Diary journal on Regionalism in Sweden 2005. 

Sweden has been trying to regionalise the political and public administration sectors for almost 15 years. As a state with a long tradition of centralised government the progress is slow and tedious. This document contains personal reflections about the process as expressed in this Blog for the year 2005. Regard it as a form of diary journal of what going on in Sweden in the field of Regionalism. Documents for 2006b and 2007 will follow.

Sunday, January 30, 2005
The Island of Bornholm
It is interesting that the debate on the future of the Island of Bornholm has now started. This island has historically been a part of Skåneland (Scania), together with the other three provinces Halland, Skåne and Blekinge. In connection with the military expansion of State of Sweden during the late 17th century the provinces of Scania was separated and Skåne divided into two parts. Rule by division!

By clever manoeuvres by the inhabitants of Bornholm, the island was returned to Denmark. And that is the way it has been for past few hundred years. The question now is: how will Bornholm find its place in the new open Europe where the state borders are reduced in importance and more emphasize is put on the Logic of the Geography?

With Skåne and the rest of the historic Scania? Or with the present Denmark which lies further away? This is the questions asked in an article published in Bornholmske Tidene. However, any attempt to recreate old ties across state borders is bound to create animosity between to bitter enemies – Stockholm and Copenhagen.

What the article does not mention is the possibility of close cooperation between parties that share the same problem and probably have the same remedies to solve them, namely the three large islands of the Baltic – Åland, Gotland and Bornholm. The Island Region of the Baltic.

Saturday, April 09, 2005
Scattering the State
During this week the Government and the State parliament have decided to move a number of public state authorities from the Capital to sparsely populated areas of Sweden. This manoeuvre was designed to compensate for the recent closure of military bases around the country. And this is not the first time. A number of public state authorities has been moved to the periphery over the years. Although never to Skåne. This time they go to Arvidsjaur, Östersund, Kristinehamn, Karlstad och Gotland.

There is only one thing worse than state centralism and that is scattered state centralism. Prior to dispersing state authorities, anyone – public or private – wanting to do business with the state government could go to the Capital and negotiate for one’s cause. Now you have to travel like a globetrotter around the country in order to conduct your daily business. If you areable find out where the heck they are located to in the first place.

Instead of decentralising the public decision making process to the regions (and that is what European regionalism is all about) the government is going in the opposite direction. The State is tightening its rein on the people by dispersing the state authorities and making it less accessible. Instead of the other way around.

Why does Sweden always seem to go backwards into the future?

Saturday, April 09, 2005
"The State is dying"
Six years ago, in 1999, the undersigned and Peter Broberg, professor and architect, published a book – “Regionalism in the Prospect of the 21st Century” (“Regionalismen inför 2000-talet”). In the book we predicted that the European state will eventually collapse under the pressure of its own weight. It has become increasingly unable to satisfy the basic needs of the people. It is simultaneously too large and too small. Too large for culture, language and identity. Too small for economy, mass media, technological advances and the free movement across state borders of people and businesses.

Today the regional tabloid Kvällsposten refers too a seminar where the future of the state was discussed. The paper has now – six years later - come to the same conclusion. The State is too large and too expensive to cater for the individual needs of people. The headline reads: “The Big State dies – the welfare lives on”. How nice it would be if the state leaders would realise that the State has come to the end of the road and make a graceful exit. The formula is “European Regionalism” and the recipe is in the book “Regionalismen inför 2000-talet”.

It would be nice and educational if those in power in Stockholm could read the article in Kvällsposten. Unfortunately this cannot be done since the paper is owned by the Stockholm based Expressen (Bonnier). The two papers share Expressen's webpage with the consequence that we in Scania have Internet access to the editorials of Expressen but those in Stockholm do not have access to the editorials in Kvällsposten. Too bad.

 
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Less is more?
There are strong forces on the move to close down the regional parliament in Skåne – Region Skåne. It was introduced as late as in 1999. The reason is, the Swedish Government representatives say, that Region Skåne is not able to run and operate the public health and medical services. Instead they want to centralise it to the state level.

The former Party Secretary of the Social Democrats is suggesting in an article in Dagens Nyheter that the directly elected regional government in Skåne should be replaced by an indirectly elected regional board. That is, the politicians themselves will elect the members of the regional governing board. He says:

“Who loves the elected Regional Government in Skåne?” And he continues to propagate for the other alternative. He says: “An indirectly elected governing board does not need to be less democratic than a directly elected parliament.”

What is the man saying? Less democracy is more democracy? This is just another example of the Orwellian Newspeak. There is an obvious risk that both the political left and right in the state parliament in Stockholm will join forces and abolish the democratically elected regional government in Skåne. Again, Sweden is moving backwards into the future.

 
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Regions and Identity
The first class Internet newsletter Gränsbrytning discusses regionalism in Scandinavia, Sweden in particular, in a very interesting and well-informed way. In fact, Gränsbrytning is the one periodical most knowledgeable in Sweden on regionalism in Europe and in the European Union. Unfortunately, Gränsbrytning is only published in Swedish.

“Identity – important means of competition” says one headline. How rare it is to see the question of regional identity discussed in Swedish mass media. Anyone, companies or individuals, bringing up the issue of the existence of a Scanian regional identity runs a tangible risk of being accused of separatism and xenophobia. In the Swedish PC rhetoric regional identity (particularly in Skåne) is the same “misguided nationalism” and “exclusion of immigrants”.

It is therefore most uncommon by producers of goods and services to use Scanian names and symbols when trying to compete on the market. The words Scania, Skåne and Scanians are so tainted by centuries of anti-Scanian propaganda in Sweden (hatred against Skåne and Denmark, so well described by Wilhelm Moberg) that companies are reluctant to use the Scanian identity as an important tool for competing on the marketplace. It also affects the Scanian self-image negatively. And that’s bad as well.

Saturday, April 23, 2005
Regions or no regions?
At the end of May, in a month time, the government inquiry Ansvarsutredningen will present its findings about the future of the regions in Sweden. The head of the inquiry Mats Svegfors is the State Governor in the County of Västmanland. The future of the regional parliament – Region Skåne - is at stake. We know that the important leaders of the two largest parties in Sweden - the Social Democrats and Moderaterna – want to abolish the regional political level altogether and only have two in the future – the state and local governments. Is the State servant Mats Svegfors going to confirm what the centralists in Stockholm have already decided?

The important question is: what does the Scanians think? When are we, the little people, being informed by our regional politicians? And what do they think? Where is the popular debate on one of today’s most important question? Can we expect that the debate will take place during the five minute regional television program Sydnytt the government has awarded the Scanians daily in the state television?

The public servants of the Association of Local Governments and Landsting in Stockholm claim to have had an internal debate on the subject in the form of workshops. Some of them believe that the concept of medical and health services should determine the geographical regions of the future. Some are of the opinion that patterns of daily commuting should be the determining factor. Why can’t these people get out of their comfortable hiding places behind bureaucratic curtains and discuss the matter openly so the regular people is given the chance of participation? After all, it is our future that is at stake here.

"Mats Svegfors wishes a debate on the issue of the Regions", says one headline. Isn’t it rather typical that the Government presents controversial proposals either just before Christmas when people are about to celebrate the holyday season or just before the summer vacation period when people have other things to do than engaging in serious business like the future of the regions in Sweden.

Sunday, April 24, 2005
Region Confused?
Next month the government’s public inquiry Ansvarskommittén will present its findings on a new political and administrative distribution of responsibilities in Sweden. Its Chairman Mats Svegfors hopes for a broad public debate on the subject. And a region reform we need. The regional division in Sweden is grotesque. Each public authority has divided the Sweden into its own functional region, one not like any other. For instance, my little town Eslöv (30 000 inh.) has two telephone prefixes. And so on.

Let’s take another example - the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Southern Sweden (Sydsvenska Handelskammaren). It covers the provinces of Skåne, Blekinge, half Halland and half Småland. They have the full right to determine their own boundaries since they are an association of businessmen, but it would be in much better taste if their region corresponded with other “regions”. And besides, who gives any party - public or private - the right to split ancient historical provinces such as Halland and Småland in half?

Another region is the historical and cultural region Skåneland consisting of the former Eastern Denmark, which many people and organisations in the cultural and linguistic sector are promoting.

In the middle of this mess we have a regional elected political body covering only the Province of Skåne.

Confused? It’s getting worse! We also have the EU-region consisting of the provinces of Skåne and Blekinge. There is no political body covering the EU-region “Sydsverige”. Instead, the State via the County Administrations, is in charge of all relations with the EU structural funds. No wonder we continue to be a net-payer to the EU, knowing the poor efficiency of large administrative systems.

Not to mention the myriad of ad-hoc “regions” created for various Interreg and interstate projects.

It appears obvious that this messy and muddled regional division in Sweden makes regional politicians impotent. This regional confusion and impotency only benefits one party – the Central State. And that is the way it will be in the future. Unless Ansvarskommittén can come up with some bright ideas next month. But I doubt it.

PS. Here is an example of what a beautiful regional division of Sweden could have looked like. It is beautiful, because it satisfies many aspects of a successful decentralisation in many areas of the society – administrative, political, economic, industrial, environmental (the logic of the geography) and historical/cultural. But - since when has autocratic political systems voluntarily opted for beautiful solutions?

Sunday, May 01, 2005
Who will take the fight!
“Take a fight for the regional self-rule”, said a headline in Kvällsposten last week. The article is written because of a new book on regional self-rule by Tomas Ekberg, a political analyst in the Region of Västra Götaland. The reason for the editorial is that there is a danger that the two biggest parties in the Riksdag will support the closure of the regional parliament after next election in 2006 (Regionfullmäktige – Region Skåne) and the Landsting (elected bodies in charge of medical and health-services in the counties - län), which they have indicated.

The question to the editor at Kvällsposten’s editorial page is this: Who is going to do the fighting?

The regional and local politicians who would be the proper group to do the fighting for us are apparently weak and inactive (unless they are engaged in acts of “silent diplomacy” with the State Government). We have hardly heard a peep on the subject from our regional politicians since the change of power three years ago. Tomas Ekberg writes in another report about this political impotency on the regional and local levels: “It is still difficult to se how big future prospects and development issues can be actively pursued with one voice” …. “Besides, the regional and local scope of activities is limited by state directives and legislation and their dependency on state grants”.

Maybe the Swedish members of the Committee of Regions do the fighting for us? But they are also weak since it is uncertain both for them and for us who their principal master is.

The EU Parliamentarians? Well, they are not elected personally but are mostly selected by their political mother party. Would they take a fight that goes against those who sent them to Brussels?

The local politicians? With a few exceptions, they do not seem at all interested in the future of the regional self-rule.

So, Mr Kvällsposten Editor, there doesn't seem to be anybody ready to take the fight for a permanent elected regional government in Skåne. Except maybe you. And perhaps me, through this Blog. And, I am sure, the Swedish EU Commissioner Margot Wallström - she knows what the EU is all about. But will she take the fight for us?

 
Sunday, May 08, 2005
Differentness?
In today’s Sydsvenskan, the largest regional newspaper, is an article on a relatively new magazine called “Magasin Skåne”. It is about the province of Skåne, sometime referred to in the article as a “region”. The publisher is interviewed in length.

The slogan in the present issue of “Magasin Skåne” is “The New Good Life”. The publisher is suggesting that the state level is on the decline in Europe and the regions is moving up. He talks about the importance of a regional identity as a platform for the development of the future. And the magazine's definition of regional identity is regional good food, cultural events and a good life on the countryside. That’s all.

The journalist does apparently not like the idea of a Scanian identity and tries to manoeuvre the publisher of the magazine into the corner of Skåne equals xenophobia. In his eagerness to throw suspicion on Scanian initiatives, he uses a seldom used word for something odd and suspicious: “annorlundahet” (“differentness”). Regionalists are suspicious, the journalist suggests, because they base their concept on “annorlundahet” and nostalgia and not on a belief in the future. The publisher objects and suggests that this is not a correct assumption. The regionalists, he says, need the history as a tool to define their spirit of community, fellowship and their unique situation.

But the journalist presses on and says that “there are those” (read: he does) who think that “neo-regionalism (read: the Scanian regionalism) is something "murky and obscure", on the “borderline of racist”. The question is, why do Swedish journalists, in an otherwise respected news media, pursue this line of questioning as soon as the issues of Skåne and Scanian identity are brought up?

With the Swedish “racism-cloud” hanging over Skåne, no wonder why people are reluctant to express their Scanian feelings and thoughts and be proud of their background. Are other regions in Europe exposed to the same unpleasant journalistic tactics? Or is it just us?

 
Sunday, May 08, 2005
Peace in Europe
Today is the 60th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. Tomorrow, on the 9th of May, it is exactly 55 years since the French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman announced his plans for a unified Europe. His foresight was incredible; his plan for Europe (which started with a super state control of steel and coal of which guns are made), is still working and has developed into what is the European Union of today.

It is important, on this anniversary of Peace in Europe, to remind ourselves of the motives of the “founding fathers” of the European Union, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet: “No more wars to originate from European soil”.

Their insights of the mechanisms which start wars, and their recipe to prevent them, has led to a non-war Europe for 60 years. Those of us who are reaching sixty years of age belong, in fact, to the first generation to live a peaceful life without a war in Europe. For which we are Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet very grateful.

What was the core of their insight? Did Bavaria or Slesvig-Holstein start wars? No, it has always been the central government in Berlin doing that. Did Scotland or Wales start wars? No, it has always been the central government of the UK. Did Bretagne or Normandy start wars? No, it has always been the central government of France. Wherever you look in the world you find that it is the central governments who are demonstrating their inability to get along with their neighbours. With almost frightening regularity the central state governments have been, and still are, producing despotic leaderships who made life miserable for ordinary people.

So, the recipe, according to Schuman and Monnet, is to phase out the central states’ previous "sovereignty" (in another word: to do what they please) and share the power between two other levels of authority. One up: to the European Union and one down: to the Regions of Europe. This is the main thread and the connecting thought one can perceive right through the various EU treaties from Rome to Nice. It is the basic idea behind the new treaty that the European central states presently are in agony about (nobody likes loosing power for any reason!).

To phase out the central states, with their violent pasts, in favour of a common Europe and stronger European regions is behind the phrase “The European Union is a Peace Project”. It is my humble opinion that those who object to the new European constitution, knowingly or not, favour future wars and other conflicts on European soil.

For those who think that new violent conflicts in Europe are unthinkable. Think again. It only takes a certain charismatic party leader (for instance: in France), an engaging subject (for instance: immigrants and refugees) and a propaganda friendly mass media (for instance: a major state television station) and the polished boots will again be marching in Europe.

Today is the anniversary of the end of the Second Word War and tomorrow is the anniversary of Schuman’s plan to stop future warmongers in Europe.

Friday, May 20, 2005
”Hate the French”
“Europe unites in hating the French”, said one headline in a Swedish tabloid the other day and referred to a survey made in different European countries. Suddenly it has become fashionable to hate the French. One Google on the phrase “Hate the French” gives more than 24 000 hits and increasing by the day..

The Swedes hate the Danes and the other way around. The British hate the Germans and the French hate the Americans. The Chinese hate the Japanese and the Indians hate the Pakistanis and so on.

When Englishmen say they hate the French who do the actually hate? All citizens of France? The Bretons? The inhabitants of Provencal? French cooking? French wine? The French identity? Or the French Government? Or perhaps the target of their hatred is Jacques Chirac himself and/or his ruling party?

I know people from both Bretagne and Provencal who are totally without any hateable attitudes. I know Iraqis, Iranians and Afghans who are the nicest people who want nothing else than living a decent life in peace, raising their children and earn food on the table. And yet inhabitants of Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan are hated just because they come from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Etcetera.

What is it with the state system that makes ordinary kind and peaceful people go around hating other people whom they, in most cases, have never met? Do state leaders, due to the lack of actual popular legitimacy, need hateable objects in order to stand out in its goodness, just as the Church needs the Devil?

Somehow we have to put an end to this state-nationalistic hating-business. For the sake of the sanity of all human beings and also, if for no other reason, for the sake of industry. Today there are Danes who do not want to buy a Volvo because they hate the Swedes. Englishmen do not buy BMW because the hate the “Krauts” and Americans do not buy Peugeot because they hate the French. Ridiculous? Yes, but that is the way it is.

Saturday, June 04, 2005
The EU is dead. Long live the EU!
”The Constitution is Dead!” The Swedish naysayers are having a field day after the referendums in France and the Netherlands. Happy and loud naysayers are publicly voicing their hope that the referendums also mean that the European Union is dead and the sooner Sweden leaves it the better. The naysayer political parties are accused of having a concealed agenda for getting Sweden out of the Union. There are some 5000 pages in Swedish popping up, increasing by the day, when Googleing on the phrase “ut ur EU” (out of the EU).

Another naysayer political party, Junilistan, was successful in the last election to the European Parliament is now likely to make it to the Swedish Riksdag. "We feel joy and delight at the result in France and the Netherlands and the ratification process should immediately be suspended", the party proclaims on its webpage. “The will of the people must be respected and the process of ratifying the present constitution should be stopped”, says Junilistans founder and leader. Which “will” is he referring to and to which people, one may ask? The French? The Dutch? Or maybe the people of the nine member states that has already ratified the treaty? If nothing else, the Say-Non in France and the Netherlands only emphasise the need for the new treaty.  

Europe needs a strong leadership that will not be sabotaged by a minority of naysayers. It is time to abolish the present concealed and non-transparent decision making system and start trusting the common institutions of the union. We need a distinct and legitimate leadership of the EU. The result of the referendums in France and the Netherlands is that the old state system is not working anymore. In fact, anybody digging into the European history book can easily conclude that it never did.

 
Sunday, June 05, 2005
Growth - but elsewhere
The Swedish Growth List 2005 is sad reading for Scanians. Only two Scanian companies (Trial Form Support, Helsingborg and Resurs Bank, Helsingborg) made it to the list. Out of 44 companies. 21 are from Stockholm and its vicinity, half of all growth companies in the country. Trial Form Support is in the biotech and medical sector and Resurs Bank offers loans with little or no interest.

The growth list confirms the saying “all business is local”, meaning that those who control the cash also control the investments. Since Stockholm controls both “the cash” and “the politics” it is no wonder why the investors favour local investments in the growth sector of business.

Skåne neither controls the cash nor the politics. So the local and regional politicians can sit and feel sorry for themselves for having only two companies (number 5 and 34) on the list. As a consolation they created their own little “Skåne Growth List” together with the Stockholm owned (Bonniers) newspaper Sydsvenskan. While the strong business and political sectors in Stockholm are guiding investments to their own region, the weak political system in Skåne only allows responsible regional and local politicians to watch as spectators as “the cash” passes them by

The sad fact is also reflected in the unemployment figures for May 2005 (open and in various programs): Stockholm 5.3% and Skåne 8.4%. Out of the three major regions in Sweden, Scania is nearest to the European market and at the same time the poorest. Why is that? Maybe something for the regional politicians to think about?

Saturday, June 18, 2005
On his behind
The Swedish Prime Minister ”sat down and was dragged on his behind” was the headline in today’s Sydsvenskan. That is the rough translation of “Göran Persson satte sig på hasorna”. The article was about the negotiations in Brussels on the future of the EU. The headline was an allusion on a grumpy and stubborn donkey that doesn’t want to play ball in a team and must be dragged forward by the others. This is a very good metaphor of the situation in Brussels these days. A few European leaders are having a field day basking themselves in the political lime light, cheered on by their respective home audiences of Euro-sceptics.

We have a French leader who wants more European subsidies for his inefficient agricultural sector. We have a British leader who doesn’t want to pay the dues as the rest of the team. We have a Swedish leader who doesn’t really says what he wants, except that the EU should cut back on the volume of decision making and give back some to the State parliaments to worry about. The latter in plain language: less money to the EU and more to the state (presumably to cover deficits at home).

Sometimes you wonder to whom the EU belongs – the state leadership nomenclature or the people. The way the prime ministers and presidents are acting these days, the more obvious it gets that it is time for the little people to take charge of the European Union. This can only be done by starting to trust the EU institutions such as the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions. Let’s select the right people next time and give them the self-confidence and authority they need to take charge of the decisions they are presently denied by the member states. The state leaders must be kicked out from the undemocratic “Councils of Ministers”, which are presently deciding the future of Europe hidden behind closed doors.

The way the state leaders act in Brussels the more one realises how necessary it is to have the new EU treaty approved, ratified and implemented. As soon as possible.

Friday, July 08, 2005
Stateism or regionalism
One of Sweden’s more well-known bloggers does not appear to be a friend of regional identities and regional self-rule as a solution for Sweden. In one of his entries in his blog he says “No thank you” to political and administrative regionalisation of Sweden. He uses Skåne and Västra Götaland as examples and calls the present political set-up in Västra Götaland a “catastrophe”. He also claims that there are no regional identities in Sweden, except perhaps in Skåne. But, just because nobody talks about something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exists. By that statement He is demonstrating that he is basically just another centralist who denies basic facts about history – the history of how Sweden came about during Svealand’s expansionist era when new territories were added, either by military or colonial means.

He ends his blog as follows: “The regional and local development, which I naturally am very positive to, is best achieved by liquidating the Big State in Stockholm and make the citizens free so that they may, in voluntariness, develop the society in this global times. Regional political colossuses? No thank you!”

The blogger’s arguments remind me of a party which is balancing very near the percentage limit of being expelled from the state parliament – Centerpartiet (the Centre Party). On the one hand it advocates for “federalism” in Sweden, but it is very unclear of what they mean.
The party leader tried to make her analysis of her party’s definition of federalism - a Swedish variation. Her hope is that the wishes of the grass roots should somehow influence the state parliamentarians in a more pronounced way. But she failed to explain how this will come about.

The blogger’s fuzzy proposal doesn’t help. How can people, without political representation, develop the society in any direction? True, the present regional set-up is not the best, but it is all we have at the moment. As a political advocate, he should strive for making it better instead of abolish it altogether.

The Centerparty may call it “federalism”. I call it fuzzy. The Centerparty’s political storytelling does not hold together. The voters are, wisely enough, seeing through the party’s muddled political message. And as long as the Centerparty’s fuzzy story does not hold together, the party must accept the faith of a continued balancing act on the verge of being expelled from the state parliament. The party is almost totally eradicated in the City Hall in Malmö and is the second smallest party in the regional parliament in Skåne. That should tell the Blogger and the leadership of the Centre Party something.

“The time is up for the European state” is the headline of an article the undersigned had published a few weeks ago in a Centerparty publication “Rådslag”. You will find it here (in Swedish only). Another analysis for inspiration is perhaps this article: “Regionalism is the future!" (in Swedish).

 
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Power to the little people
The well known continues his debate on regionalism on his blog. He emphasises that he is not a centralist, i.e. he actually wants less to the state parliament and more to the “little people”. He wants stronger local governments and despises the idea of political regions. He says: “With strong local sovereignty, the local municipalities will become the centre of the democratic and political exercising of power. …. Thus: start with more power to the individual citizen, then we take the next step to the local democratic arena, the local municipality, for issues of welfare and cooperation and then to the state on principal issues, and the finally the European Union.” He may call it a recipe for decentralisation. I call it wishy-washy.

A prerequisite for European regionalism is political representation on the regional level, in between the local municipality and the state. The red thread in the various EU treaties - from Rome via Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice - is the bid for slowly diminishing the state sovereignty in favour of greater regional autonomy. (That’s probably why centralist governments like Sweden, France and the UK are scared stiff of the new EU treaty.) Regions are also the basis for distribution of wealth through EU’s structural funds (NUTS). The idea of a regional political division is also supported by the Council of Europe and the Assembly of European Regions.

The European regionalism constitutes no major problems for the European states which have a decentral or federal modern history. But central states like Sweden, Denmark and France have various degrees of difficulties with the prospect of transferring political powers to the regions. And this is particularly the case in Sweden.

There are 33 local municipalities in Skåne alone, a province of less than one million inhabitants. Each local municipality government is guarding its own political and administrative territory. Often are two neighbouring municipalities run by opposing political majorities (like Malmö and Vellinge) and they are often not even on speaking terms. I fail to see how the Blogger’s recipe for decentralisation of power in Sweden will materialise "from down and upwards". It sound more like centralistic wishful thinking than a realistic views on practical politics.

He has a past as a politician in the Centre Party (Centerpartiet). His ideas on regionalism / federalism is confusingly similar to the ideas the present leadership of the party brings forward. Interestingly enough many of the young people in the Centre Party, unlike Mr Blogger, seem to get the hang of what European regionalism is all about. The future is promising.

 
Thursday, July 21, 2005
To tell a story
The prominent Blogger is not open for debate. He sticks to his arguments on “federalism” and patronises in a very condescending way those who have a different point of view, like the undersigned. Further debate with him on the issue of regionalism is therefore pointless.

Only one political party – the Centre Party (Centerpartiet) – is marketing an opinion on the subject of decentralisation of the centralistic political powers in Sweden. The party leader proposes federalism as an alternative to today’s state centralism. That’s good. However, her story does not hold together.

Every good and credible story must have a beginning, a middle and an end. The Centre Party’s beginning is “federalism”. That’s okay – federalism is acceptable although the European brand of regionalism is preferable as a more realistic way forward. But the Centre Party’s middle – why does it want federalism and what it should look like – is muddled. It is here the party’s story starts to wobble. The Centre Party leader is showing the same shortcoming as most other Swedish politicians. It is one thing saying that one is in favour of something but then they fail to explain why in a clear and credible way.

Since the party leader fails in the middle part of the story there can not be a believable end to it. The story’s end should convey the party’s vision of what will be the result of the beginning and the middle of the federalism-tale.

The story of the Centre Party’s leader is suspiciously similar to the Blogger’s; muddled, unclear and wishy-washy. Since he is a noticeable ideologist with a close connection to the Centre Party in the past, one must assume that his opinions in this matter have influenced the party’s view on federalism. It should be noted that I am not the only one calling the party leader’s brand of “federalism” wishy-washy. On the editorial of one of Sweden’s largest newspaper – Svenska Dagbladet – on the 13 July 2005 one editorial writer makes the same analysis: “Despite her correctly-fitting choice of shoes, earthiness and her wishy-washiness about federalism …”

The Centre Party’s story on federalism does not hold together, which the voters have noticed. That is one reason why the party is, and has been for a long time, balancing dangerously close to the 4% hurdle to the state parliament, is the second smallest party in the regional parliament in Skåne and practically eradicated in the City of Malmö. In order to move onto safer grounds the party must get their “federalism” story together. To achieve this I recommend that the party leaders should do two tings: stop listening to Dick Erixon and begin to listen to the young people in the party. Read Rådslaget for a starter.

Monday, July 25, 2005
Human Cultural Rights
In April 2002 Scanian organisations met in Stockholm with a delegation from the Council of Europe – The Expert Committee of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Sweden ratified the Charter on 9 February 2000. Three prominent organisations from Scania met with the committee – Stiftelsen Skånsk Framtid, Skånska Akademien and the Scanian Regional Institute. The three organisations delivered a presentation on the situation in Scania.

The Committee’s subsequent report, published in June 2003, the following paragraphs were included:

§ 30. During its "on-the-spot visit" to Sweden the delegation of the Committee met representatives of the speakers of Scanian. The organisation "The Foundation for the Future of Scanian" also communicated a written comment to the Committee of Experts in accordance with paragraph 2 of article 16 of the Charter. During the meeting, the Scanian representatives made it clear that their aim was not to secure protection under the Charter for Scanian as a living regional or minority language, but to put an end to what they regarded as the unjustified neglect by the Swedish Government and Academia of the history and traditions of Scanian. They felt that a stigma was attached to the use of Scanian because of a lack of respect for these matters.

§ 31. Where there exists a linguistic continuum with persons in adjacent territories speaking variants similar to one another, the distinction between a language and a dialect can be a difficult question. It involves not only the linguistic criterion, but also often political, social, cultural and historical criteria. The Committee understands that there is an on-going debate in Sweden on the status of Scanian.

§ 32. The Committee is nevertheless concerned by any suggestions of prejudice used against a specific dialect or language, independent of the official definition of this idiom. The Committee notes with approval the proposals in the report of the Committee on the Swedish Language to ensure respect for local varieties of Swedish. It is hoped that this will go some way towards redressing the feelings of resentment, which the representatives of Scanian organisations expressed.

It has now been three years since the report was made public. The three Scanian organisations have been waiting in vain for the Swedish Government to initiate a dialogue as per recommendation by the Council. Either the Government has not read the report or it has no intention of following the recommendations from the Council of Europe. Knowing the Government’s long-lasting antipathy to the Scanian culture and language, it is probably the latter.

In a second report from the Council of Europe, this time from Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the following paragraph is included.

§ 19. The Advisory Committee notes that representatives of certain organisations from Scania and Gotland have made efforts to obtain from the Government a fuller recognition of, and support for, the specific linguistic and other concerns of the people residing in these regions, including in the context of the implementation of the Framework Convention. At the same time, the authorities are of the opinion that the persons residing in these areas do not constitute a national minority since they only speak dialects of the Swedish language. The Advisory Committee considers that the issue could be addressed through dialogue between persons belonging to the groups concerned and the authorities.

There has been no response or activities from the Swedish Government on this recommendation either. The organisations who met with The Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in April 2002 and The Expert Committee of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in November 2002 are still waiting in anticipation for any sign of life from the Swedish Government.

Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Interstate hate
Maybe as a result of the Denmark-bashing in Sydsvenskan the other day, the Danish tabloid Extrabladet is paying back. In a small article on 26 July the tabloid ExtraBladet is noting that the University of Lund is offering courses in Danish for Sweden’s unemployed academics. The headline reads: “Arbet schøges”, which means “Looking for work” but spoken by an alcoholic drunkard. The article is subsequently illustrated by a drunk Swede holding on to a lamppost.

The article continues: “It is about time the Scanians will get their old language back instead of the gibberish that has been forced upon them by hundreds of years of Swedish occupation.” It goes on making mockery of Swedish words and expressions and ends “whatever else they may have learned of Swedish obscenities”.

The Swedes hate the Danes and the Danes hate the Swedes. And that is the way it has been since the 16th Century. In the middle is Scania as a ping-pong ball, bashed - intentionally or not - by the big boys (Stockholm and Copenhagen) of the old State dinosaurs when they insult each other. This state-hating business must come to an end. Or, at least, please keep Scania out of it.

Friday, August 05, 2005
The Future of Copenhagen
Copenhagen is at the bottom of the population growth list, only a few cities (like Aalborg and Odense) have lower figures. Only 0.3% population growth per year anticipated until 2014. This figure should be compared to Oslo 1.9%, Stockholm 0.7%, Aarhus 0.84% and Malmö 0.8%. It must be a chock for the leading politicians in Copenhagen to realise that there is a considerable growth on either side of the two bridges leading away from the capital.

It is quite obvious that one growth potential for Copenhagen is the one million inhabitants on the other side of the Öresund. But here we have the same old state problem. It is unbelievable that, according to an article in Kvällsposten 11 June, a person from Copenhagen working at the University of Lund and lives near his work on the Scanian side of the bridge, looses his voting rights in Denmark. It is also not allowed for two cities like Helsingborg and Helsingør, only fifteen minutes apart by ferry, to construct a common education or training institution (“gymnasium”).

This is just a few examples of how the European state system, with rigid state borders, is laying its paralysing hand over regional growth opportunities. Skåne and Sjælland have 1000 years of common history and the logic of the geography dictates that it should have a common future as well. This does not seem to make any difference to the state centralists who vigorously guards the state border lines. Or is that the actual reason?

The Lille Havfru has all reasons in the world to show a sad face.

Tuesday, August 09, 2005
Where you least expect it
“The regions must have a right to self-determination, have the right to direct taxation and in the future be represented in a two-chamber parliament on the state level. In the state parliament the regionally elected chamber shall be some sort of watch-dog, making sure that the directly elected state parliament chamber are not taking decisions which curtails the local self-rule. …. In other words, a federally governed state.”

Who said that? Well, it wasn’t a German Länder politician for whom this set-up is the most natural thing in the world. Nor was it an official in the EU commission. Or a Scot in the new Scottish parliament. IT WAS A SWEDISH POLITICIAN! For the first time in modern history has an established mainstream politician in Sweden said the un-sayable.

The political secretary of the Centerparty was interviewed in one of the largest newspapers in Sweden - Jöran Hägglund. Is it a one-off case? No, I don’t think so. The other day the party leader Maud Olofsson was the guest at Carl Bildts dinner table on his TV talk show on Channel 8. She was unmistakeably clear on the question of regionalism. Strong local government, strong regions and, subsequently, not so strong state in several political areas, she said.

Now, that’s good news for a devoted regionalist like the undersigned. There are only a few unclear areas to worry about. Will the Centerparty advocate for a beautiful regional division or will it continue on the path of the not so beautiful solution which was introduced by the Government in 1999? In other words, will the regional borders follow the existing historic borders or will the Centerparty’s regions be mutilated regions (like the existing “one-out-of-three-provinces- Skåne”) or an illogical mishmash of provinces with no or little historic identities (like the Västra Götaland).

The second worry is that the Centerparty is a small party, wobbling just above the 4 % limit to the state parliament. There are reasons to suspect that, on the state level, the two mastodon parties in Riksdag want to abolish the regions altogether. The fact that the Centerparty now has brought the issue of regionalism onto the political arena is good, but how will it convince the other parties that its vision is the only realistic way forward? I guess we just have to wait and see were the Centerparty is going before a support becomes obvious and natural for a regionalist like myself.

 
Saturday, September 10, 2005
Regionalism a la Suede
The Swedish Government’s inquiry on a new political and administrative organisation in Sweden was supposed to deliver its first report on its findings in May this year (the final report in 2007). As far as I have been able to determine, no report was presented at that time. Why? Could it be that the largest political party in power, the Social Democrats, has changed its position on the subject? It looks that way, which reinforces my suspicion that the main purpose of public inquiries is to confirm and legitimise decisions already taken by the Government. It must obviously be very hard for an inquiry chairman to present his findings if the government opinion changes 180 degrees in the middle of his work period.

In December 2004 the responsible minister in the Government, Sven-Erik Österberg voiced his opinion that “the Scanian regional self-government is a threat to a strong Sweden”. Generally speaking the minister expressed a certain unwillingness to support the idea of a regional self-government for the future.

In the last six months something has happened in the hallways of power in the Government. This month the same minister publishes a debate article in Sydsvenskan in which he expresses his (new?) opinion that the regions (particularly in Skåne) has worked well and that the “regional trial” should be expanded to more areas of Sweden. That’s good!

In another newspaper article the minister concludes again that the regional experiment in Skåne has ”worked well” and that an elected regional government with the right of direct taxation is needed for the future. Again, that’s good!

But there is a fly in the ointment. He goes on to say that there are too many county councils in Sweden, twenty-one of them, in fact. The number has to be reduced to 8-10, he says. Then, typically of the Swedish anti-cultural establishment, he suggest that the regional government (of Skåne) should expand and include one half of Halland and one half of neighbouring Småland (The Kronoborg county). Sweden is probably the only state in Europe to come up with the idea of cutting old historic regions into pieces and hand them over to their neighbours. Mr. Minister, if there is a beautiful regional division, why create an ugly one? And one more thing, Mr Minister. Former French President Mr Mitterand gave us one good advice before he passed away: “If there in one thing the history of Europe has taught us and that is never to play with borders”. Halland has almost one-thousand years history with Skåne and Blekinge. Doesn’t that account for anything?

 
Saturday, September 10, 2005
Regionalism and the Opposition
In the previous blog contribution I had a look at the position of the main political party presently in charge of the state government in Sweden – the Social Democrats – on the issue of regional self-government. But where does the opposition stand on this issue?

Yesterday the four party coalition leaders in opposition visited Skåne on their election campaign tour across the country. The next election is in exactly 12 months from now. On the day prior to the visit the regional head of the political party Moderaterna in Skåne (centre-right conservative) had published a debate article in the regional newspaper Sydsvenskan. He argued strongly for a greater regional self-government in Skåne - “a requirement for Skåne to become a growth-motor for Sweden".

But his party chief did not agree. On the question if they supported the concept of regional self-rule the leaders of the three other parties making the coalition (The Alliance) answered Yes to this question. The leader of the state level party Moderaterna said No. He wanted only two levels in the future – the state and the local levels. That’s all.

The question is: will the three Yes-parties of the Alliance be able to persuade the Moderaterna in Stockholm to change its position on the subject before the election? Or will it become a coalition deal-breaker? As a regionalist I think I will follow the development carefully before casting the vote at next year’s election.

Saturday, September 24, 2005
Net Payer to the EU
In a small note in yesterday’s newspaper it was observed that Sweden is the second largest percentage net payer to the European Union. Only beaten by The Netherlands. Sweden paid last year 24 billion kronor as dues to the EU. It got ten billion back, mainly in the form of support to the agricultural sector. Also Germany, France, Austria, Denmark and Finland paid more that they got back. Why has Sweden not managed to get a better return on their “investment”?

In 1996, just after Sweden had joined the EU, I had the privilege of having a personal meeting with the head of the DG16 – the department in the EU Commission in charge of the EU regional policies. I still remember his comments on Sweden:

“Sweden has a tendency of running their regional policy through central state authorities and agencies. It does not yet have a regional structure which more efficiently deals with the regional support program within the framework of EU’s structural funds. It is with reluctance we allow regional support money to take the detour through the state government. The regions know best what their problems are and also know best how to solve them.”

As long as the Swedish government, through the State County Authority (Länsstyrelsen) persists in running the regional contacts with the EU commission for regional support, I am afraid that we would have to continue to be a considerable net payer to the Union. Unfortunately there are many Euro-sceptics in Sweden who is blaming EU for the poor results instead of looking at the Government’s unwillingness to accept European realities.

Sunday, September 25, 2005
Rubberband Götaland
The region of Götaland is a originally a specific region in Mid-Sweden (actually a twin-region – West Gothia and East Gothia) with specific historic borders, history and to some extent its own cultural identity. The Region of Svealand is another region in Sweden, which always harboured dreams of big power. The two regions joined forces more than a millennium ago in some sort of loose union that has developed into what can be called the Svecia Propria of today. Some five hundred years ago the expansionist Svealand decided that Svecia Propria was not enough. So the Svealand decided to gobble up the Region of Småland and suddenly the Rubberband border of Götaland was stretched to include this region as well. Småland had become part of Götaland.

Then the old Danish land of Bohus was also consumed up by Svecia Propria and included in the ever growing Götaland. In 1658, probably the largest and most experienced military army in Europe under the Svealand king Karl X, invaded the Danish mainland and walked away with Scania - the provinces of Skåne, Halland and Blekinge (but missed the Island of Bornholm). And zip! – the Rubberband borders of Götaland was again stretched to include the newly conquered Scania. Already in the late 17th Century the maps were reprinted in which the Region of Scania was renamed Southern Götaland.

Okay, that’s history and one would think that after two world wars, much because of squabble between states about borders, we would have learned from history not to play with borders. But - oh no! The Swedish Government are still playing with borders as if nothing has happened. As a result of the new regional division contemplated by the inquiry commission for a new regional set-up for Sweden – Ansvarskommittén – a number of proposals are flourishing in the press. One historic province moved to here, another to there and one split in the middle. And so on.

When will someone propose the obvious – the beautiful regional division following the historic borders and the logic of the geography? When will the Swedish government realise that the European experience is to avoid at all cost to play with borders? The whole point of the European Union is to learn to cooperate across the borders and not change them.

Sunday, September 25, 2005
Thoughts on Freedom
There are some 7-9000 nations and peoples in the world; many stand the risk of loosing their cultures and languages. Others live in severe poverty and still others are exposed to state violence. Many of these nations and peoples are governed by others, often from far away state capitals. This is sometimes referred to as the Fourth World (one definition: “Nations forcefully incorporated into states which maintain a distinct political culture but are internationally unrecognized”).

Some of these nations and peoples have lately started to organise themselves internationally – FUEN (Federal Union of European Nations) and UNPO (Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation). But they are up against a stiff and difficult opponent – the so called Nation State. The State governments have not been particularly keen on giving up their power to the benefit of the peoples and nations within their borders – what in Europe nowadays are referred to as the Regions of Europe. But freedom is not predestined only for some but must be for everybody. Here are some quotes on freedom from well known thinkers and philosophers. Help yourselves!

• Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. George Bernard Shaw

• The moment the slave resolves that he will no longer be a slave, his fetters fall. He frees himself and shows the way to others. Freedom and slavery are mental states. Gandhi

• Freedom is not something that anybody can be given, freedom is something people take. James Baldwin

• O Freedom, what liberties are taken in thy name! Daniel George

• You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free.  Clarence S. Darrow (US attorney)

• What stands if freedom fall? Rudyard Kipling

• Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains. Rousseau

• Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose. Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster

• No man is wholly free. He is a slave to wealth, or to fortune, or the laws, or the people restrain him from acting according to his will alone. Euripides

• It's often better to be in chains than to be free. Franz Kafka

• If you think you're free, there's no escape possible.  Bab Ram Dass

• While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State. Lenin

Sunday, October 30, 2005
Playing with borders
The Mayor of the City of Malmö made a move on the regional division project last week, just in time for his party’s congress in Malmö. “He wants to see a Great Skåne” the headline in the newspaper reads and he suggests that “The Region of Southern Sweden must be larger than only Skåne”. The Mayor is also chairman of the Association of Municipalities situated in Stockholm. He sits on two stools at the same time and one must always ask what cap he is wearing at any given time.

The proposals vary. The Scanian province of Halland should be split in half. The northern half should be handed over to Gothenburg and its surrounding countryside. The region of Småland should, according to the Mayor, be split in half and the Southern part be incorporated with the Province of Skåne. “We must create strong regions and that means that there are provinces which are impossible to keep intact”, he adds.

Now, why is the political establishment in Sweden (and the Mayor of Malmö is undoubtedly part of this establishment) so keen on continuing centuries of the state policy of “ruling by division”? There is already a beautiful region map to follow, but the political leaders in the country appears to be scared stiff of bringing it to the negotiating table.

The present debate is lacking a long term vision on what is best for the regions in Sweden and the European Union on all areas of society. The debate has instead become the domain of politicians who are allowing themselves to be hypnotized by the present state of public services, particularly within the health and medical services.

There is one lesson the turbulent European history has taught us: never play with borders. And yet, instead of learning how to cooperate accross the borders, the regional division in Sweden is a made into a borders-game with the historic borders as toys in a children’s playground.

Sunday, November 06, 2005
The crumbling state
Catalonia in Spain has submitted a proposal to the state parliament in Spain in order to obtain greater autonomy. This is interpreted in Swedish newspapers as “controversial” because “the proposal will make Catalonia a nation”. The proposal, according to the newspaper article, is expected to meet with considerable resistance from the political right party PP in Spain because “it is a threat to the Spanish unity”. The fact that Spain for all practical purposes already is a federation consisting of a number of more or less autonomous regions with different historical, cultural and linguistic backgrounds does not seem to be of interest to the state centralists.

The question is if the crumbling state system will follow the path of the state centralists, with possible future conflicts as a result - or if it will make a graceful exit and give back to the regions the self-governance taken from them during the last century-and-a-half.

And something for the Swedish journalists to consider. Catalonia has always been a “nation”, which the State of Spain has never been. A state is a political, military and administrative entity. It’s as simple as that. Why is it so hard to differentiate between nationhood and citizenship?

 
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Selling out
At the EU summit meeting last week the Swedish Prime Minister was asked, by a Swedish television reporter in the corridors of Hampton Court, how the threat of globalisation should be met and what the European Union should do about it. This is, from memory, what he said: This is not a problem for the EU but a matter for each individual member state to tackle.

What is the man saying? Should we ask the institution that has created the problem of Europe’s defective competitiveness on the global arena to solve the same problem? It is like calling the pyromaniac to ask him to help put out the fire. The fact that the European state level is not the right party to solve tomorrow’s global challenges is illustrated by, according to an editorial in Kvällsposten on the 31 October, a statement by the French prime Minister who talked about “economic patriotism” as a means to solve the European problem. That’s called state protectionism in everyone else’s vocabulary.

I am almost certain that the Swedish Prime Minister does not believe that renewed state protectionism is the answer. So, why did he say what he said and to whom is he speaking? Obviously, his own constituency is the target. He is talking to his centralistic Euro-sceptical party wing. Why? There is a new threat appearing on the horizon of the political party arena in Sweden – the Junilistan who basically wants out of the EU. The Prime Minister is selling out the greater good for petty party politics. That could be described as “the Curse of the Political Party System”.

Sunday, November 13, 2005
Political trendsetters?
”Scanian politicians will become trend scouts”, was the headline in the newspapers the other day. They will try to discover which way the society will move in the future. About 60 participants from the regional administration will be working with the group of politicians. The assignment is to find the answer to: “Which changing values and attitudes among the citizens will influence the society in a fifteen years term?” According to the newspapers, four scenarios for Skåne to 2020 have been suggested (here in a shortened version): 

• The Individualist: The society is characterised by demands for considerable personal freedom and less government control.

• The Security Seeker: People will feel strong solidarity with their own group. The regional government will be strengthened at the expense of the state and the EU. 

• The Networker: The demands for liberty and freedom of choice are considerable. 

• The Group Player: The group feeling is important. The public sector has grown but the regional government has lost ground in favour of state and EU levels.

Typically, the questions are not open but leading to a considerable degree. In the full version of the scenarios above, the politicians have attached leading assumptions to them:

• The Individualist: “Weaker individuals may come to grief.” 

• The Security Seeker: “Those who do not fit in will be placed outside of the group”. 

• The Networker: “Some will end up on the outside and the social gaps in the society will widen.”  

• The Group Player: ”The society in characterised by the care of others. We will be open for new individuals into our group.”

We know that the majority party in the present Swedish state government is not in favour of a continued regional self-government and is a devoted supporter of a strong and dominating public sector as well as the leadership becoming increasingly Euro-sceptical.

The same political party is in power in the regional government of Skåne. Therefore it is quite understandable that the scenarios created as a platform for the political trendsetter group is heavily slanting towards scenario number four on the list. The Group Player Scenario could easily have been composed by the Prime Minister in Stockholm.

There are good reasons to closely follow the group’s progress.

Sunday, November 13, 2005
The Catalan Case
One of the readers of this blog made a comment to an earlier entry about the situation of Catalonia. I think that the comments the reader made are very interesting and should not be destined to the relative obscurity as “a comment”. I would like to bring it up to the front here.

Another thing. I found a picture on a traveller’s web site on the Internet. The traveller makes the following comment below her touristy picture:  

“FREEDOM FOR CATALONIA
This is written EVERYWHERE here, the vast majority of the time in English, and I can't figure out why. It's like they're trying to extract sympathy from me for their oh-so-oppressed separatist movement.”

The traveller does not seem to know how poorly the Catalan language over the years has been treated by the ruling Spanish speaking “upper class” from Madrid. As late as during the Franco era, I have been told, the telephone booths had a sign saying: ”Remember that it is illegal to speak Catalan”. Under these circumstances it is quite understandable that, to the dismay of certain web site travellers, the Catalans are trying find other ways of getting their message across other than using the language of their “linguistic oppressor”.

 
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Language monopoly
Nowadays state nationalism in Sweden is breaking all boundaries. Introduction of a state “national day”, state efforts into fields like sports and the royalty has only been the beginning. On the 17 November a proposal that will in effect create monopoly on languages in Sweden, was adopted by the Swedish parliament. The decision was taken without any public debate or discussion in the country. It came as a total surprise to me, at least. Have the mass media and the journalists been asleep?

The decision will establish the regional language of Svealand - Swedish - as the only official language in the State of Sweden. Goodbye all regional variations that exist within the borders established by Stockholm/Svealand through military and colonial activities over the last few hundred years.

In the press release from the Riksdag the other day, the bill contained the following proposals. 

• The Swedish Language shall be the principal language in Sweden.
• The Swedish language shall be a complete and “community establishing” (samhällbärande) language. (I.e. nation building.)
• The official Swedish language shall be polished, simple and understandable.
• Everybody shall have the right to a language: to develop and acquire the Swedish language and use one’s own mother tongue and the minority language and have the opportunity to learn a foreign language.

At the time in history when one would have expected that state nationalism would lessen and the small regional cultures in Europe would get a chance to develop after centuries of being held in obscurity by dominating state powers, Sweden is going the other way. This is very unfortunate. But then again, Sweden never was a full partner in the European historic experience over the last century-and-a-half and is obviously not fully aware of the dangers of what intensified state nationalism can cause. Again, Sweden is going backwards into the future.

 
Saturday, December 03, 2005
The Secret Plan
There is a secret plan that will affect people in Skåne. The dominant electric power producer in the region has a plan for how to close down the power supply in certain parts of the region in case we will have a cold winter. The electricity manufacturers have produced a report to the government in which they conclude that there will be an electricity shortage if the winter will be cold. And the risk is greatest “in southern Sweden”.

See there another problem with the rigid state borders. Why are we being held at ransom because of the politicising of the power supply issue. One state based political decision was to have a referendum on nuclear power production some thirty years ago, which virtually prohobited the development of further investments in new nuclear power plants. Another one was to close down the nuclear power plant Barsebäck in order to satisfy certain political groups in the state parliament. True, Barsebäck did not have the best geographical position in the middle of a densely populated area between Skåne and Copenhagen. But it was placed there by a political decision as well!

Now, the question the people in Scania should ask themselves is this: why should we freeze this winter because the politicians on the state level has a hard time accepting that electricity is just another consumer commodity. In an open European market it should therefore not matter where the electricity is coming from. Why should we in Skåne always have to hear that we could freeze next winter because “the rivers in Norrland are dry” or that the State of Sweden “has an electricity shortage”?
 

Saturday, December 03, 2005
The State Commissioner
The region’s largest tabloid evening newspaper has a poll on its web page. The question is: “Who would you like to see as the next State Commissioner in the province?” (The old one is about to retire).

The graph (click at the newspaper’s web page) shows that the readers have chosen Peps Persson, the Scanian of the Year, as their choice by far. He has presently 31% of the votes.

Now, here is an odd thing. How can the readers engage themselves on an issue over which they have no influence whatsoever? The State Commissioner is an authoritarian relic from old ages when the Kingdom of Sweden needed someone to control its unruly citizens in the provinces. The person is appointed by the government in Stockholm and is over virtually no democratic control by the citizens.

What Kvällsposten should discuss on its pages is if the Länsstyrelsen should be handed over to the democratically elected Region Skåne’s Regional Council (Regionfullmäktige). That is the natural and important question any democratic regionalist would ask.

Sunday, December 04, 2005
The End of the State?
There is an interesting Letter to the Editor in today’s Sydsvenskan. The author is taking offence of a judicial decision taken by the Swedish Supreme Court. He is offended because the court acquitted the case since a conviction according to Swedish law would be overruled in a European court. “This is the end of Sweden as a sovereign state” reads the headline.

It is strange how different people can view the same development from two totally different perspectives and draw opposite conclusions. The author of the letter to the editor sees the end of the world with the development of the EU while others see the union as a grand and positive project. Let’s look at a few of the points made in the article. 

• “If this is the case it is totally unnecessary for the Riksdag (State Parliament) to pass new laws at all for the country. How many other Swedish laws will be quashed by the EU?”

• “Sweden has lost its sovereignty and has become a satellite to Brussels.”

• “Worse than the Supreme Court case is that Sweden no longer can control its own military power."

• “Swedish youths can be forced to become genocide butchers and themselves be butchered abroad if Brussels so decides.”

• “Sweden’s two-hundred years of peace could go to history as a very fortunate parenthesis."

• “EU supports thousands of years old religious conceptions with related hateful outbursts of emotions, aggressions and explosion of violence instead of science and humanism.”

• “One wonders how France will react to this – the country from which the Light of Enlightenment once was spread all over Europe.”

It would be easy to disregard the arguments as ridiculous and divorced from reality. But it is part of a general propagandistic EU-sceptical drive, which has been going on in Sweden since the issue of joining the European Union came up in the early nineties. Those who do not know better may be influenced by such low level argumentation.

It is hard to imagine why such nonsense is published in the fourth largest morning newspaper in the country.

Friday, December 09, 2005
Oops! Wrong button
They say that “an official state language is a regional language with an army behind it”. There are strong centralistic voices, predominantly in Stockholm, who are trying to make the regional language of Svealand (referred to as “the Swedish language”) the only official language in Sweden stipulated by law. They have pushed the issue as far as to the floor of the Swedish state parliament (the Riksdag). Unfortunately for them (and fortunately for those of us who are working for regionalism), the centralists lost the vote. By a narrow 145 for and 147 against.

The Chairman of the Swedish Academy (who selects and announces the Nobel Prize Winner in literature) expressed his disappointment on TV and meant that there must be one “complete and comprehensive language in the country”. The Swedish state television’s linguistic expert calls the decision “brainless and chicken-hearted political correctness”. A member of the Swedish academy says “the Parliament should as the most natural thing in the world accept the bill which establishes the Swedish language legally as the official language in the country, without running the risk of being accused of nationalism or racism”.

Having worked with the issue of obtaining some form of official recognition for the historic Scanian language for fifteen years (the Scanian my grandparents spoke), with no response from the state authorities whatsoever, I can only say that I am pleased that the result turned out in favour of those who believe that issues concerning history, language, culture and language has little to do with the state and should be dealt with on a regional level. With the parliamentary decision I would also like to believe that our work has not been in vain and that we have managed to sway enough members of the Riksdag to oppose the bill, although the margin was narrow.

To the Chairman of the Swedish Academy I would like to point out the following. If it is a “complete and comprehensive” language you want, you should propose English. English is in use as the corporate language in many Swedish companies today and many university courses in Sweden are already conducted totally in English. Many important and popular books in English are not translated anymore. As you can see, the Swedish language is already too small and insignificant to make such big fuzz about.

For a regionalist like myself there is no reason to celebrate - yet. The vote margin was small – only two votes against the proposal in the bill. I am sure that the state centralists are regrouping for another try. One politician demonstrates his contempt for the forum he himself is a part of by not respecting the decisions taken. “We will make another attempt next year” – “the no-vote was the result of mistakes in the parliamentary set-off mechanisms, errors in the button-pushing and differences of opinion”. How come this argument is not used in all other decisions taken by the members of parliament?

Sunday, December 11, 2005
Between what?
”It is time to start the bridge building”, says a headline on a debate article in today’s Sydsvenskan. Slesvig-Holstein’s Minister for Europe is the author and argues that it is time to start cooperating over state borders and between “North-Germany, Denmark and South-Sweden”. Particularly since the Fehmarn Belt Bridge will be a reality in a few years time. The Slesvig-Holstein minister is inviting to a prosperous partnership. But, as he points out, there are juridical and administrative differences that first must be overcome. That sounds good, but there is one obstacle – the lack of regional political and administrative influence in Scania.

The Minister for Europe’s region of “South-Sweden” does not exist except as a functional region like in the case of the membership organisation Sydsvenska Handelskammaren. Its borders include the whole of Skåne, half of Halland and half of Småland. Skåne as a region exists only as an elected body for health and medical services. Everything else is run by the state, through the Länsstyrelsen.

Before cooperation over state borders can commence the negotiating partners must be identified. In the case of Slesvig-Holstein it is clear and dandy – the Federal State Government and its administration. In the case of Denmark it is also clear – The Danish Government (although I am not sure what the people of Bornholm and Sönder-Jylland will think about that).

In the case of “South Sweden” it is not clear at all. Whom will Slesvig-Holstein negotiate with? The municipal council of Malmö? I don’t think so – there are 32 other municipal councils in Skåne alone who may or may not agree with the leaders in Malmö. The regional government Region Skåne? I don’t think so. They are so busy with health and medical services that they have not yet even discovered their potential in other areas of the society. That leaves the Länsstyrelsen which are controlled by the Government in Stockholm. The Government has so far not shown any interest in solving any cross-border problems in the southern part of Scandinavia.

No, the “bridge-building” will most likely continue to be a brain-child of the Slesvig-Holstein EU Minister. It took 1000 years for the southern part of the Ice Age ice rim to travel from Ystad to Stockholm. It seems that this is probably the time it will take for any visionary ideas of Europe to travel the same path.

Sunday, December 11, 2005
The Destruction of Culture
A columnist in the Skånska Dagbladet complained the other day that the cultural heritage is being eradicated on purpose by the politicians’ lack of understanding about the value of a collective cultural memory. The men and women of the political elite “do not seem to want to rest until the collective threads of memory are totally eradicated” and “politicians seem to believe that the people will achieve true freedom only when they are free from their collective memory”. The columnist goes on to say that “this is the freedom of the brain-washed, so they can be steered in any direction”. The author is deeply – rightfully - concerned that the collective memory is disappearing fast.

The actual reason for this, the way I see it, is that the state government is basing its politics on the incorrect assumption that there is such a thing as a state based historic, cultural and linguistic identity – concepts like citizenship and nationality are simply being confused. The leaders of the centralistic state will not accept that these qualities have other borders than the state.

The columnist’s next article should deal with this: Is there such a thing as one identifiable history of Sweden? If this is the case, when did the history of Skåne start or end? If there is such a thing as one identifiable Swedish culture, what then should we call the culture of the Sami people?

Linguistic experts fear that 95% of the world’s cultures and languages will disappear before the end of this century. This cultural genocide will become a reality unless the columnist and others are willing to identify the real sinners and culprits – and then do something about it.

What actually is going on in Sweden today is the following. In order to create a true state-based identity, all regional identities first have to be destroyed and their sympatisers neutralised. The on-going destruction of the multi-cultural society is the sad legacy of the French Revolution.


Saturday, December 17, 2005
Centralistic indignation
During the past week the Swedish parliament took a decision, with the smallest possible margin, not to adopt legislation making the Swedish language the only official language in the country. This has created deep outbursts of indignation among certain state nationalist. Not only on the letter-to-the-editor columns in the newspapers but also among certain language nationalist in the Swedish Academy (which also selects the Nobel Prize winners in literature).

It is estimated that there are some 6000 to 9000 languages in the world today. Some linguists fear that 95 percent of these languages will have disappeared by the time our smallest children reach old age. It is therefore not the state languages that need legal protection, but the small languages that are subjected to centralistic state cultural policies. These policies effectively favour the so called official language. This has been duly noticed by the Council of Europe. With the support of the EU, it is now trying to force the state powers to protect the small languages in Europe. That is why Sweden has been forced to adopt conventions and charters that will legally protect the small languages, for instance the languages of the Sami and the Tornedal Finns.

The Swedish language has its roots in the region of Svealand, which has conquered other linguistic regions with military and colonial means. With the aid of political and administrative control over the education system and mass media, the regional language of Svealand has been glorified at the expense of others. “Vann”, “klär” and “lomma” (water, clothing and pocket) are examples of specific and unique Scanian words, which the Scanians have inherited from their ancestors. Because of the centralistic politics in Sweden there are no longer any room for these words and they are subjected to forced eradication, as well as being systematically ridiculed. Words like these are nowadays reduced to become slapstick features in New Year variety shows on the Scanian country side.

Sweden was criticised in 2002 in two reports from the Council of Europe because it had not taken any consideration to the regional language variation in the country and mentioned specifically the languages in Skåne and Gotland. The Council of Europe recommended that the Swedish Government should initiate contacts with cultural organisations in the regions in order to create a dialogue on these issues. This has not yet happened. Now, there is something to be indigenised about!

Friday, December 30, 2005
Power to the People
The Swedish government appointed a committee given the task to propose a new political and public administration set-up in the country. The background was that the centralistic political system in Sweden did not work very well. The name of the committee is Ansvarskommittén (The Committee of Accountability). The committee has been working for a few years, mostly behind closed doors. The people have not been involved in an open and free debate – as usual. One would have thought that the common man would have a say in the way his political affairs are being conducted since the Swedish constitution says in its first paragraph: “All power derive from the people”.

The Chairman of the committee held a press conference the other day. He proposed that the map of Sweden is re-written in order to get the country on the move again. Sweden should be divided into six to eight regions (map from the article) and that the power of state county commissions is transferred to six or eight elected county councils. Now, that’s good news. But there are a few question marks.

Scania is being divided into two pieces Skåne and Blekinge as one unit and the committee suggests that Halland (a province of Scania for maybe a thousand years) is being split in half and the parts handed over to its neighbours. But the whole idea of the concept of the Regions of Europe is to learn to work across borders and not divide historical provinces into pieces and hand them over to adjacent provinces. The European experience is clear - to play with border have always caused problems.

The major political party in power for 63 of the last 70 years is referred to in the newspaper article a party who wants to maintain central power and opposes a new strong regional level. Unfortunately, the major party to the right of the centre line has expressed hesitations to the creation of regions and wants to centralise all political and administrative control to Stockholm, but has lately begun to show signs of wobble on the issue.

So, let’s see how the matter develops during the eight month ahead to the state election. Unfortunately the two major parties have votes to gain by playing on the wide spread state romanticism and EU-scepticism. These are two propaganda phenomenon, which nowadays are deeply rooted in the population of certain parts of Sweden.

 
Saturday, December 31, 2005
The Legitimacy of States
The European state system is the result of the French Revolution and did not assume its present centralistic form until the mid-1800s. So, whatever the school teacher did try to put into ones head, the modern central state is no more than 150 old, at the most. Most states are much less; they came into being after the colonial era some 60 years ago. That may explain why many of these states are lacking in popular legitimacy and crackle as soon as it comes under pressure – they become so-called failed states. This phenomenon was discussed in a very well written article in Washington Post by the foreign minister of the US - Condoleezza Rice. Quote:

“Since its creation more than 350 years ago, the modern state system has always rested on the concept of sovereignty. It was assumed that states were the primary international actors and that every state was able and willing to address the threats emerging from its territory. Today, however, we have seen that these assumptions no longer hold, and as a result the greatest threats to our security are defined more by the dynamics within weak and failing states than by the borders between strong and aggressive ones. The phenomenon of weak and failing states is not new, but the danger they now pose is unparalleled.” 

The questions Condoleezza Rice should ask herself are these. Why should a state – Iraq - that has already failed once have a future in its present form? Isn’t it time to split Iraq up in its original pieces (nations) and let the various nations and peoples run their own affaires, politically and otherwise, on the land that they have inherited from their ancestors?

Is “holding Iraq together” an inevitable end in itself and a therefore potentially a viable and lasting solution? I don’t think so!