one had basically done nothing other than repairing potholes. When I arrived, we began to work significantly more systematically with both inventory, follow-up, and prioritization of measures. Once we knew how large the maintenance debt was, we also knew which measure we had to take in order to be able to pay off the asphalt debt. That is where I want to get to.

In our municipality, we invested very heavily for a period, just as the government is doing now. After that, we could measure and see that the maintenance debt was actually being paid off over time, and today we can say that we have reached the point where the maintenance debt is no longer growing but is decreasing again. That allows us to put money toward something else. That was the point I wanted to get to.

My question to the Minister is: Does the government know how large the maintenance debt is for our subsidized properties? Does the government know if the debt is still growing, or can it be seen that it is decreasing?

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

Finansmarknadsministern Niklas Wykman (M)

Mr. Speaker! Unfortunately, the member describes a pervasive theme for the politics until we began to reshape it. A lot of new initiatives were taken, a lot of new agencies were established, and a lot of political measures and experiments of various kinds were to be implemented. Many of them were very costly, and a good deal of them had quite low utility for the taxpayers. The waste became a bit of a theme at times.

What is worse is that the then Finance Minister and subsequently – during a very turbulent and failed period in Swedish politics – Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson is notorious for her trickery and carelessness with public finances and for not taking responsibility. Maintenance debt is such a typical example of politics that cannot manage to prioritize and that barters for votes with other parties instead of doing what is best for Sweden. All of this is so significant for Magdalena Andersson's political actions and so deeply harmful for Sweden.

We saw that at times there were great ambitions for cultural heritage but no funding, or at least insufficient funding. We also saw it regarding the infrastructure, where the maintenance debts grew and were very large for both roads and railways. New promises were made, but what was already had was not taken care of. This led to major problems.

Messy politicians – cheating politicians – like Magdalena Andersson will always lead to problems for a country, and we also got that in area after area. Infrastructure is one example and cultural heritage another where money and ambition levels simply did not hang together. We have now added large resources to infrastructure and to our common cultural heritage. One simply should not build up those types of debts.

I share the member's view that more can be done to increase clarity regarding the agency's mandate and what is to be done. One could, for example, consider this in regulatory letters.

There is also a difficulty. I will not ask the member to reflect on it in its entirety, but I still want to say something that I myself think about. When it comes to infrastructure and other things, it might possibly be somewhat simpler to get an idea of how large the maintenance need and thus the maintenance debt is.

When it comes to our cultural heritage, which we have already touched upon that we are fortunately very enriched by in Sweden and have much of, it is clear that this is a question both of the condition of the properties and obviously of what one wants to use them for and what the level of ambition looks like. Objectivity may therefore possibly become somewhat less clear than within, for example, the infrastructure area.

What does one want an old remnant of some kind to be able to be used for? Should it remain there for research? Should it remain there for organized visits? Should it be openly accessible to the public? Should there be an opportunity to conduct some kind of commercial activity in connection with it? Is it a beautiful and fine place where one can get married or in some other way mark holidays in the family or in society? How large the debt is also depends, of course, on what level of ambition one wants to have.

There has been a current discussion about this over the last few days, Mr. Speaker, and if one were to say anything more about this, it is that the state can and shall do much and, of course, has the ultimate responsibility for preserving very much of our history and that which is common. I am also glad that during this period we have seen that more actors, municipalities for example, have stepped forward and taken greater responsibility for their local cultural heritage, which is indeed very important.

Neither I nor the member thinks so, but I want to emphasize that it can sometimes create a kind of contradiction between the fact that one might sometimes want to sell objects or bring in private individuals who have a great commitment and show great care for our shared history, and that the state does this. If I am to supplement the member's request with anything, it is therefore to also see how we can get a greater commitment in society as a whole to preserve and showcase our fine history.

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

Pia Trollehjelm (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister once again for a good debate and for the answers that have been given.

I agree that civil society is important when we talk about these things. I also believe that we share the same basic view on this issue. Our cultural-historical properties and environments are not just buildings but so much more. They are carriers of stories, identity, and history.

In a time when we see war and conflicts all around the world, it becomes clear what significance cultural heritage and common history have for the country's identity and our cohesion. That is why I argue that long-term perspective becomes so important, and the minister agrees with that here today.

For me, this is by no means about a level of funding, but rather about ensuring that future generations also get access to our cultural heritage. Therefore, I believe that inventorying, follow-up, and clear indicators are important tools to ensure that the maintenance debt we have decreases and that the efforts yield results where the needs are greatest.

Who knows, it might even turn out that we are at the right level and that we are actually paying off the maintenance debt we have, but it is difficult to say without having a complete picture.

Mr. Speaker! My ambition with this interpellation was actually nothing other than to draw attention to a problem that I myself happened to stumble upon. The more I become aware of it, the clearer it becomes how important long-term perspective, inventory, and follow-up are so that we can also be able to prioritize correctly in the future. Here, the Minister and I are in complete agreement.

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

Finansmarknadsministern Niklas Wykman (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Pia Trollehjelm, for this interpellation! It is often said that it concerns important issues, but this is actually important in a real sense. It is so easy to neglect this and think that it can take a back seat and so on, and if one does that for far too many years or makes it a conscious part of politics, one also erases a part of the past.

I belong to those who are completely convinced that it also becomes much more difficult to navigate into the future. One loses a lot of knowledge about oneself – one perhaps cannot even fully be oneself – if one does not know where one comes from. Then it is more difficult to know where one is headed. It is also more difficult in a reality where so many have been invited to our country but have not fully been invited to become a part of our country.

I am convinced, Mr. Speaker, that a sense of community is the most important tool for building a common Swedishness and a common idea of the future. There are, however, also other things that are important, such as a cultural competence and an understanding of why we Swedes are as we are and why we behave as we do.

There are very well-known quotes about one should be careful about what one does with buildings, because first we do something with them and then they do something with us, and a good deal of what we are has actually been shaped by what we have built and what we have done. It is clear that we shall make this accessible and ensure that it maintains quality and is maintained in a correct and purposeful manner. I would like to say that a cornerstone in that work has been the resource supplements that have been made, for this has been underfunded.

The committee members raise important issues, and others have also done so. We have talked about a number of agencies and evaluations and about how, from the stronger foundation we now stand on, the work can be organized better and more clearly in the future. One obviously needs to think about this relatively carefully so that it turns out well. One should not have a lot of measures just for the sake of the measures, but one should have them to achieve something better.

One thing I am sure of. I have met so many committed and knowledgeable people working at Statens fastighetsverk that I know this is in, if not perfect, at least good hands, and now we politicians can do our part.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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