Response to interpellations 2024/25:360, 366 and 376 on the closure of state service offices
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the closure of state service offices. KD considers state presence important but that the operations must be streamlined 1. KD argues that Statens servicecenter should have greater room to decide on locations 1, that service should be available via FA-regions and mobile offices 2 3, and that the focus should be on reducing the number of agencies 4. S argues that the closures involve increased centralization 5, affect people in digital exclusion 6 7 and damage trust in the state 6. S considers that the government, through draconian cuts, is forcing closures 8 and prioritizes tax cuts over the citizens' needs 9 10.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Speakers (19)
- Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
- Lars Isacsson (S)
- Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)
- Isak From (S)
- Kristoffer Lindberg (S)
- Linus Sköld (S)
- Peter Hedberg (S)
- Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
- Lars Isacsson (S)
- Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)
- Isak From (S)
- Kristoffer Lindberg (S)
- Linus Sköld (S)
- Peter Hedberg (S)
- Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
- Lars Isacsson (S)
- Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)
- Isak From (S)
- Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Lars Isacsson has asked how I and the government intend to ensure that Ludvika, as a growing and successful municipality, retains its state service office and thus continues to have access to close public services, and what measures I and the government intend to take to ensure a long-term state presence in smaller localities and in growing municipalities where the demand for service is high.
Furthermore, Ida Ekeroth Clausson has asked me, in light of reports regarding a possible decommissioning of the service office in Mariestad, what consequences the closure of the service center will have and how I should act to ensure citizens' access to state services throughout the country.
Furthermore, Isak From has asked me what analysis I and the government make regarding the fact that more citizens are getting further away from a service office, and whether I and the government are considering taking any action to enable state services for everyone, often elderly people, who cannot use the digital agency services.
State presence and service throughout the country is important to simplify for individuals and increase public benefit. At the same time, it is important that every tax krona is used wisely, and state-funded activities shall be subject to review and prioritization. When the National Audit Office audited the service office operations, certain deficiencies and challenges were identified regarding the operations and its conditions for being conducted efficiently.
A challenge raised by the National Audit Office was that the model previously in place, where the government designated where individual service offices should be established, hindered Statens servicecenter from conducting a cost-effective operation. The government has now chosen to give Statens servicecenter greater room to decide where the individual offices should be located - something that is in line with what applies to the public administration as a whole and, according to the government, promotes a more efficient public administration. When it comes to questions regarding individual offices, I therefore refer to Statens servicecenter, which is best suited to decide where the offices should be located.
When the number of service offices has been expanded, the number of visitors has not increased to the same extent. Against this background, the operations need to be adapted and streamlined, as every tax krona must be used as wisely as possible. This will mean that some offices will be decommissioned and that citizens may have to travel further to the nearest permanent service office.
Statens servicecenter is working on developing more mobile and flexible office solutions in order to be able to get closer to citizens in more places in a simple and smooth way. This is a development I follow with great interest.
The Government also considers the balance between geographical accessibility and cost-effectiveness to be important. In the assignment to Statens servicecenter to develop a plan for a new organization of the service office network, the Government has therefore specified that the agency shall plan to, in the long term, provide state services in all so-called FA-regions as a basic level for the geographical coverage.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister Erik Slottner, for the answer!
Ludvika municipality is a municipality in growth. Business development is strong, not least thanks to Hitachi Energy's expansion. New jobs are being created and the influx of residents is increasing, and with it, the need for state services grows. The large influx of labor to Hitachi means that more people need support and contact with authorities. At the same time, there are many municipal residents, especially the elderly and people in rural areas, who are dependent on physical meetings with state officials.
Despite this, the government and SD choose to let the service office in Ludvika be closed. This means that the functional labor market region of Ludvika and Smedjebacken is referred to Borlänge. This, in turn, means journeys of up to two hours for those who live in Fredriksberg, Nyhammar and Grängesberg, and it is not a reasonable solution.
Madam Speaker! The Minister says that it is up to the authorities themselves to decide where they want to locate themselves. But what does that mean in practice? Well, it means increased centralization. The service disappears from smaller towns and is concentrated in larger cities.
When the government abdicates its responsibility to ensure a state presence throughout the entire country, the field is left open for a development where the countryside is progressively emptied of community services. It also goes against the government's own mandate to Statens servicecenter that there should be service offices in every functional labor market region.
In Avesta, where I come from, we have had training in the municipal council for all members after every new election. It is a training in the Local Government Act and what is expected of an elected official. That training is called "Govern or Resign".
Madam Speaker! I want to ask how the Minister views the fact that the government's objective of a state service office in every functional labor market region was directly bypassed by Statens servicecenter when they closed the service office in Ludvika.
Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)
Madam Speaker! Now I wonder if the Minister himself believes what he is saying. Does the Minister really believe that it is possible to cut resources to this activity and that it can still provide equally good service? It is an activity whose very purpose is to be close to the citizens.
When the Social Democrats were in government, a major focus was that the state should become more visible in our elongated country. The current government is destroying this in an instant. A state presence throughout the country builds public trust and also gives legitimacy to the exercise of authority. But this government is withdrawing its hand from the state's presence in the whole country, not only in the form of state jobs but also when it comes to the accessibility of the services of the citizen-facing authorities.
For those who are in a state of digital exclusion and cannot use BankID, there is no alternative but to seek out the service centers. But the government wants to severely limit that possibility for hundreds of thousands of people across the country.
In the partial reporting of the report Government Assignment to report a plan for new organization of the service office network, it can be read: "During the coming years (2025-2028), the number of service offices will decrease in all parts of the country, including sparsely populated and rural areas, metropolitan areas, and areas where exclusion is great. This will have consequences for private individuals and companies who visit service offices. The assessment is further that the consequences for the authority are tangible and complex. A comprehensive operational change shall be conducted in parallel with the operational activities being maintained and effective long-term solutions shall be developed."
According to the agency's own impact assessment, the closure of offices in rural and countryside areas will primarily be noticed in the form of reduced accessibility as a result of longer travel distances to the nearest office and thus also higher travel costs for individuals to visit service offices. In metropolitan areas, the problem instead becomes the risk of traffic congestion and longer waiting times. In areas where the sense of marginalization is great, offices will also be closed, and there, trust in state activities may be negatively affected when service offices that were recently opened are closed just a couple of years later.
In today's restless society, we do not need less trust in the state. Instead, we need to become a society that holds together.
Madam Speaker! I have asked how the Minister will act to ensure citizens' access to services throughout the country. I have not received any direct answer to that. Therefore, I ask the question again.
Isak From (S)
Madam Speaker! Minister! When we Social Democrats presented an agenda for state presence throughout the country with service offices in all municipalities, the Sweden Democrats, among others, said it was a waste of taxpayers' money. It is approximately the same thing that Minister Erik Slottner says here today.
The Sweden Democrats promised before the 2022 election that the whole country should live. Now we see what the promise was worth. The government, which is supported by the pivotal party Sweden Democrats, is cutting back sharply on state services and presence throughout the country. A quarter of the offices will disappear.
When we had a regional political debate here before Christmas, it was clear that 150 million would disappear. However, it was a bit unclear then what that meant. Now, however, it is very clear what it means, namely longer travel distances for many more. It means concretely that several municipalities - Piteå, Trelleborg, Ludvika, Östhammar with several others - will be left without offices, and residents in the surrounding municipalities will also have to travel somewhere else.
My question to the government and Erik Slottner was: What analysis has been made of this? The answer I can see is that it is noted that it will be a longer travel route for some. Is that fair? Some still have greater accessibility, but at the same time, resources will be reduced even at the offices that remain. At least 100 services will be cut, which means that accessibility will become worse even for the others. I cannot see anything else in the minister's answer than that this is the intention.
Was there no analysis? Was there no steering behind the fact that, in that case, other authorities could also cover for this? It seems there was no idea, because the entire responsibility is being placed on Statens servicecenter. The government abdicates from its mandate to steer. Citizens perhaps expect some idea of how this is to work and that one says "we think this is good." Instead, it is said that the authorities have closed certain offices and that it is not the government's proposal.
Money is being removed, and it has consequences. It has consequences for very many who from now on will have a significantly longer travel route to get to an office. I have seen nothing else in the government's response than that the government thinks this is good.
Kristoffer Lindberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the interpellants who have taken the initiative for this absolutely necessary debate.
Sweden is larger than Stockholm, and the service offices are an important social service that maintains the state's presence throughout the country. Now it is clear that several offices in my home county of Gävleborg will be closed, closest to that in Sandviken. Sandviken is a municipality with nearly 40,000 inhabitants. How large does a municipality need to be for the state to be able to have a presence there at all?
In connection with that, we have been able to see reports in the media that the office in Bollnäs, at my home, will be closed - not because it is not well-visited or because it is not needed. The Bollnäs office serves not only Bollnäs municipality but also Ovanåker municipality and parts of other municipalities. It is also the office that is open the most days a week.
No, the reason why it is planned to close the office is, according to information, that the lease expires later this year. It is therefore that office closure in Hälsingland that can as quickly as possible help to save the 150 million that the government decided to save on state services around the country. No other consideration has been taken.
The number of visits to the Bollnäs office over the last three years has been between 10,000 and 13,000. In the same period, 13,000–17,000 administrative cases have been handled. The office is open five hours a day, four days a week. If we do a simple mathematical calculation where we subtract public holidays and a few other things, it theoretically means that someone visits the service office in Bollnäs every fourth minute. Now the minister argues that these people will find it more difficult to physically receive help from Arbetsförmedlingen, Försäkringskassan, Pensionsmyndigheten, and Skatteverket.
If one instead has to travel to the service office in Söderhamn, it takes about 80 minutes round trip from Bollnäs. But it is not the residents of Bollnäs who are hit hardest. For those who live in Edsbyn, the travel time is extended from 1 hour round trip to 2 hours and 20 minutes. For the residents of Vallsta, it is extended from 46 minutes to nearly 2 hours. And for those who have settled in Voxna, it means an extended travel route from 94 minutes to nearly 3 hours round trip.
Is this the Sverigedemokraternas and the government's policy for the Swedish countryside? Was this what the Kristdemokraterna intended when Ebba Busch spoke warmly about "hjärtlandet" during the election campaign?
This is nothing other than a massive betrayal, and I think the minister should go out into the country and meet the people who are dependent on the services at the service centers. Tell them why they will no longer have their needs for agency services met! Tell them why parts of our country are not to have any state service at all! Tell us where the heart of the country lies! For us, it is clear that the Christian Democrats think it lies somewhere completely different than in southern Hälsingland.
Madam Speaker! It is of course more efficient for an agency to, for example, only exist in the big city. But politics must also at some point take other values into account. We need even more service offices, not fewer.
I therefore appeal to the government and the Sweden Democrats: Do not shut down the service centers around the country!
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! State service throughout the country is important, the Minister said in his answer here. When one looks at the consequences of the proposals that we are debating today, I think it is almost a bit mocking to say so.
In the autumn, it was stated clearly that the government would cut 150 million on the service offices around the country. I then asked Erik Slottner in an interpellation debate, which was quite similar to this one, which offices he thought should close. I asked which of the Norrbotten offices he thought should close. He could not answer that, because he has shifted the task to the authorities to decide this.
The simple answer is that Erik Slottner wants to avoid answering the question. Erik Slottner does not want to have to go to Piteå, which is one of the first offices that need to close, and stand up for the fact that he is closing the office there. He refers all questions about individual offices to the agency. It is convenient, if one is the responsible minister.
Now it is as stated clear that the consequences of the government's draconian cuts are that every fourth office is to be closed. One of those that is first out is therefore in my neighboring municipality Piteå in Norrbotten. If the heartland is not in southern Hälsingland, it obviously is not in Norrbotten either. The office in Piteå has 8,700 visitors every year, and they will now instead have to travel by bus for five and a half miles to Luleå, which has the nearest office.
Last week I was in the western parts of the county and visited Lärcentra in Arjeplog municipality. Arjeplog is one of the country's smallest municipalities, and it is very far to the next municipality. The staff at Lärcentra said it would have been good if there had been a service office in the village. It was understood that it could not be open every day of the week, but perhaps some time – so that the students would not have to take a whole day off to travel 87 kilometers one way to Arvidsjaur by bus.
I had to say it as it is. With this SD-led, heartland-hostile government, there will be no new offices. Instead, every fourth office will be closed. The government saves 150 million. It is a sad message to someone who works with people, is dependent on access to state services, and has the nearest service point 87 kilometers away. It is a sad message to have to give, but it is the only one possible.
Slottner makes this change and claims that he is giving the authority greater room to decide where the offices should be located. But does Erik Slottner seriously mean that a cut of 150 million gives the authority greater freedom of action?
Peter Hedberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I think that a large part of this debate is about responsibility, as several of the debaters have touched upon. It is about the responsibility for a state presence throughout the entire country.
I believe that the Minister and, by extension, the government are hiding behind a part of the National Audit Office's reasoning when they say that they are giving the agency room to freely choose where it should locate its offices. It was also that part of the answer that I caught on to the most – that it is expressed that the government has now chosen to give Statens servicecenter greater room to decide where the individual offices should be located. When I say that they are hiding behind the National Audit Office's reasoning, it is because they do not address in the answer that they are cutting 150 million kronor from this agency over three years.
The concern that has been raised by several of my party colleagues regarding individual offices that we can see will be closed, and also those that risk being closed, has arisen due to a lack of political governance. The State Council and the government argue that when they reduced the appropriation to Statens servicecenter, they also gave the agency the freedom to decide where the offices should be located. But they have actually not made any clear political assessment of which other aspects should be weighed in. Instead, they merely refer to something vague about the agency being able to decide this entirely on its own and argue that they have no responsibility for this at all. That makes me wonder where the level of ambition lies when it comes to state service throughout the country.
Several have been involved in the reasoning about the heartland, as it has been spoken of. I remember that on very many occasions, it stopped at different types of gas stations, where one would talk about 10 kronor at the pump and the like. Now we are talking about 150 million kronor over three years, and the government is not willing to take responsibility for the consequences this leads to.
I am thinking about what Isak From pointed out, the analysis of how one should instead ensure that the citizens who are affected by this cut actually get access to a full state service. Where is the analysis and the assessments? Is this something that the Minister can imagine developing in the debate here tonight?
I choose to go back to the wording in the Minister's opening response: "The Government has now chosen to give Statens servicecenter greater room to decide where the individual offices should be located." Does the Minister mean in all seriousness that this implies a free scope of action to best determine how state service should be carried out within the agency's framework, when one is actually cutting by 150 million kronor over three years? That is something I would like to have an answer to.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Several questions have been asked - I shall try to address them in the correct order.
Statens servicecenter has now established overarching principles for the continued localization of the offices in the coming years. One of the principles is precisely the accessibility of service throughout the country. It is therefore not the case that one will simply preserve the service offices in the metropolitan regions, but service shall be available throughout the country; the focus is the FA-regions. If we can adhere to this and the agency can secure a localization in all 60 FA-regions, it means that state service offices will be spread across the entire country.
We must remember that even today, service offices are missing in many municipalities. It is not the case that there are service offices in all municipalities and that all people have very close access to a service office. Even today, many people live in municipalities where one is not digital and where it is far to a service office. It sounds a bit as if there are service offices within walking distance for all residents today and that we are now removing this, but that is not actually the case.
Statens servicecenter shall also work more with, for example, mobile offices and opening hours that are more adapted to the operations. It is another way. One is not only available if one has a fixed office, but one can also be available, for example, through mobile offices and more flexible solutions that are more adapted to the time we live in. I also think that is an important message to take with.
If it is indeed the case - which we do not know yet - that 35 offices will be closed within a few years, we will actually have exactly the same number of offices as when Statens servicecenter took over the office operations from three agencies, namely 113. It is therefore not the case that it will be completely gutted and we go back to how it was in the 60s, but there will still be a significant state presence even if this were to become a reality, which we, as we said, do not know yet.
The National Audit Office has had views on the efficiency of the State Service Centers. We spend almost 1 billion kronor on this agency. We also see, for example, that the number of visitors has not increased at the same rate as the costs.
Regardless of what is said here, the Swedish National Audit Office suggests that the agency should be given a larger mandate to decide for itself where in the country the office activities shall be located. Until today, it has been a mix. Some of the offices are politically bound, and others the agency can decide over itself. It has been very difficult to explain that governance model – why some offices are politically appointed and others agency-appointed. Now we are streamlining this and following a fairly well-known Swedish administrative model, namely that very many of the decisions are delegated to the agency. I do not think that is particularly strange, in itself.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Minister for the answer!
The Minister pointed out that if Statens servicecenter were to adhere to the FA-regions, the functional labor market regions, there would be a presence across the entire country. My question to the Minister was why, then, it is being closed in Ludvika, when Ludvika-Smedjebacken is a functional labor market region. I called for more governance from the government and the Minister and received, well, immediate proof that it is needed. The reason why it is being closed in Ludvika is the same as in Bollnäs: the lease agreement is expiring. That is the harsh reality.
Madam Speaker! The Minister also speaks of cycling distances. I do not believe that any of us members believe that we can have state service within cycling distance. This weekend I was in Malung-Sälen, which is Dalarna's second-largest municipality by area. There, it is 17 miles from north to south in the municipality. Regardless of where the service office is located, it is a long way there, and it is not cycling distance even today.
The Minister also says that it is not efficient to have service offices in smaller localities and that the government must be careful with every tax krona. I question the analysis of efficiency, especially regarding Ludvika and Smedjebacken, where there is exceptional growth. New companies are being established, labor immigration is increasing, and the population is growing. When more people need agency services, it is rather more cost-effective for the state to be present on-site than to force residents to travel long distances to the nearest office.
I also question the argument from a broader perspective. The government now seems to be pursuing a policy where the state withdraws from municipality after municipality with the justification that it is not efficient to be there. What does that mean for the cohesion and equality in our country? Shall we accept that people in smaller municipalities get increasingly worse access to state services while the large cities continue to have full presence? Shall we really use the tax crowns to centralize the services to a few places instead of ensuring that the whole country functions?
It is also a question of democracy and trust. When the state withdraws from smaller towns, the feeling increases that certain parts of the country are prioritized over others - that one is a second-class citizen. It increases mistrust towards authorities and decision-makers. If the state only exists where it is considered profitable from a narrow economic perspective, how does that affect people's trust in society?
Madam Speaker! I would like to ask the Minister: What is it that the government and SD actually mean when they say that the state shall be present throughout the entire country?
Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)
Madam Speaker! In the Minister's written response, I read: "It is at the same time important that every tax krona should be used wisely, and state-funded activities shall constantly be subject to reassessment and prioritization." Furthermore, it states: "The Government has now chosen to give the State Service Center greater scope to decide where the individual offices shall be located." These are fine words, but as the investigation shows, it will have major consequences wherever in the country the activities are discontinued.
In the proposal for the closure of 35 offices, the office in my home municipality, Mariestad, is also mentioned. The staff at the service office in Mariestad have been informed that even though the closure itself is not planned until 2026, it could occur earlier if staff begin to resign. In that case, staff in Mariestad may be relocated to cover for other offices.
This announcement comes at the same time as Mariestad faces a major development and growth with AB Volvo's upcoming battery factory. According to Skellefteå, which has gone through a similar journey with a large factory, there is a before and an after the factory. In Mariestad Municipality, which today has barely 25,000 inhabitants, over 3,000 new jobs will be added just at the factory. The municipality is expected to grow to perhaps 40,000 inhabitants in just 15 years. The service office could play an important role during the coming years when it comes to helping with ID documents, biometric checks, coordination numbers, and so on.
Does the Government think it is reasonable for the state to withdraw from a municipality facing such great growth with associated opportunities and also very large challenges? Would it not be more logical for the state, on the contrary, to strengthen its presence in growth municipalities?
That an office moves from a growth region is a major problem, but it is equally serious when one, as now, closes offices in parts of Sweden where there is already a lack of community services. The government contributes here to leaving a large part of the population in exclusion. Even though the Minister seems to believe that Stockholm is the whole country, that is not the case. The Minister mentions in their response that the operation must be efficient and that there are too few citizens using the service offices. Therefore, I wonder how many citizens the government wants to use the service offices for it to be considered enough.
Isak From (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister said in his latest contribution that we are back at the level we were at before the expansion. That is quite telling. We should then bear in mind that an important reason for the expansion of state service offices was that the sector authorities withdrew. Försäkringskassan, Arbetsförmedlingen and Skatteverket centralized their operations.
In the interior of Västerbotten, none of the small municipalities currently have Arbetsförmedlingen or Försäkringskassan in the town. Some of the municipalities have, however, received a state service office with the sector authorities on site. That was the very purpose of the reform: Through Statens servicecenter, one should have the possibility to co-locate state authorities and state services for the citizens.
Will the sector authorities move back suddenly? It is not likely, because they also lack governance. I can read that Arbetsförmedlingen is now sending back 9.4 billion kronor that have not been used, even though we have sky-high unemployment. It makes the whole thing even more absurd. One thus has a large surplus that one cannot use because the government does not govern to actually get people into jobs.
What is stated on the Statens servicecenter's website is actually an amusing read. In a customer satisfaction index, Statens servicekontor receives 93 on a scale between 0 and 100. That is among the highest for any state agency. Among the visitors, 95 percent consider that they have received a good reception, 97 percent consider that they have received the help they needed, and 94 percent think that they have received help within a reasonable time.
It is also noted that more and more, especially sole traders, appreciate the possibility of easily contacting the Swedish Tax Agency. This can be taken into account in a time of increasing bankruptcies. This is said to be a government that is business-friendly, but it is not reflected in the growth when it comes to new business ventures or in the bankruptcies, which are skyrocketing.
A particularly large increase in cases is seen in region Nord, region Stockholm and Gotland. In addition, Försäkringskassan's cases are increasing across the country, not infrequently linked to childcare and vab, where it concerns that one feels they have not received help from or have not understood Försäkringskassan's website or that one wants help making a necessary change.
That the needs exist is completely obvious. That the money exists, although it has been prioritized for something else, is also completely obvious. The Government has still not answered my questions.
Kristoffer Lindberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I am astonished. The Minister seriously argues that it is good to close service offices with reference to the fact that there are not offices in all municipalities anyway, as if fewer offices would mean that more people get closer [access].
The Minister completely evades responsibility and has no political will to let the citizens' needs guide the way. For the Sverigedemokraterna and the government, it does not matter where the service centers are located or not.
The Minister has said in a previous debate, in the autumn, in the same matter: My three guiding principles as Civil Minister are precisely efficiency, simplification and benefit to the citizen.
In what way do these closures lead to greater efficiency for the citizens? In what way does the Minister simplify things for those living in Sandviken or for the residents of Bollnäs and Ovanåker when the offices are to be closed? In what way is it increased citizen benefit to no longer be able to meet the state authorities without traveling long distances?
The answer is that this goes completely against the guiding principles that the minister theoretically claims to adhere to. It is clear to the vast majority that this is about nothing other than the fact that all ministers have had to scrape together what they can to be able to fund the government's enormous tax cuts for the wealthiest in society. It is now once again clear that it is the most vulnerable people in our country who are to pay for high-income earners' tax cuts.
I cannot put into words how distressed I and many others with me are by the minister's and the Sverigedemokraternas actions. I want to once again appeal to Sverigedemokraterna and the government: Think about the service centers!
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! Erik Slottner says that there are people who live in municipalities without service offices. Yes, I think that sounds like a good argument for expanding the service offices to more municipalities. It sounds like a bad argument for closing every fourth office.
Slottner continues to assert that it is efficiency that is to be achieved in this activity. It is an activity that shall ensure that citizens, regardless of where in the country they live, shall have reasonable proximity to a physical office where they can get help with matters at the largest citizen-facing authorities. They shall have it regardless of where in the heartland they live.
If one has efficiency as a guiding principle for such an activity, it will be the offices in the large cities that remain, where one can maintain a high frequency of visits and a low cost per visit. In the heartland, the offices will have to close when Erik Slottner puts efficiency before public benefit and the heartland.
I still think it is a cowardly strategy of the government to shift this onto the agency. Piteå-Tidningen reported on the closure of the office in Piteå, which, by the way, will take place on March 31 this year. Piteå-Tidningen then contacted Erik Slottner, who very pleasantly was able to refer to the agency. He did not even need to comment on the issue in the local press and in the office most directly concerned. It is an incredibly cowardly strategy. I think Erik Slottner should take responsibility and come to Piteå and tell the citizens there why they should not have any service from state agencies.
Peter Hedberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I must admit that I too was quite surprised that the Minister, in his previous answer, tried to portray it as something to be satisfied with, that a move from 148 service offices to 113 would be a positive thing. I would like to say, just as previous speakers have pointed out, that there are all the arguments to expand this activity in the municipalities where service offices are lacking. Many sector authorities have indeed withdrawn from these municipalities.
Then I cannot help but bring up what the Minister was touching upon regarding the issue of walking distance. I do not think that any of those who have debated this issue tonight believe that there is walking distance to the nearest service office for everyone. From Nordingrå to Kramfors, I believe it is 40 kilometers. I believe that from Överturingen to Ånge centrum it is about 60 kilometers.
We can take a very long cycling distance and compare it with Vätternrundan, which is 315 kilometers. Is it a reasonable distance, as the Minister thinks, that one should have to the nearest service office? I ask because we still do not get any answer on what political assessments should be included when it concerns this type of cut. It just goes back to the fact that it is the authority that has the responsibility to decide where the individual offices should be located.
I wonder what opportunity Statens servicecenter has to calmly do what the Minister claims one wants to do – analyze where the service centers are most needed – when one has a knife to one's throat. They are constantly looking at the length of the lease agreements and at where they can save money the fastest, not at where the needs are greatest. I ask the Minister again: What room for maneuver have the reductions of 150 million kronor over three years given Statens servicecenter?
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I naturally invite the opposition to the grateful smash position they received here. But what I said, which could certainly be misinterpreted intentionally or unintentionally, was actually a reaction from my side to what was said earlier. I have never said that I believe the opposition thinks that everyone has walking or cycling distance to a service office. But it sounded in earlier contributions here as if one cannot carry out errands related to Pensionsmyndigheten, Skatteverket, or Arbetsförmedlingen if one does not have very close proximity to an office.
There was no argument for reducing office activities. But even today, there are very many people living in a municipality that has no service office but which obviously manages these services in some way anyway.
If the number of offices were to decrease by 35 - which we do not know yet - we would be back at the same level as in 2019. Stefan Löfven was Prime Minister then, if I remember correctly. There was some form of state presence in Sweden even during his period as Prime Minister. One makes it sound as if we are going back to some time when everything was in Stockholm. So that is not the case.
The principles that have been developed are important. Efficiency is one of the principles. I think it is important; I stand for it. Efficiency is one of my three keywords as Civil Minister. I think that the state should be efficient. We shall also be careful about where we spend the tax money.
But it is not the only principle that guides the authority when it is now to take a position on what the office operations should look like. It is actually about accessibility and service throughout the country. Even though Peder Björk looks very skeptical, we have interpreted this as that the FA-areas are good when it comes to measuring this.
It is also about accessibility based on visitor volumes and needs, which is also, of course, important to measure. Efficiency, needs, and regional policy shall form the basis for the agency's decisions regarding office operations.
As I have said in previous posts, I also want to emphasize that Statens servicecenter is not just about presence through fixed offices. There are other solutions, especially mobile offices, which I am convinced will need to be used more. I have said this in interviews but also in assignments and steering documents to the agency. It is about using more flexible office solutions to increase accessibility for more citizens in that way.
Since then, the government has allowed the authority to have a higher appropriation saving for this year, precisely so that one can make decisions as well-considered as possible when one now needs to reduce the office volume. This is therefore not solely to have to do with the length of the lease agreements and so on. One has received a higher appropriation saving, which I think was very welcome that we were able to achieve.
We also talked about state presence and what it means for me. Yes, but the state is present throughout the entire country today. It is not the case that it is only present through Statens servicecenter and through state service offices. Many other agencies are decentralized around Sweden, either with headquarters or with what is called satellite offices, i.e., agencies that exist in several different locations.
We are carrying out historically large increases within the Armed Forces, the Police Authority, and the judiciary. These are state jobs that benefit all of Sweden. The County Administrative Board, which exists in all 21 regions, receives increased appropriations this year for civil defense, for example. There is therefore much other state presence than state service offices.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thanks to the Minister and the other interpellants!
It was now the third time that the minister said from the rostrum that there shall be a service office in every FA-region. I can interpret that as that there will be no closure in Ludvika. I imagine that Leif Pettersson, who is the chairman of the municipal executive board in Ludvika and who is watching this debate, is happy about this.
In Ludvika, Hitachi now has an order backlog of 400 billion kronor. That corresponds to a third of the state budget. They are entering their third year, and they are hiring three people a day. Nordic Iron Ore is going to open mining in the municipality, and Spendrups in Grängesberg is investing and expanding. Many cabinet ministers want to come to Ludvika and cut ribbons, but what does the government and SD do when the business sector invests and the municipality grows? They leave! It is as the chairman of the municipal executive board in Ludvika, Leif Pettersson, said in Nya Ludvika Tidning: The state cannot just leave from here.
It is, however, exactly what is happening. Here in the chamber, there have been debates about the state film archive that was closed in Grängesberg and about the lack of infrastructure for industry in Västerbergslagen. There have been debates about cuts to passenger transport for commuting and about the over-implementation of the water directive which risks turning large parts of Ludvika municipality into swampland – we could close both the laundry and the ski resort. And now the state is going to close the service office.
Madam Speaker! The Government and SD do not lack money. They simply prioritize other things. They prioritize lower taxes for high-income earners higher than healthcare for everyone, trains that run on time, and state services throughout the country. They also always prioritize the city over the countryside. It is not a Sweden that holds together.
What KD meant by "the heartland" in the election campaign is incredibly difficult to know, but this debate has shown that it is in any case not Ludvika, Piteå, Östhammar, Sandviken, Bollnäs, Ovanåker, Arjeplog, Mariestad, Kramfors or the inland of Västerbotten.
Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)
Madam Speaker! It is clear that the government does not prioritize that the whole country should live or that there should be a state presence.
In addition to the closure of service offices, there are constantly several announcements about authorities that are to move to Stockholm instead of being located around the country. To counter the centralization, clear political counterforces are needed. A government was needed that has the will and the courage to point the finger at Myndighetssverige so that they take responsibility for ensuring the whole country.
This is what the Social Democratic government did. We were not satisfied with how it looked in 2019, but we wanted it to be in a different way. We saw how new agencies were placed in towns around the country and how existing agencies were relocated. We established many new state service offices around the entire country, which primarily offer valuable and everyday service to people and companies. They have also come to signal the political shift to people and companies: that the state, not least in our rural municipalities, shall be something more than just Systembolaget.
It is, however, becoming increasingly clear that the SD government thinks that tax cuts for high-income earners are more important than having a well-functioning welfare state and a society where citizens can trust that the state is there for them.
Isak From (S)
Madam Speaker! I continue where I left off, namely with the State Service Centers' own website. It appeared very clearly in the answers when they were asked why they had visited the service center that the most common reason was that they had been advised to do so by another sector authority or by a family member. One has, for example, received advice from Försäkringskassan, Arbetsförmedlingen, or Skatteverket to visit a service center in order to be able to receive the help one actually needs.
The vast majority had first attempted to resolve their matter on the digital web service, but failed. Part of my question is also what the government is doing to facilitate things for people who do not have this ability. Yes, at least one does not enable folkbildningen to take over this task, or to provide education. Now we see in area after area that studieförbunden – as a result of the government cutting back – are also cutting back. Most often this occurs in the smaller municipalities, which often lack a state service office.
The Minister refers in his writing also to the National Audit Office, and the National Audit Office has in the same report also clarified that there are savings in locating agencies outside of Stockholm. There is cost-effectiveness, because you have a more loyal staff when you locate outside of the metropolitan areas.
Now the government actively chooses to shift the cost from the state to the individual having to bear the cost themselves.
Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! It is worth reminding that we do, in fact, have a state presence all around Sweden. That is something that this government is not changing in any way. I heard Ida Ekeroth Clausson talk about several announcements regarding agency moves back to Stockholm. What is that nonsense? What are these "several announcements"? We can come back to that if necessary.
When new agencies are formed, they should be placed outside of Stockholm, but this government has more focus on reducing the number of agencies. We do not want to build a lot of new agencies. It cannot be ruled out that some more agency will be created because it is needed, but otherwise, the direction is to reduce the number of agencies.
I think that many times there is a bit too much focus on where the headquarters itself is located. I think that one should be able to work with being active in different parts, i.e., that the entire agency does not need to be in one place. I am thinking, for example, of one of my agencies, Digg. It is an agency that exists in both Sundsvall and Stockholm, to mention an example. It is very much possible that more agencies could work in that way.
We are also now seeing a very large expansion of state presence in the form of the expansion of the judiciary, the Prison and Probation Service, the Armed Forces and the total defense, which in turn affects the county administrative boards. These are state jobs that will benefit all of Sweden.
I also received a direct question about how I want to facilitate things for those who have difficulty using and perhaps today lack mobile BankID for various reasons. When it comes to this, the state is now working on – and they have come far in the work – to develop a state e-identification. It is to be made both safer, more secure and more accessible to be able to identify oneself digitally so that even more people can do this.
Lars Isacsson says that the government does not lack money. I feel quite often that we do. I would gladly have a few billion more to spend on both one and the other, but we do not have an inexhaustible source that we can draw money from. They are limited resources even when it comes to money, also for this government.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.