Response to interpellations 2023/24:728 and 729 on the sale of farms

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Karin Sundin has asked me whether I and the Swedish government, in the work of introducing so-called farm sales, have considered accepting WHO's offer of support and advice.

Christofer Bergenblock has asked me if I can deny the information that has emerged regarding that drinks with over 15 percent alcohol content should not be included in the proposal regarding farm sales. Christofer Bergenblock has also asked me if I can deny the information that has emerged about requirements being placed on own production of grain and other raw materials in the proposal regarding farm sales. Christofer Bergenblock has further asked me if I can account for how the restrictions included in the investigation's main proposal will be handled in the bill. Christofer Bergenblock has finally asked me if I can clarify what the timeline looks like for farm sales to be able to become a reality during 2025.

I have responded to WHO's letter orally at a meeting with Hans Kluge in Copenhagen on 29 August 2023. At that meeting, I thanked WHO Europe for its support and clarified the government's position on the issue of farm sales and regarding alcohol policy in general, including the importance of maintaining a high level of protection for public health and that the Swedish retail monopoly shall be protected and secured.

Then it concerns Christofer Bergenblock's questions regarding farm sales of alcoholic beverages. Work is currently underway within the Government Offices to prepare a referral to the Council of Legislation with the aim of introducing farm sales of alcoholic beverages. The intention is for the government to produce a referral to the Council of Legislation as quickly as possible that enables farm sales while simultaneously protecting Systembolaget's monopoly and submit a proposition to the Riksdag on the matter, so that a legislative change can enter into force at some point in early 2025. This, however, presupposes an EU process that does not drag on. The government intends to notify the European Commission of the proposal in accordance with customary notification procedures and applicable directives. I cannot anticipate the government's decision and the work currently underway within the Government Offices and can therefore also not comment on how the proposal will be designed.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! It was a yes or no question that I asked in my interpellation. Has the government considered accepting the World Health Organization's offer of support and advice in the process regarding so-called farm sales - yes or no? I thank the Minister for Social Affairs for the answer, and I note that it may well be interpreted as a no.

I think that another path would have been possible for the government. When the World Health Organization sends an official letter expressing its concern about the consequences of Swedish policy, one could say: We should perhaps listen. We should perhaps say yes.

I understand that this issue is not easy for the Minister for Social Affairs to handle when there are major tensions within the government base and when, judging by everything, there are also tensions within his own party. Nevertheless, it is the minister's question to handle.

Many of us, so to speak, feel a strong concern about what will happen with the Swedish retail monopoly. That concern grows when one listens to the primary advocates for farm sales. I guess we will soon hear Member Bergenblock once again wave away all fears and repeat that, according to the investigator, Systembolaget is not at all threatened by farm sales—as if heavy referral bodies have not pointed out that the EU will hardly think the Swedish retail monopoly can apply if hundreds of new private points of sale arise, as if the Ministry of Justice's internal legal investigation had not concluded that the investigation's proposals do not fulfill the investigation's directive that the monopoly shall be secured, and as if the European wine industry's trade association has not already in advance said that they will initiate a legal process.

During this process, many of us wonder how firmly rooted the political will to preserve Systembolaget actually is in the Government Offices today. Is it the case that this so-called "yard sale" is just a step on the way toward a Sweden that is a little less like Sweden and a little more like other countries, a Sweden where both the producers and the trade could earn large sums of money if consumers could buy their beer and their wine in the same store where they buy their food? Buy three bottles and pay for two of this week's campaign wine at Ica!

Madam Speaker! The concern for where Sweden is headed is not diminished by the fact that the government does not respond to public correspondence from the WHO, which asks what Sweden is actually doing. The Minister says to have responded at a meeting but not in writing. Neither I, the media's scrutineers, nor the citizens can therefore truly know today how the government addresses the WHO's concern - no more than the vague answer we receive today.

The Minister thanks for the support, and he has clarified the Swedish position. But what then is the Swedish position? Farm sales or not? How is the so-called farm sale to be designed so that it ensures the survival of the Swedish retail monopoly? That is the answer we are all waiting for. What is public health actually worth in the Government Offices today?

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Last week I visited Kalmar and looked at various companies within the beverage industry. I visited Ängöl on the outskirts of Kalmar city, a brewery with artisanal production of beer. They produce 150,000 liters of beer per year, which means it is a relatively small, small-scale production. They have lager, IPA, wheat beer, and so on. They have tastings today, they sell within the local assortment at Systembolaget, but they lack one thing: farm sales.

I then traveled to southern Öland to Håks gård in Beteby, where they have 4,000 grapevines under the Öland sun. From these grapevines, they produce grapes for both red wine, white wine, and rosé wine, and since they had released their latest wine varieties just a couple of days before I arrived, there was a queue at Systembolaget where they are included in the local assortment. They also have wine tasting and guiding at their vineyard, but what they lack is farm sales.

In conclusion, I visited Kyrkeby Bränneri in Vissefjärda just outside Emmaboda, a bit inland. It is a very exciting place, where one combines cultural heritage with food culture. There has been a distillery there since the 1700s, sanctioned by the king at one time. Production continued until 1971, after which production was discontinued.

At the beginning of the 2000s, the local heritage association in Vissefjärda began to take notice of this old cultural facility, whose buildings were already heritage-listed. They went back and looked at how the process had looked previously and began to recreate it. Today, distilled beverages are produced in the same way as has been done for a couple of hundred years at that location. What is missing today is farm sales.

Common to the three locations I visited is precisely the waiting for farm sales to become a reality. It is an opportunity to further develop their operations and gain another leg to stand on. But based on what has leaked from the Government Offices from Moderate MPs, whose information there is no reason whatsoever to doubt, only two out of three of these production sites would be given the opportunity for farm sales in the future.

Farm sales are about being able to trade products at the production site - beer, cider, wine or distilled products. The idea itself has been that it is the character-defining part of the production that should be at the production site. Now it has emerged that the proposal that the Minister for Social Affairs is preparing is intended to be limited by a volume content of 15 percent, which eliminates all distilleries, and requirements for own production of grain and other raw materials, which largely eliminates all breweries. What remains are vineyards and cider producers.

In my interpellation, I have wanted to give the minister a chance to deny that this is indeed the proposal that the government is preparing, and I want to give the minister another chance to answer this. Can he deny that this is the government's proposal?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thanks to the interpellants for further questions regarding this! To begin with, I would, of course, like to thank Karin Sundin for the extensive concern. It is always pleasant to receive such from political opponents.

However, I am a bit questioning regarding the question of what the Swedish position is. I have been here in the Swedish Riksdag as many times as ever and explained it. The position is that it is the government's ambition to introduce farm sales to a limited extent on the condition that Systembolaget's monopoly can be protected. Our view is that this is possible, and we are working on a legislative proposal to make this possible.

We see, just as Christofer Bergenblock does, that there are advantages to farm sales. It strengthens the tourism industry in rural areas if this opportunity exists, and therefore it is important for the government to work with such a proposal. Is it easy to produce this? No, it is not. One only has to look at the referral bodies that have submitted views on the investigation that Christofer Bergenblock referred to. It concerns a very large number of referral bodies with quite diverging views on this.

One thing they do have in common, however, and that is about Systembolaget's monopoly. Not least the bridge-builders are careful to say that it must be preserved. It must not be risked. The temporary and local assortment at Systembolaget, which the interpellator Bergenblock referred to, was made possible by a reform from the alliance government, and it has been an important basis for the Swedish drinking miracle that that possibility exists. It is important for the local producers.

We are continuing to work on a proposal that must be compatible with EU law and that must also be possible to introduce while the Systembolaget monopoly is protected. That work continues with high tempo, great force and intensity, and the ambition is to present a proposal in the near future. At that point, the details and limitations that will be necessary will also be revealed. In the investigation, there are a number of limitations, for example, which Christofer Bergenblock also points out in his interpellation.

This will, of course, be apparent, but our view is naturally that the proposal we are submitting should have a real significance for the tourism industry in rural areas. But it is a difficult and complex task, which I think is shown by the fact that no fewer than three government inquiries have gone through this issue and reached different results.

For our part, we are working on presenting something that actually works in reality.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Social Affairs, for the answer!

Farm sales shall be introduced but with the monopoly maintained. The question is how it shall be done. I know that the Minister for Social Affairs, just like the Swedes, understands why Systembolaget sells alcohol without a profit motive and why there are no loss leaders or sales on wine. The Minister for Social Affairs and the Swedes understand why Systembolaget is not open 24 hours a day. One understands why you have to show ID long after you have passed the magical threshold for being allowed to shop at Systembolaget.

Systembolaget is about us taking collective responsibility to protect children, young people, women, men, and alcoholics from the harmful effects of alcohol. That is what we agree on, but in this debate we rarely talk about it. We only talk about the pleasant experience that farm sales entail and about how this would be desirable, but the other needs to be said. The proposals that have been presented do not show that we can protect the Swedish monopoly.

I believe the Minister for Social Affairs when he says that the question is difficult. He is likely working hard to hold this together without being torn apart by those who actually want this issue to be reduced to being about the producers' conditions and pleasant experiences for the average consumers.

There are other ways to go, Madam Speaker. It is possible to introduce farm sales without risking Systembolaget's future and without local producers being disadvantaged by Swedish local producers getting better opportunities to showcase and sell their products. There are ways that would not lead to the WHO sending letters of concern to responsible ministers asking what on earth Sweden is actually doing.

We Social Democrats have long said that we are also open to farm sales, but only on the condition that there is no risk to the Swedish retail monopoly. The proposal being discussed today and which forms the basis for this discussion - the one that Member Bergenblock so eagerly propagates - does not meet that criterion.

We Social Democrats therefore presented a different model for farm sales last week. We propose that Sweden should introduce a special farm sales assortment that local producers of beer, wine, and spirits can join. By making it open to local producers from all over Europe, the monopoly is not threatened, and the producers also get better opportunities to showcase their goods.

The infrastructure for this – a specific yard-sale app – could be managed within Systembolaget's sales structure. After the purchase has been made, Systembolaget would ensure that the goods are delivered to the consumer's home. In that way, the monopoly would not be threatened, and it would facilitate things for both consumers and producers.

This can be done tomorrow; no new investigation is needed. This will not affect us in terms of EU law, and it will not threaten Swedish public health.

We also want to review the possibility for local producers to become agents for Systembolaget and thereby distribute their own and others' products.

There are certainly more paths that could be taken. My point is that there are more and better paths than the one the investigation proposes, which clearly implies that we risk losing the Swedish retail monopoly. The question is which path the Minister for Social Affairs and the government choose to take.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Social Affairs for the answer.

Sometimes when I stand in the chamber and debate, I wonder if we have read the same material. I am not only referring to the answers that came from the Minister for Social Affairs, but also to the questions that came from the Social Democrats and Member Karin Sundin.

This investigation, which, just as the Minister for Social Affairs pointed out, is the third investigation in the series, had a very clear directive. It was largely formulated by the Center Party, which has been driving this issue for a long time. The directive was: Submit a proposal that is compatible with maintaining public health and the retail monopoly! This is exactly what was delivered.

In the investigation, actually very in-depth analyses are made of both EU law and the public health issue. These pieces are connected – public health is connected to the maintained monopoly. It is noted that the monopoly is not threatened by this proposal because of the very rigorous restrictions that the proposal contains right from the start. It is also noted that public health will not be significantly affected by the sales that may arise through farm sales. This is about premium products. It is not about carton wines at Systembolaget, it is about expensive wines for several hundred kronor per bottle. It is not about the cheap beers at Systembolaget for 9.90, it is about the expensive beer varieties for 25, 30 or 35 kronor per bottle. It is not this that will affect public health.

The maintained monopoly is linked to the fact that a number of restrictions have been included in the main proposal regarding production volume at the manufacturer, purchase volume at the consumer, that sales only occur in connection with an activity, and so on.

Overall, there are both pros and cons in the main proposal that exists. Therefore, it was so strange when we, via the media, got to learn what is being prepared at the Government Offices. There is no doubt that there is a split in the government base here between, on one hand, the Moderates and the Liberals and on the other hand, the Christian Democrats.

Since then, the Social Democrats have come forward with their own proposal that we should have farm sales at Systembolaget. One could have thought that it is a parody of farm sales being played out in these times of political satire, but a sharp proposal has been submitted to introduce this. People shall go out to a farm or a producer, take out their phones and in the app order what they want to buy instead of being able to trade it directly on site. It is a very strange proposal.

The Social Democrats have been clear that it is precisely the Christian Democrats they are courting with this proposal; it is there that they see an opportunity to find favor for this. It is connected to what has leaked out from the investigation.

I still think, Madam Speaker, that there is reason for the Minister for Social Affairs to deny these rumors. It is not the case that one as a minister is bound by the Instrument of Government or any other law in such a way that one is not allowed to comment on an ongoing investigation, but it is merely a method, or a practice, that has developed. One as a minister has every right to say how the investigation looks and what proposals one puts forward and to deny the rumors that are circulating.

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! I have explained to Christofer Bergenblock – and it does not only concern this issue – that it is not appropriate to comment in the way he wishes. I understand that there is an interest in the issue and a curiosity about what the proposal will look like, and we will present that when we have a finished proposal. We will not present different types of working materials or whether the issue is highlighted from different perspectives or in different ways – it is simply not how a good preparatory process works. I think this should be respected, and that is what I try to do.

It is, however, good that we receive word from Christofer Bergenblock that Centerpartiet stands behind all the restrictions proposed in the investigation. It is excellent that this is clarified here, so in that way, this is a clarifying debate in the Riksdag.

In other respects, I largely agree with Christofer Bergenblock. The Social Democrats, whose party Christofer Bergenblock belongs to as I understand it, are planning various types of cooperation and government cooperation with, have a proposal that is not at all about farm sales but about something else. One can, of course, discuss their proposal, but it has nothing to do with farm sales. I also do not perceive that it is another app that is being requested, but rather that it is the possibility of selling in connection with a visit to a farm or to a producer in the countryside that is being requested.

Karin Sundin said that what the Social Democrats propose can be done tomorrow, but it is already being done today. One can already today, via one's own phone or a computer on site, order from the store's assortment and then have it sent home from Systembolaget. The problems that the Social Democrats consider themselves solving with their proposal are already solved. It is something else that is being requested, and it is that we are working on getting in place.

What the WHO is concerned about is the retail monopoly because they see it as an effective measure to reduce alcohol-related harm. It is also the government's view that it should be protected, and I have clarified to the WHO that our ambition is to present a proposal that also protects the retail monopoly, which of course is important and significant.

Let me say, however, that it is complex and requires careful consideration. We have, of course, conducted our own extensive analyses, and we have had to supplement the commission's proposals in various ways during the preparatory work. We continue this work to produce a proposal that manages to do what we see as so urgent: to strengthen the tourism industry and make it possible to sell alcoholic beverages from farms after nearly decades of investigation, and at the same time do what is important for public health and the producers, namely to preserve Systembolaget's retail monopoly.

Systembolaget is appreciated by the Swedish people and contributes to us having a wide range of drinks across the entire country. It is well worth protecting, and that is what we will do in our proposal.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! It is true, as Member Bergenblock said, that the investigation underlying today's debate had a clear directive, which was not followed. This is shown, among other things, by the Ministry of Social Affairs' internal legal investigation.

I want to believe that it means something when representatives for the UN through WHO write to the Swedish government and remind them of Sweden's international commitments and the framework for alcohol policy that Sweden has joined. I think a letter from WHO deserves more than an oral response in a debate initiated by me almost a year after the letter was written.

I note that Systembolaget year after year tops the ranking of Sweden's most liked companies. The Swedes understand that Systembolaget is different for a reason, and Systembolaget manages its mission to provide good service throughout the country and at the same time safeguard public health and the health of those who risk drinking too much in an absolutely excellent way. Let Systembolaget therefore also handle the farm sales so that we do not risk the Swedish retail monopoly collapsing.

I mean that we should do our utmost to safeguard Swedish public health over private profit interests. We all understand that there are millions to be made for the private actors who, in a first step, are allowed to sell on farms and in a second step, along with other producers and representatives of trade, profit from the fact that the Swedish retail monopoly falls and, in the long run, that Swedes begin to drink more. The costs to society for this would, however, be much higher.

I recommend that the Minister for Health and Social Affairs accept WHO's extended hand with an offer of support and advice.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! In my previous contribution, I described the limitations present in the investigation's main proposal and that these are proposed to protect precisely public health and the retail monopoly. However, this should not be interpreted as Centerpartiet standing behind all these limitations. It is primarily a limitation that is very questionable, and that is that the law would be introduced temporarily over a six-year period. This would mean that the companies that need to make investments in stores, staff, or equipment would be forced to write off these investments over six years, which is not a reasonable condition. This is at least one of the things that there is every reason not to proceed with.

This debate, however, is not about the limitations that exist in the main proposal, but about the information that has leaked out that the Ministry of Social Affairs may be preparing further limitations through a limit that excludes alcoholic beverages from farm sales and another that excludes almost all breweries from farm sales.

There is every reason to ensure that the farm sale is implemented now. The Minister for Social Affairs has said that work is being done at a high pace. However, it has been a year and a half since the government took office, so the pace has not been particularly high so far. I do, however, assume that the pace will be increased and that a proposal will eventually emerge and that the proposal is serious. But if it is not serious, Centerpartiet is open to doing it in the same way as in the case of the gender identity law, that is, taking the issue directly to the Riksdag and preparing it in the Social Affairs Committee to then legislate in the Riksdag. Because that is something that can be done.

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! It was clarifying from Christofer Bergenblock that the Center Party does not stand behind restrictions that protect Systembolaget's monopoly.

With all respect for what one thinks about different things; it is what is possible that governs for my part in this matter. I do not want to see any unnecessary restrictions that are not needed or are unjustified. What needs to be done is to create a proposal that enables farm sales to strengthen the tourism industry in the countryside and at the same time safeguards Systembolaget's monopoly. It is not primarily about what one thinks, but more about what one has for ambition, but one needs to design a proposal that works after a long period of investigation. In that case, it is hard and serious preparatory work that matters. EU law looks as it looks, and so one must do one's absolute utmost and best to produce a proposal that works, is realistic and possible to implement, and which also provides an opportunity to strengthen the tourism industry. It is the government's ambition, and it is also this that we intend to move forward with in the near future. It feels good that we are working with a serious preparatory process to achieve something that previous governments have not done and which has dragged on for a long time. I hope that we will be able to present this shortly.

I thank the interpellants for the opportunity to discuss this issue also at this occasion.

The interpellation debate was hereby concluded.

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