General political debate

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the opportunity to begin the debates of this parliamentary term.

I want to start by congratulating the government parties on having formed a government. One can also congratulate the Sverigedemokraterna for having managed to get their own government without sitting in it; it is quite impressive. How this will go, only the future will tell, but we Social Democrats will scrutinize this government – rest assured!

This government has been very open about where it wants to take the country. Still, we were quite surprised that the Liberals were involved in abolishing the Ministry of the Environment, which was created by the Social Democrats during Ingvar Carlsson's government period and which has undoubtedly had a great significance for Sweden being at the forefront and has been - and still is - a climate leader in Europe and in the world.

Madam Speaker! It is expensive to refuel. The market price has risen by more than 4 kronor since the election and was 28.30 when I refueled at home in Norsjö. The recent increase is due to the war and to the fact that EU countries such as Germany are now switching from Russian gas to oil and diesel. This increases demand.

One can wonder how the new majority intends to put this together. It has still not become particularly clear how they intend to ensure the supply of the expensive oil, while at the same time they want to scrap the reduction obligation and sink the biofuels. The reduction obligation is an opportunity for us to strengthen the self-sufficiency rate and ensure production through biofuels and own production.

This is also industrial policy. Right now, there are many Swedish companies, not least forestry companies, that have invested large sums, up to 15 billion kronor, in ensuring own production, where residual products from the forest can become biofuels that we can fuel in our cars. Even though we are to gradually transition to electricity, the vehicle fleet that rolls today will most likely still be rolling in 15 years and will need to have fuel.

Then the question is: Who should one be dependent on? Should the new government also have an oil minister? Should one build a dependency on Iranian oil or Saudi oil, or is it some other unknown oil that one has intended to ensure we can fuel the vehicles with? This has not been reported at all.

It is quite tragic that we are now back in the same situation as during the Reinfeldt government, where the business sector was not significant but a special interest. When now SCA, Sveaskog, Holmen, ST1, Preem, large Swedish companies, say that they want to invest in this area and that they believe in it, one places a wet blanket over their entire operations. It is really, really bad. It is bad climate policy. It is bad business policy, it is bad self-sufficiency policy.

We Social Democrats will do what we can to ensure that those who need to refuel their cars will also be able to refuel their cars in the future.

(Applause)

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker, honorable members of the Riksdag! Sweden has had a stable and practically fossil-free energy system that has primarily consisted of hydropower and nuclear power. We have been self-sufficient every hour and every day throughout the entire year. This situation prevailed until approximately the turn of the millennium, when we then closed the Barsebäck power plants. Svenska kraftnät pointed out at that time that southern Sweden would no longer be self-sufficient in electricity. Despite this, the decommissioning has continued.

In a stable and well-functioning electricity system, a balance prevails between three important parameters every millisecond. Production, transmission capacity, and consumption must be in balance. One must therefore understand that there is a difference between energy and power.

Nuclear power plants and other large power plants have large generators that help adjust the balance in the power system every millisecond. They thus constitute a resistance in the system. These are the laws of physics that neither politics nor small generators in, for example, wind power can replace.

The decommissioning of dispatchable power in southern Sweden has given us a more unstable electricity system, where the transmission capacity from the north to the south has also decreased. One example of this is the line that has been built from Hallsberg to Skåne, which today only has approximately 60 percent of the capacity it was dimensioned for. This is due, among other things, to the fact that Oskarshamn 1 and 2 as well as Ringhals 1 and 2 have been decommissioned.

Overall, political decisions have caused private individuals and the business sector to be hit hard by high energy prices, and it is highly likely that it will get worse before a turning point can be discerned.

Madam Speaker! Can this be solved quickly? No, one can imagine that politics has actually cut down a forest and now regrets it. There is, therefore, no quick solution to get the forest back.

A faster expansion of wind power is also not a solution, regardless of whether it is on land or at sea. Wind power can fit well into the energy mix overall, but it cannot constitute a base. It is not predictable, and it creates instability through its dependence on weather and wind.

In the Tidö Agreement and in the government statement, the Prime Minister has presented a fast track for new nuclear power. This includes, among other things, changed permit rules, state investment support, and new ownership directives for Vattenfall. This thus creates long-term conditions and attractive terms for companies that want to invest in new, modern nuclear power.

What can we do in the short term? In the Tidö Agreement, there are also some lines about combined heat and power, where we could increase the power to the system through some changed conditions. But we also need, I believe, to review how the energy market functions and is complied with. Especially after the failure we have seen out in Europe with Germany's energy transition, we need to look at the application of electricity zone division, production and transmission capacities, and how the electricity market directive and the requirement for 70 percent transmission capacity of the production volume are complied with. To put it briefly: There is no easy way out of this.

Madam Speaker! Finally, I want to point out that sustainability has three dimensions: the social, the environmental, and the economic. These three dimensions need to be considered in politics in general and in energy policy in particular. I believe this has been lacking during the recent parliamentary terms.

The situation is now acute, and we need to act now. This is what our citizens and our companies expect.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Lars Engsund, and welcome to the Swedish Parliament!

In the election campaign, the Moderaterna have made it sound like it is nuclear power, nuclear power, nuclear power that is going to fix all policy areas, and it has really sounded like it is easy. Now we are told that we are heading towards difficult, tough times. It also emerges, as we have said, that nuclear power can be an important part of the energy mix. But then we must realistically expect that it will be expanded to a greater extent after 2035, regardless of fast tracks, because for me, it is not politics but the market that is going to build the nuclear power.

What should the Moderates do here and now? That is what the Swedish people want to know.

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker! As I just mentioned, there is no quick solution to the situation that politics has created over the last 20, 25 years. There are, however, a number of proposals, for example to review district heating, decommissioned plants and, above all, the market conditions. But it is no quick fix, we know that.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! No, it is not really some quick fix. We have Sverigedemokratiska and Moderata municipal councilors in southern Sweden who say no to wind power and no to power transmissions. All power transmissions of wind power are appealed, so it is not easy for southern Sweden. In that case, it is reasonable that southern Sweden now asks itself: What shall the Moderaterna do while waiting for the new nuclear power?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker! What I just mentioned was that politics cannot replace the laws of nature; they are already in place. More wind power is not the solution to the problem, neither in the short term nor in the long term. We need stable base load power that is predictable, and it takes time to build.

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

Mattias Jonsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Welcome to the Riksdag, Lars Engsund!

I listened with interest to Lars Engsund's presentation. There are obviously laws in the energy system that must be followed, but there is also new technology, not least for handling inertia and the potential loss of the large generators in order to be able to cope with the different flows. Among other things, a new facility has been built outside Gothenburg.

The fact is that in 2010 we imported 2 terawatt-hours to Sweden, while we now export 25 terawatt-hours. In the short term, we need to have new electricity production, just as Isak From said.

But again, what is the solution? We have applications for 350 terawatt-hours of offshore wind power in southern Sweden. How is it that the Moderaterna are so eager to say no to this being established so that we can increase Swedish electricity production?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker! Let me point out again that there is a difference between energy and power. It is important to keep these concepts separate. Energy is what one has over time, and power is what one has here and now at a certain place at a given point in time. It is important to understand.

How municipalities generally handle wind power is up to each individual municipality. But again: Wind power is not the solution we need to get back the stable and robust energy system that we had once upon a time.

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

Mattias Jonsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Lars Engsund for the answer.

The solution is also not to look only at nuclear power 10-20 years ahead when we have actors who, for market reasons, want to invest in offshore wind power. If politicians around our coasts did not say no, we could increase this now as part of the solution.

My last question to Lars Engsund is: When will the electricity price support be in place?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker! When it comes to the electricity price support, I refer to the government, which has just mentioned that it is underway. I cannot provide any exact timetable, but obviously it shall take place expeditiously.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Madam Speaker! Welcome to the Riksdag, Lars Engsund!

We have just finished a campaign, and I have heard enough of Moderate MPs and politicians trying to pin the Social Democrats' decommissioning of Sweden's nuclear power on them.

The Social Democrats are a state-bearing party, and I believed to the core that the Moderates were also that and would take responsibility both here today and moving forward. In 2016, a cross-bloc agreement was made on energy policy, and in that, we agreed that it is all clear to build new nuclear power. But the so-called market did not solve the problem.

How does Lars Engsund think about this?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Markus Selin for the comment.

In order to want to invest, the market must be given long-term rules of the game and know which conditions apply. The energy agreement 2016 did not provide these rules of the game. It is quite simple; one only has to compare the Tidö Agreement with the energy agreement 2016.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Madam Speaker! Long-term and comparable, says Lars Engsund.

Small modular reactors in functional operation do not exist anywhere at all. The Moderates have turned this into a show, a game with Sweden's energy production.

When, Lars Engsund, are we going to have small modular reactors in place in Sweden - something that currently does not exist functionally anywhere in the world?

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

Lars Engsund (M)

Madam Speaker! Significant progress has been made in the development of small modular nuclear reactors, and in Canada, for example, there are demonstration reactors. There are even some on submarines in the Atlantic.

I would assess that it will take approximately ten years before we have it in place, but everything depends on the permit management and the conditions.

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

Andrea Andersson Tay (V)

Madam Speaker! The climate crisis is today the most decisive issue for humanity. Despite this, we have just gone through an election campaign where the climate crisis has been treated as a non-issue by many parties.

Europe has been in shock over the historic drought that hit the continent. In Pakistan, a third of the country's area has been submerged under water. The climate crisis is global, but it is as if Swedish politicians, from Sverigedemokrater to Moderater and Socialdemokrater, believe that Sweden would somehow be spared and that it does not concern us.

Unfortunately, that is not the case. The hot summer of 2018, the floods in Gävle last year and recurring water shortages - it does not end there; it is only the beginning.

Climate research shows that we have a very limited space for continued greenhouse gas emissions before we reach levels that pose great risks to human civilization. Calculations show that Swedish emissions must decrease by an order of magnitude of 20 percent per year to reach the Paris Agreement's goal of keeping global warming well below two degrees. The work to reach the goal should have started in earnest a long time ago, and our situation today has become so much more difficult because it has not been done.

The previous Social Democratic government made no serious attempts to reduce emissions at the rate required, and its Minister for Climate and Environment resignedly said that she considered it almost impossible.

It is hardly surprising that it looks like it will continue in the same way with the new government. The right-wing parties are putting all their eggs in one basket and betting that nuclear power alone will save us from the climate crisis. Even if the most optimistic assumptions about how quickly new nuclear power plants can be in place were to prove true, Sweden's emission space will already be exhausted by that time. At the current emission rate, the Swedish carbon budget will be exhausted in four years, 2026.

Madam Speaker! The climate crisis is one of the issues that worries the Swedish people the most. Despite this, we have once again received a government that flees its responsibility. When politicians abdicate from leadership, they simultaneously place the entire weight of the climate crisis on the shoulders of individual citizens.

People want to be able to live without climate impact, but for that to become a reality, we need a government that is capable of leading us there, that dares to make the investments and introduce the regulations that are required. Ulf Kristersson's government is not that government.

The right-wing parties mention nothing in their palace agreement about the railway or public transport, nothing about the climate transition of agriculture and forestry, and nothing about how we are to tackle the emissions from the goods we consume.

So who is going to take responsibility for that? People across the entire country depend on trains and buses running. People should be able to trust that the food they eat and the clothes they wear are not fueling the climate crisis and that Swedish companies are reducing their emissions at the rate that is required.

It is the government's responsibility to ensure that it becomes so. But this government will, just like previous governments, not take that responsibility.

Madam Speaker! In my generation and among those younger than I, there is a glaring lack of faith in the future. A steady job and a secure home appear to many as unattainable dreams. Equally unattainable seems the dream of avoiding living one's life in the shadow of the climate crisis. The new government does not want to do anything to change that. Now it is up to the rest of us to turn the tide despite the government.

(Applause)

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Europe is exposed to an energy war. When Russia chokes off the fuel, all of Europe suffers. Some countries, such as Sweden and France, have nuclear power. Other countries, such as Poland and Norway, do not. But it doesn't matter – the electricity price is just as high throughout Europe.

The EU's collective response to the energy crisis is an energy policy called REPowerEU which has three main strategies. Number one is that we should not make ourselves dependent on fuel imports from individual countries. Number two is that we should save energy. Number three is that we should accelerate clean energy. Here it says: "Renewables are the cheapest and cleanest energy available, and can be produced domestically, reducing our need for energy imports."

Against this background, what is Sweden doing, that is, that country up there in the north with a small population and a lot of rivers, forests, and long coasts?

Madam Speaker! I am sorry, but the Swedish energy debate has lately, unfortunately, collapsed into populism and simplified messages. And now this collapsed energy debate is moving into Rosenbad and becoming Swedish government policy. Let me raise two essential aspects.

Firstly: Sweden has had a deregulated electricity market since 1996, where the idea is that politics sets the rules of the game and the market actors make the investments. It is a system that has delivered some of the lowest electricity prices in the world. And now there is a bubbling of investment will in electricity production, energy storage and digitalization, while new business models are being tested everywhere, just as a market should function.

But now the new government wants to introduce a planned economy in the electricity system. They want to force in a technology and give direct orders to Vattenfall's CEO to invest in a single technology, regardless of how expensive this technology is. At the same time, they lay a wet blanket over all the initiatives bubbling in the market. We are moving backwards into the past, and the price of electricity will rise, just as it happens in a planned economy. It is inefficient and expensive.

Secondly: The energy system is in need of a stable energy policy across mandate periods. Adjustments in the energy policy should be made with a gentle hand and with broad support among the parties in the Riksdag. The Moderates and Christian Democrats left the broad energy agreement in 2019. Now, it is intended to, together with the Liberals and the Sweden Democrats, push through a rapid change of the energy policy, without broad support in the Riksdag.

But what happens if a new government takes office in four years? Then they will tear it up and run a new energy policy again. That would be devastating. Broad, stable energy agreements are needed in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! We politicians shall not step in and micro-manage the energy market. We politicians shall set the long-term rules of the game and let the market actors handle the investments. Let the market decide whether nuclear power is the right technology!

So far, however, the market is making exactly the same assessment as the EU does in its REPowerEU, namely that Sweden has fantastic conditions for a modern and digitized energy system where we develop domestic bioenergy resources, utilize the free fuel that water, wind, and the sun offer, and develop energy storage on different timescales – hydrogen and batteries – while simultaneously being economical with our consumption. Thus, we get an electricity system with long-term low electricity prices, security-politically secure electricity supply, and sustainable energy.

(Applause)

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! The task of climate policy is to protect the entire population and all activities from climate-related risks.

Here in Sweden, it is about more intense heavy rainfall leading to floods, landslides and rockslides and thus destroyed buildings, about droughts that damage our harvests and can thus lead to higher food prices, about heatwaves that can seriously affect people's health and about natural disasters in other countries that affect subcontractors to Swedish companies.

Globally, we are already seeing floods in Pakistan, affecting over 30 million people, and severe heatwaves and droughts in Europe as well.

The direct and indirect consequences of climate change are so numerous and complex that they cannot be counted. These are risks that I believe we as politicians have a duty to protect the population from. These are risks that we are expected to manage.

The climate transition must happen here and now if we are to avoid the most serious risks of climate change. At the same time, the climate transition entails fantastic opportunities that we in Miljöpartiet want to take advantage of.

During our seven years in government, Sweden was named the country with the world's best climate policy. We reformed the EU's emissions trading and invested in the transition of industry and companies through Industriklivet, Klimatklivet, green credit guarantees, and coordination through Fossilfritt Sverige. We now see a green industrial revolution that contributes to a strong societal development, innovations, new jobs, and strengthened competitiveness. We introduced reforms that have caused electric car sales to soar. This means better air, less noise, and more pleasant urban environments.

Mr. Speaker, Sweden has now received a new government and with it a fundamentally different political direction for Sweden. Everyone who has followed the environmental policy during the election campaign knows that it has long been clear that the national conservatives, if they were given power, would pursue a policy that increases greenhouse gas emissions. Now this has been confirmed in black and white: In the Tidö Agreement and in the Prime Minister's government statement, there is not a single proposal that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. On the other hand, there are several that will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions and thus exacerbate the climate crisis.

The proposal to reduce the reduction obligation alone will increase Sweden's territorial emissions by a full 10 percent, in a situation where science clearly establishes that we must reduce emissions significantly now - in the near term - to meet the Paris Agreement. With the announced slaughter of the reduction obligation, Sweden's opportunity to reach the climate goals is thrown out the window.

Madam Speaker! Climate policy and environmental policy are about our life conditions, about our drinking water being protected from toxins so that we do not get sick, and about there being bees to pollinate our crops. The climate crisis is linked to the loss of biodiversity, which is worse than ever. Against this background, the Prime Minister chose, upon taking office, to abolish the Ministry of the Environment in the Government Offices.

Madam Speaker! The climate crisis and the environmental crisis are about our life conditions, now and for all the future. The problems do not disappear by burying one's head in the sand.

(Applause)

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! Power shortage. Energy poverty. Rotational load shedding of the power grid. Electricity price shock. These are many new words that we have been forced to learn over the past year. It is almost so that one wants to laugh at it, at the almost absurd fact that we in Sweden, one of the world's most industrialized and high-tech countries, in 2022 no longer with self-evidence know if we will have electricity in the outlet when we need it.

That we have ended up here is a failure for us as an industrial nation, for us as a climate nation, and actually for us as a welfare state.

For the last four years, I have served as a regional politician in a Skåne that has gradually seen the problems grow. That we have the problems we have now does not come as a surprise to us. For four years, we within politics, but also in the business sector and academia, have warned against precisely this. If one shuts down the energy production that is available in southern and central Sweden, it becomes very expensive when we are forced to turn to the continent and the price levels prevailing there. We see the consequences now. The list of companies facing bankruptcy is unfortunately very long. It is not what a Sweden in acute need of more jobs needs.

Madam Speaker! Now, for a week, there has finally been an agreement that, for the first time in a very long time, attempts to take a holistic approach to the energy supply. It is an agreement that pushes nuclear power back into the energy mix that has served Sweden very well. It also gives Sweden an opportunity to now obtain a stable and reliable energy system.

The beauty contest between different types of energy that I have heard here today and which has been ongoing for a very long time must now cease. Those who believe that we have the luxury of choosing between different types of energy sources have not understood how deep the crisis is that we are in. We need to maximize all energy production we can. It is not a question of nuclear power or wind power, solar power or combined heat and power, but everything is needed.

I have heard colleagues from other parties talk about how we must talk about the energy system. We can certainly do that. But from the Liberals' side, we are clear. This discussion should not have as a starting point which types of energy we should have in Sweden. This discussion is now closed and finished. This conversation should, in that case, have as a starting point: What capabilities do we want to see in the Swedish energy system? What should the energy system be able to deliver? It should perhaps also be about: How long do we intend for our energy system to be able to withstand an internal or external threat? It is not about technologies or capabilities, and not about one against the other, but about everything and full speed ahead.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Louise Eklund for this, and welcome her to the Swedish Parliament.

I followed her speech with interest and can agree with the speech in many parts. It is about the entire energy system. We also need to talk about how we achieve this energy production, especially in southern Sweden, when we have the situation we actually have with applications for offshore wind power on both sides of the sound. This is what the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates, and several other parties consistently say no to. It is the fast possible solution to increase the energy supply in southern Sweden.

Now the new government base, in which the Liberals are included, is going to build a future based on increased oil dependency and increased nuclear power dependency, where we also need to secure uranium for these nuclear power plants. It is a rather interesting question. How do the Liberals intend to solve all these parts?

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the welcome.

The new government takes office with an ambition that Sweden shall change the energy policy goal to be one hundred percent fossil-free. We therefore do not see an increased oil dependency in the near future.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! So, what is stated in both the Palace Agreement and the Government Bill regarding that the reduction obligation shall be scrapped from 2024 is therefore not correct? The alternative is, in fact, an increased oil dependency. The Liberals cannot claim anything else at all. Or is it also the case that consumers and road users out on Sweden's roads should stop refueling. If this is the intention, we understand where this is heading.

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! No, what is stated in the Tidö Agreement regarding energy production is that we shall change the energy policy goal to becoming one hundred percent fossil-free. This is a paradigm shift compared to how it has been previously, and where Sweden moves in a direction where one is no longer dependent on coal or other fossil sources.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Madam Speaker! Welcome, Louise Eklund, to the Swedish Parliament!

Two things echo in my head when I listen to the Liberals' new gift. How do the Liberals view cooperation with the Riksdag's most EU-critical party, the Sverigedemokraterna? Why I ask the question, Madam Speaker, is simply about how we view a common market in the EU. When it comes to this non-existent self-criticism about why we wanted a common electricity market ten years ago, I wonder where the Liberals were then. That is my first question.

My second question concerns uranium. How do the Liberals view the top ten list of uranium-supplying countries with Kazakhstan, Niger, Russia, Uzbekistan, and China? How do the Liberals view the fuel for this hallelujah energy production?

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the welcome.

As said, in the Tidö Agreement, the energy policy goal is set that Sweden shall be fossil-free. The question of fossil sources such as oil is therefore a question that we address by trying to find alternative types of energy.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Madam Speaker! The Liberals have problems, Madam Speaker. I thought we could rely on the Liberals in their view on our common EU project with the four freedoms and that we could jointly stand up for the ultimate goal of the EU work, namely peace.

Now we are here again with skyrocketing electricity prices and a liberal Swedish party in the Swedish Riksdag that has chosen to govern together with a party that is to the highest degree EU-critical.

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the consideration. The Liberals are doing perfectly well, and we will continue to be the party that most strongly pushes for a strong Swedish voice in Europe.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet entered into the energy agreement in 2016. It states clearly there that Sweden shall have a goal of one hundred percent renewable electricity production by 2040, but that it is a goal and not a deadline for nuclear power, and that it means that one may not decommission nuclear power through political decisions. We in Miljöpartiet have continued to stand behind that.

This amendment in the Tidö Agreement shows strong measures to force through nuclear power production. I wonder how the Liberals, who work extensively with the security issue, view the risks of nuclear power in Sweden. During the war in Ukraine, we have seen that nuclear power plants have been held hostage and could pose a great risk to the population. How do you view the security policy risks of an increased nuclear power investment in Sweden?

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! We see that the very greatest risk is that Sweden actually does not have an energy supply that is there when we need it most. We see what is happening in Ukraine right now, where the country is being shut down because of the war. The very greatest security policy risk is not having an energy supply that works.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Sweden has had nuclear power for a long time, but there has also been a plan for it to be phased out. Now, there has also been work regarding final disposal and handling of the estimated volumes of the radioactive waste from the total nuclear power production. If it turns out as this government wants, that is to say that the construction of new nuclear power is forced through, it will yield large volumes of radioactive waste for which there is no planning regarding either interim storage or final disposal. How do the Liberals want to handle that?

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Madam Speaker! I turn to the description that some kind of energy must be forced through. I do not share that problem description.

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

Jytte Guteland (S)

Madam Speaker! Sometimes when one listens to the public debate in Sweden, one gets the feeling that global warming is something happening somewhere else. I do not know how many debates I have listened to during the election campaign where the climate issue has been completely omitted or only handled a bit perfunctorily for a couple of minutes. Alternatively, reference has been made to nuclear power, as if it were to solve everything.

It is as if it were someone else's responsibility to handle the climate issue, or as if it did not exist at all. Still, the climate was the issue that was most often raised with me when I knocked on doors during the election campaign, and with many others. It was the issue that sparked the most engagement among the Swedish people.

The climate crisis means more natural disasters in the form of storms, droughts, floods, and heat. It drives species to extinction. It shakes up agriculture. It creates conflicts in the world. It ultimately drives people into flight or into poverty. In the discussions, the question is many times "But what happens in Sweden?" – as if these global catastrophes were to occur outside our realm.

I am convinced that the pandemic and the war have convinced the Swedish people that global crises also affect us here at home in Sweden. But for those who are still not convinced: We are already seeing problems on Swedish soil, and they will become convincingly clear. It is about dried-up wells, and it is about dry fields. It is about more burnt-down forests, despite better technology and better machines. It is about blown-down power lines, empty ski lifts, more expensive coffee, and empty store shelves in the grocery stores. It is about war reporting on the news. It is about swarming mosquitoes and invasive species. Then I have only mentioned a little of what we are already affected by and what we will see more and more of.

My view is that the Swedish people are following this. They follow and know this. The knowledge is high, the ideas are many, and the will to contribute is great. We in Sweden think that the climate is important. And our European neighbors agree: Almost every other European considers the climate to be the EU's most important future challenge. A broad majority of EU citizens, therefore, stand behind strongly increased climate ambitions.

We know that there is an urgency to speed up. Last week's report from the World Wide Fund for Nature shows that nearly 70 percent of all vertebrates have disappeared in just 50 years. This summer's reports of extreme drought in Southern Europe and severe floods in Pakistan show the effects of the climate crisis - that it is already here and now creating indescribable catastrophes. Last year, furthermore, new, grim records were set regarding greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, sea-level rises, and ocean water temperatures.

Madam Speaker! COP 26 in Glasgow meant that the Paris Agreement's rulebook, including how emissions are to be counted, was finally finalized. This means that more progress has been made, with new promises of climate neutrality from the USA, China, and India.

Despite this, there are estimates that we are now heading towards 2.7 degrees of warming even if the countries were to fulfill these promises. It is therefore not enough. We must hurry up before the conference in Egypt in November. The newly elected Swedish government has an enormous responsibility here to show decisiveness and show, both at the conference in November and in the EU and ahead of the Swedish presidency, that Sweden leads this climate transition.

(Applause)

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! Under our burning environmental and climate crisis, Sweden has no Ministry of the Environment. So a politician wrote on Twitter yesterday. "Environmental and climate crisis" - these terms need to be clarified.

Furthermore, I believe we should use the word "crisis" with great caution, not least now when Sweden finds itself in a very serious energy crisis where many elderly people who are short of money and find it difficult to cover the electricity bill will soon have to go to bed early to avoid freezing. It should not be necessary. We know what can be done here and now, in the short term. In addition to efficiency and saving on electricity, it is about quickly increasing combined heat and power production, regardless of fuel.

I believe the claim that we are in a climate crisis lacks scientific support. We last did that in the 1860s, when summers were absent or became so short that one did not have time to harvest.

Madam Speaker! Is it bad to start up an oil power plant in Sweden? Of course, it is good for those who avoid freezing to death in winter. But how does the climate view the matter? It is not necessarily bad – if we avoid the import of Polish and German coal power, get lower transmission losses and increased rotational inertia, and get greater transmission from the north to the south of energy from hydropower and wind power.

The so-called climate crisis justifies that enormous sums are invested in reducing carbon dioxide emissions in Sweden and within the entire EU, while at the same time the impact of all these measures on the global temperature at the end of the century is barely measurable. If, for example, Sweden reduces its emissions to zero, from today's 0.14 percent of global emissions, the temperature at the end of the century - all other things being equal - will, according to the IPCC, drop by a mere 0.0027 degrees, that is to say, nothing. Everything we do in the climate area is symbolic politics. Of course, we have good intentions to influence other countries, but our efforts will never be able to be measured as a temperature impact. It is good to understand that.

In 1990, the UN's climate panel IPCC warned, on very good grounds, that the consequences for the Earth's climate in the year 2100 would be devastating if the exponential increase in carbon dioxide emissions continued. They warned about carbon dioxide but also about freons and other greenhouse gases. The latest major report from the IPCC, in 2021, shows that the development feared in 1990 will not occur at all. Nor is the development feared in the report from 2013 considered likely any longer. The world is not heading towards 100 gigatons of carbon dioxide per year.

Why don't we instead focus on the more acute environmental issues, where we could make a difference? Where are the investments in reducing environmental toxins, pharmaceutical residues, and resistant bacteria? Is it not a problem when cheap, dirty production in developing countries, resistant bacteria, and other environmental problems are hidden and go completely under the radar? This happens despite constantly recurring reports and analyses that confirm the serious situation with the spread and effects of various environmental toxins and chemicals in nature and in humans.

The conclusion is that far too great resources are being spent on emission reductions. More focus and resources must instead be placed on environmental issues, where we can rightly speak of a global crisis. Then it must be the highest priority that no one has to freeze to death this winter.

(Applause)

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

Markus Selin (S)

Madam Speaker! It is deplorable. I am ashamed. 24 hours ago, we stood and listened to Ulf Kristersson here in the chamber of the Riksdag. He spoke broadly about the climate work and the Paris Agreement. And here we stand, 24 hours or a night later, and listen to the largest party in the government base, which quite frankly drags the entire work to save our planet into the mud.

Madam Speaker! I will hold back on the emotions a little bit. But I can recommend that Member Elsa Widding go out here at Mynttorget on Friday and listen to the young people. Can the Member look the young people in the eyes and explain to them that we do not have a climate crisis? It is our children, our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren who want - and demand - that we here in the Swedish Riksdag take action on this.

(Applause)

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am not so used to this, so I did not quite understand the question - if I were to receive one.

I can only say that it is good to study. I have devoted practically all my time since AR6, the latest report from the IPCC, together with a larger number of professors within the basic sciences that the climate issue is based on, to analyzing data and what actually stands in the reports. I can therefore say that I do not know where to begin. But now you are not talking about extreme weather; that may come later.

When it comes to our children, it is very important that we convey to them what science says, and nothing else. Religion must come to an end.

(Applause)

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

Markus Selin (S)

Madam Speaker! Now the research has come so far - it shows report after IPCC report - that we are there now. The last ones hesitating are accommodated in the Sweden Democrats in Sweden's Riksdag, the government base for Moderates, Liberals and Christian Democrats. I do not care much for so-called Sweden-friends, especially when they swing wildly with research and drag everything through the mud.

I have a question: Why, in that case, should one place oneself in an oil dependency from pirate states?

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! What I tried to express in my speech was that the most important thing of all is that people survive. Just as the previous speaker spoke, the most important thing of all is that we get electricity. I tried to express that it is not necessarily as you say.

Carbon dioxide emissions are global. Therefore, we must also view them in that way, and that is why I argue that the climate goals are counterproductive. It is not obvious that it would be worse for the climate to run on oil. If the member had listened, he would have heard that it would mean that during the hours we run an oil power plant, we would avoid importing coal, which emits more.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Welcome, Elsa Widding, to the Swedish Parliament, and thank you for the sincere speech!

Now we understand the reasons why the Sweden Democrats have pushed for a shutdown of the Ministry of the Environment. It becomes fully understandable when we, interview after interview, hear the Sweden Democrats stand and say: We do not trust the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Their figures are not correct, because we have no global warming. The climate denial is actually total, so we do not need to discuss it.

The Sweden Democrats do not believe that we have a climate crisis, that temperatures in Sweden - especially in the north - have risen during the last 50 years and that it is carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels that are the cause. The Sweden Democrats do not believe that. The Sweden Democrats believe that we should fire Karlshamn power plant with Iranian oil.

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! What was it Isak From said that we do not believe in? I can say that according to Copernicus's database, the temperature between latitudes 40 and 90 north has risen by 2 degrees during the last 42 years. The corresponding figure for 40 to 90 latitudes south is 0.08 over land and 0.00 over ocean. It is 0.14 degrees according to satellite data since the 1970s. It is the same trend according to other measurements in Hadcrut 5, approximately 0.19. I do not understand what you are talking about.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Elsa Widding perhaps did not understand. I am talking about how the Sweden Democrats deny the climate threat we face and have pushed forward a government that will increase oil dependency and make us dependent on rogue states.

My question was whether it was Iranian oil that one particularly wants to get at, or Saudi Arabian. Or which oil is it that Elsa Widding wants us to burn in Sweden?

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! I want people to avoid freezing to death. I think that is more important. Furthermore, I believe that oil is not necessarily worse for the climate. Oil emits less than coal, especially lignite - brown coal.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Elsa Widding said that it is good to study. It also matters what one reads. I can only state that investigative journalism has a massive task ahead of it in fact-checking what is said in this chamber during this mandate period.

We are in a climate crisis. The consequences of it are extremely serious. I am completely convinced that there is not a single member in this Riksdag who wants people to freeze in the winter. There are, however, plenty of solutions to ensure that our entire population is warm and has reasonable electricity prices.

Environmental toxins, the spread of resistant bacteria, and chemicals you also mentioned. I can say that the decommissioning of the Ministry of the Environment means that we can neither manage the climate crisis nor the environmental problems you mentioned.

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is very good if we agree that we have great challenges when it comes to environmental issues. I am completely convinced that we will manage them, with or without a Ministry of the Environment. It is about what we focus on. The issues will not disappear - certainly not. I made a comparison and argue that here we really have something we can steer and influence.

When it comes to reading, I am probably one of the more well-read in this chamber.

I have a question for Elin Söderberg. How many hours have you spent on Assessment Report 6 from the IPCC?

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! I have spent very many hours on various IPCC reports. I note that in the Tidö Agreement and the Government Bill it was mentioned that the state shall proceed with nuclear activities. It was also mentioned that only one authority shall be a party in permit cases and that a civil servant responsibility shall be introduced, which risks making experts more cautious and fearful.

The closure of the Ministry of the Environment and these types of measures will mean that we will not be able to handle the environmental problems that you consider important. How does Elsa Widding intend for that to work?

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am completely convinced that my party will take these issues seriously and pursue them. I hope that we will become the new environmental party for Sweden.

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

Jytte Guteland (S)

Madam Speaker! We have understood that SD in many ways are the social engineers behind the government and thus the new power factor in Sweden today – actually those who to the greatest extent rule Sweden. Therefore, it is very relevant to find out what you think about the climate policy and that you are truly well-informed and pushing forward.

Elsa Widding dwells a lot on this with freezing to death. There we are in complete agreement. No one is going to freeze to death. We all have a strong pathos for ensuring that we have good heating and for working with energy policy in a satisfactory way. But what we are talking a lot about today is, after all, whether it is going to get hot and we therefore get more people dying because of the heat.

The biggest killer today when it comes to different temperatures is the heat, also in Europe. Those who die in Sweden and in the EU today die because it is too hot. It concerns primarily the elderly and the sick. Therefore, I want to know what the Sverigedemokraterna want to do to reduce global warming.

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is entirely correct: When it comes to extreme weather, it is actually the only thing there is statistical evidence for—that the heatwaves are becoming a bit warmer. But the variance has not changed. Also, the cold is becoming less cold, if one can express it in that way, which means that significantly fewer people die of cold today. In total, it is therefore, if one can speak in such terms, something positive that has happened. It is dreadful that people need to die of heat, but it is very good that so many fewer now die of cold. That is well my answer.

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

Jytte Guteland (S)

Madam Speaker! I would still like to know what the Sweden Democrats are doing to reduce global warming, now that you have so much power in your hands.

We are facing a climate summit in November in Egypt. Tomorrow, the European Parliament will adopt a resolution with a number of very sharp points. Among other things, it concerns securing the 100 billion US dollars that the developing countries need and which concern a number of commitments for the countries. I would therefore like to hear what plans you have there.

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

Elsa Widding (SD)

Madam Speaker! I personally – I cannot speak for my party yet – believe that the best thing we can do is to ensure that we help the poor countries to finance good coal power plants to take them out of poverty. Then it should be coal power plants with high efficiency. Otherwise, they will build coal power plants with low efficiency that emit more sulfur, more nitrogen, and significantly more carbon dioxide.

Lifting people out of poverty is actually what distinguishes the different scenarios at the turn of the century. It is about how many of us there are at the turn of the century, unfortunately.

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

Thomas Ragnarsson (M)

Madam Speaker! We in Sweden are spoiled when it comes to the availability and quality of water. Unfortunately, we see a globally increasing shortage of drinking water, and this shortage is also coming closer to our country. Today we have municipalities that have difficulty supplying their inhabitants and their industry with water in sufficient quantities, and it is likely that this will become increasingly common.

The municipalities today have a responsibility to ensure their water supplies, but it feels as if it ranks quite low on the priority list. People are quite satisfied that water of good quality comes out when we turn on the tap, but robust systems with redundancy are lacking in most municipalities.

This is pervasive across several areas. We have lived and live in a fantastic country that has not had war for over 200 years. This has lulled us into a false sense of security, where we have successively lowered our guard. Therefore, we lack today the preparedness to handle crises and sudden events.

A changed climate with more extreme weather such as hundred-year rains, prolonged droughts, and winter months that do not provide the precipitation that would be needed leads slowly but surely to reduced availability of water in our groundwater reserves, which in turn leads to municipalities needing to implement measures such as irrigation bans and threats of rationing at increasingly earlier times.

The Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management has proposed to the government that a national water strategy be created to highlight as many aspects as possible regarding water. I believe this would be very wise, partly because we create a preparedness for different scenarios regarding water, and partly because regions and municipalities would have a common steering document to base their own strategies on.

One part is the availability of water. The other part is the consumption. Therefore, we need to increase research on water issues and not only highlight the natural science perspective but also look at technology, innovation, and the social dimensions in various interdisciplinary studies.

If one studies the groundwater levels, one can see that the deep groundwater aquifers are not being replenished at the same rate as we consume water, which over time will lead to a depletion of the existing aquifers. Given the uncertain global situation, we need to increase the robustness of the drinking water system through backup power during power outages and the interconnection of water systems between municipalities and regions. Access to drinking water is absolutely crucial for a society's survival and is therefore one of the most prioritized areas when we are to strengthen the civil preparedness.

Madam Speaker! The conflict hotspots of the future will be about water. Therefore, it is important that we secure the assets that exist in our country and create political consensus on how we shall work with the issue moving forward.

(Applause)

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Welcome to the Swedish Parliament, Thomas Ragnarsson!

I would still like to thank Thomas for his speech. I think it was very good. After the previous exchange of remarks, it was also refreshing to get some sense and balance in the debate.

In the government statement, I unfortunately missed municipalities, regions, and water supply. We therefore look forward with hope that Thomas Ragnarsson will push forward on those issues so that we, for example, when the budget is presented, see measures so that the municipalities and regions can manage the water supply. That question is very important.

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

Thomas Ragnarsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Isak, for the welcome!

I believe we all see the changes regarding our water supply. They are complex issues.

Just this question is extremely important for a society's development and construction. It will probably require that we cooperate and put our heads together and try to move the issue forward. I look forward to working with these issues. This is an important issue for me.

I often miss that we dare to discuss the conflicts of interest that exist regarding the needs that exist in society.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! That is it without a doubt. Especially southeastern Sweden has a huge challenge when it comes to precisely climate change and drought. If we are to manage the water supply and food production, we need to ensure that we have groundwater on site when we need it. We need to take advantage of rainwater in a completely different way.

I wish Thomas Ragnarsson good luck in his work with this government.

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

Thomas Ragnarsson (M)

Madam Speaker! One of the most important water issues is precisely to create redundancy in the systems. That is what we lack today. We are very satisfied that water comes when we turn on the tap. But if something happens to the primary water source, we do not have a system where we can turn on a tap for water to come from another location. That is, to the highest degree, civil preparedness for me.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! On July 4, I visited the farmer Lars Paulson at Kvarngården just outside Långås in Halland. It is a farm that is leading the way in the green transition. When I was there, he was waiting for the delivery of Sweden's first biogas tractor, which will be powered by gas produced on the farm itself. The farm also produces gas for the farm's electricity supply, for a local gas station, and for the national gas grid. Kvarngården is a good example of how the green industries are driving the transition towards a climate-smart society. And in Halland, we have plenty of companies in the green industries.

Madam Speaker! If I may boast a little, the green industries actually employ around 13,000 people in Halland. This is important not only for the production of food and forest products but equally for the green transition. We need to take advantage of the resources that agriculture and forestry provide if we are to meet the climate challenge. The climate challenge is, after all, our time's greatest fateful issue.

Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, this was not noted in the government statement that the Prime Minister read out in the chamber yesterday. On the contrary, climate issues were again reduced to being about new nuclear power in an uncertain future, while proposals to significantly increase carbon dioxide emissions through a reduced reduction obligation were all the more clear. We were thus given a policy for increased instead of reduced emissions.

The countryside and the green industries were also treated neglectfully. Not least, it was unclear what the government wants with Swedish forestry.

Madam Speaker! If we are to meet the climate challenge, we must establish that the green industries play a decisive role in the green transition. It is the growing crops that bind carbon dioxide in both the short and the long perspective. Therefore, active agriculture and forestry are both smart and important from a purely climate perspective. Furthermore, the products that come from the fields and the forest are climate-smart. It is from there that we get locally produced and sustainable food. It is from there that we get biogas, biodrivels, and biofuels. It is from there that we get fossil-free building materials for houses and constructions.

When we have these opportunities, it is not sufficient to pursue a policy that counteracts the green transition. Sweden has been a pioneer by increasing the share of biofuels, and we have all the prerequisites to also increase domestic production. Unfortunately, the government is now moving in the opposite direction, which is to the detriment of the Swedish forest industry and for Swedish jobs, but above all for the climate. Sweden needs more biofuels, not less.

Furthermore, we need to be clear that we need to increase, not decrease, the use of forest products. Even that ambition was unfortunately missing in the government statement. In Halland, we have around 10,000 individual forest owners. It often concerns family forestry that has been operated for generations. They need to continue to receive good conditions.

Madam Speaker! I return to Lars Paulson at Kvarngården. He is a good representative for the green industries, which provide the people of Halländ with locally produced food, which keep the landscape open, which contribute to biodiversity and which want to lead the way in the green transition. Of course, he and everyone else within these industries can expect that the Swedish Parliament and the newly appointed government also see the value in what they do in our rural areas.

(Applause)

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

Joakim Järrebring (S)

Madam Speaker! The House has thus voted in Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister in Jimmie Åkesson's government. The basis for this government arrangement is the Tidö Agreement for Sweden: the Palace Agreement. That it is a Sweden Democrats government is clear when one reads the Palace Agreement. It is a deeply right-conservative, bordering on authoritarian, policy that characterizes the Tidö Agreement's political project.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing, however, is the total absence of environmental and climate policy proposals. We see, on the contrary, proposals for a halt to new main lines, a halt to the expansion of offshore wind power, and a halt to the reduction obligation. These are measures that are harmful to the climate transition and to our environment, but also to the Swedish economy.

Large-scale societal projects such as new infrastructure in communications and electricity supply are issues that must be handled long-term and with common sense and respect for the citizens' money. None of this is demonstrated by the parties of the Tidö agreement.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats stand firm on Sweden's previous ambition that our country shall become the world's first fossil-free welfare nation. It is an ambition that obligates. Since the 2014 election, we have established a structure for climate work with a climate policy framework, climate goals, the Climate Act, and the Climate Policy Council. Within the framework of the agreement concluded in the parliamentary Environmental Objectives Council, business and society have the long-term conditions to carry out the transition required to solve the climate challenge.

The Sweden Democrats' government is now to return to the Riksdag with a climate policy action plan, which shall, among other things, report how they intend for Sweden to reach the climate goals. But today we already know the consequences for our environmental and climate goals. In yesterday's government statement, it became clear that there will be no Ministry for the Environment in the Sweden Democrats' government. For the first time in 35 years, there is no Ministry for the Environment in Sweden. It is not possible to get a clearer description of how lowly this government values the environment and climate.

With the announcements we have already received regarding the reduction obligation, the Tidö government has not only significantly hindered the transport sector's transition. This also jeopardizes Swedish forestry, which is already under strong pressure from the EU. It also risks strengthening Sweden's dependence on foreign oil at a time when self-sufficiency in energy and food is of the highest security policy priority. The fact is, Madam Speaker, that when you turn over and shake Jimmie Åkesson's climate package, the only thing that falls out is a slip of paper that says "New nuclear power."

Madam Speaker! I like cheap electricity and have no particular preference for any specific type of power. But "new nuclear power" is probably not going to be particularly new, or else it is something that Sweden might perhaps enjoy in 10-15 years. If the Tidö Group, instead of elevating nuclear power to an ideology, had had the interests of Swedish households and companies in mind, one would have continued to invest in that which can provide the most energy at the lowest price in the shortest time, and that is offshore wind power. Instead, they are placing obstacles in the way of all the offshore wind power projects that are currently submitted as applications to Svenska kraftnät under the pretext that all types of power should bear their own costs. But to provide fast tracks in the permitting process to only nuclear power can hardly be called technology-neutral.

Madam Speaker! I actually hope that I am wrong when I doubt that the Tidö Agreement's political project, even as an ambition, will live up to Sweden's commitments under the Paris Agreement. It remains to be seen, but from what I have seen so far, Madam Speaker, I am not impressed.

(Applause)

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

Malin Larsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Today, during our general policy debate, I intend to speak about our Swedish forests and the forest's important role in the climate transition and for jobs. In the green transition, the forest, our green gold, has an important role.

I come from Västernorrland myself, which is one of our important forest counties. Sweden is a proud forest country. The forest built our country's prosperity and will be important for jobs and welfare even in the future. I can however state that the forest and the forest counties do not seem to be as important for our newly elected Prime Minister, given that the forest is not mentioned a single time in the so-called palace agreement and furthermore none of our newly elected ministers live north of Dalälven.

Madam Speaker! It is active and engaged forest owners who create growing forests. It requires long-term planning and work by forest owners. It must be planted, cleared, thinned, and then cleared and thinned again. Paths must be maintained, water sources must be preserved, hunting and wildlife management must be conducted, and so on.

We clearly need a clear, long-term and predictable forest policy based on the two equal goals of utilization and conservation. We shall also safeguard the independence of Swedish forest policy. When forests are to be protected, it shall be with voluntariness as the basis, with strengthened ownership rights, and with new and developed forms of protection and compensation.

But we must have a balance in use and preservation. We need active use in our growing forests to be able to transition society, replace fossil-based products, and create jobs. We simultaneously need to preserve conservation-worthy forest to ensure important environmental values.

When I was young and looking for summer jobs, one of the most popular jobs was to plant forest seedlings. Those who worked with it earned really well. Today, it is largely exclusively foreign labor that clears and plants in our forests. One can wonder why that is, because there is knowledge and workers here in the country. Could it perhaps be due to the willingness to pay?

The question of jobs linked to the forest is significant. In order for us to have forestry competence in the future, it is required that we start from the ground up and educate youth and the unemployed, so that they can take all the forestry jobs that exist, especially in the countryside, furthermore at normal Swedish entry-level wages. Labor immigration shall only be permitted when persons who can perform the job cannot be found here in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! The forest is crucial for Sweden's development. We have a unique resource in the forest - for the climate transition, for jobs, and for sustainable growth. We Social Democrats want to see a growing Swedish bioeconomy. Sweden has an untapped potential in by-products from agriculture and forestry that can be used for the production of renewable fuels. We want to see fuel manufactured from Swedish forest in our tanks instead of oil from Putin. We want to see increased timber house construction and strengthen the innovations surrounding the forest. With the forest's resources, we have the opportunity to increase the pace of the climate transition, for more jobs across the whole country, and strengthen our supply capacity.

(Applause)

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! Today I thought I would take the opportunity to tell you about a Swedish pride. SSAB is today a dramatic emitter of carbon dioxide. SSAB's advanced steel production causes extensive negative environmental impact. But the new Swedish technology for producing steel will turn the reality 180 degrees and become an environmental model. Carbon dioxide emissions in Sweden will decrease by 10 percent, which is a great success in the fight for a better environment. HYBRIT means that one can produce steel without coal, but it requires very large amounts of electricity. More electricity requires new power lines.

Companies create competitiveness by leading the way in the climate transition. This benefits not only the companies but all of Sweden as a society. This is something that many other countries are looking at and want to emulate. Oxelösund is the first within SSAB to transition to sustainable production. Carbon dioxide emissions in Oxelösund will decrease by over 80 percent. The goal is for Oxelösund to be the first in the world to deliver fossil-free steel, and already in 2026.

Last week, an important decision was reached. The Energy Markets Inspectorate gave its approval for a new overhead line based on the fact that the power grid needs to be secure, reliable, and efficient. Now it is important that authorities and courts handle the case and the appeals process efficiently and promptly.

Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats' green dream is red and industrial. We need to transition our society faster if we are to meet the climate threat. Industry is part of the solution, not the problem. Industry was the backbone when we built the folkhemmet and the welfare state. Now we shall use industry for a climate transition that can contribute to growth and development and create new jobs throughout Sweden. Swedish industry shall be world-leading in the climate transition. Reinfeldt once claimed during the previous bourgeois government that Swedish industry was largely gone. That is not the case.

SSAB's and the entire Swedish basic industry's green transition has a revolutionary significance for the climate but also for competitiveness over a long period ahead. It is about thousands of jobs. SSAB's transition in Oxelösund is in great need of a power line for the electricity supply that the carbon-free steel production requires, and it is needed already now.

Madam Speaker! It is about the climate, the jobs, and the green transition for all of Sweden.

(Applause)

Migration and integration

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

Johanna Haraldsson (S)

Madam Speaker! After two terms with a Social Democratic government, the Swedish labor market stands strong. There are 450,000 more people who have a job to go to today compared to 2014, and the time it takes for a newcomer to enter employment has been significantly shortened. After the pandemic and the effects it had on unemployment, the Swedish labor market has recovered very quickly. This is largely thanks to the government's focus on protecting Swedish jobs and companies.

We have lower unemployment today than before the pandemic. Long-term unemployment is falling. But in times of economic decline and increased unemployment, we risk continuing to have far too many people without jobs and self-sufficiency for far too long. More need to enter work faster, especially among foreign-born women where unemployment is highest today.

General political debate Climate, environment and energy policy

Several important reforms have been implemented to get more people into work and shorten the establishment period for foreign-born individuals. We restructured the establishment program to become a labor market program among all others with the same requirements for those who are job seekers.

Limitation of parental leave, abolition of child support, and the introduction of extra services have moved foreign-born women closer to the labor market. The Settlement Act has created a more evenly distributed responsibility between municipalities and contributed to a faster establishment in the labor market.

Madam Speaker! High demands need to be placed on those who are without work to make themselves employable and to make their own efforts. Therefore, language requirements, activity requirements, and the duty to educate are important. But placing demands unilaterally will not make people employable. Alongside requirements, an active labor market policy with sufficient resources is required to be able to support the individual in the way that she specifically needs.

Support must be there where it is needed most. Therefore, the Social Democratic government tasked Arbetsförmedlingen with strengthening support for the long-term unemployed, especially in the socioeconomically most vulnerable areas.

General political debate Migration and integration

If one, like I, believes that an active labor market policy is the best tool for getting more people into work and for improved integration, there is, as a result of the change in government, reason for concern. The right-wing government's "slottsavtal" is full of higher requirements and reduced benefits. But I would say that it is completely devoid of effective measures for better integration.

M, KD and SD are responsible for the heavy cuts in labor market initiatives and appropriations that forced Arbetsförmedlingen to close numerous offices across the country. They have stopped extra services that have been important for foreign-born women to get closer to the labor market.

The governing parties have not prioritized measures to break segregation or support the establishment of those born abroad when they have had the opportunity. After reading the right-wing government's palace agreement, it is easy to conclude that they will continue on the path they have taken.

We have a great need to equip ourselves to meet upcoming crises. Instead, we risk a dismantling of the labor market policy. Different measures are needed because people are different. A narrower and limited range of labor market measures risks parking people outside, without jobs and self-sufficiency.

Blaming people and lowering compensations will not improve integration. It is achieved by being willing to see people's potential, setting requirements and providing as much support as requirements are set. That is what they need to enter the labor market. This requires an active labor market policy.

(Applause)

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

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today, many municipalities around Sweden are granting financial assistance to illegal migrants. This means that tax money paid in by hard-working Swedes is financing the maintenance of migrants who do not even have permission to be in Sweden. It also means that the entire administrative process regarding the review of applications for residence permits is being questioned by certain municipalities.

After the Swedish Migration Agency has completed its investigation and made the assessment that a migrant shall not stay in Sweden, and after the migrant in question has been given an opportunity to appeal to the migration court, certain municipalities begin to pay for the maintenance of these illegal migrants in Sweden.

One wonders why. They have received a fair and thorough review. The authorities that have been given the responsibility to conduct these reviews have concluded that these people should not be in Sweden and should be deported. Yet, we have municipalities that make a different assessment.

These municipalities make the assessment that it is the municipality's task to enable illegal migrants to remain in Sweden. This can occur because we today have a Social Services Act that gives the social welfare committee in a certain municipality the room to, through a political decision, also pay out financial assistance to illegal migrants.

The Supreme Administrative Court has ruled that there is no obligation for municipalities to provide financial assistance to those who are denied an asylum application and hide to avoid a rejection or deportation. Financial assistance does not need to be paid out to these illegal migrants to avoid an acute emergency situation.

It is therefore not mandated by law that illegal migrants shall be granted financial assistance. We have municipal politicians who use a loophole in the Social Services Act to undermine the decisions that the Swedish Migration Agency and migration courts have made. In Malmö, it is also the case that illegal migrants who happen to have children are provided with housing funded by the municipality.

Madam Speaker! When Swedes pay tax, they do so in the belief that these tax funds shall finance services that meet essential needs in society: security, elderly care, education for children and youth, infrastructure to hold our country together, a functioning justice system, a defense that defends our freedom, and many other investments that are important for a country.

Not many expect that their tax money will be paid out to illegal migrants who do not even have permission to stay in Sweden. This assembly, this Riksdag, must work to close the loopholes in current legislation that allow municipal politicians to provide financial assistance to illegal migrants. The only thing illegal migrants should receive from Swedish authorities is a ticket home.

(Applause)

In this speech, Erik Hellsborn (SD) agreed.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Madam Speaker! I do not quite understand the logic of the Sweden Democrats. First and foremost, no human being is illegal. I must clarify that for the member here.

So, one simply wants to make life much harder for those who are here than what they have fled from. One would probably have to do very much to Sweden if one is to replicate what it is like in the world's most dangerous country Afghanistan, the war-torn Syria, or the oppressive regime of Eritrea. That is what people have fled from.

My question is: Are you going to make Sweden just as bad, Nima Gholam Ali Pour? That is the logic that emerges here. What emerges here is a policy that has been tested in several stages and always with the same result, namely that vulnerability increases. It is also not possible to deport people just however one likes. We follow international conventions. It is then completely obvious that children must be able to get a roof over their heads and some kind of support when they are here. They also cannot be deported. We must take that responsibility.

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

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Madam Speaker! The people who stay in Sweden without permission are here illegally; they are illegal migrants. That is how the public perceives it: Those who are here illegally are illegal migrants.

When it comes to children – it is not good for children to stay in Sweden illegally. It is not good for children to live an underground life just because their parents want to be in Sweden illegally. We absolutely must do something about this.

Then I think that the social services should actually look at cases where one stays here illegally with children and see if the child should even stay with the parents. How can one sacrifice their child's safety and well-being by staying in Sweden illegally and forcing the child into an underground life here?

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Madam Speaker! The member does not answer my question about whether he wants to make Sweden the world's most dangerous country, like Afghanistan.

It is not possible to carry out these deportations. Sweden is a democracy. We follow international conventions. People can be stateless; they cannot be deported and end up in limbo. One can risk torture and must not be deported.

So my question to you, Nima Gholam Ali Pour, is: Is this government going to sign agreements with, for example, the Taliban, the world's foremost perpetrators of genocide? Is it them you want to sign agreements with in order to be able to deport people to Afghanistan? Please answer that, thank you!

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

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Madam Speaker! Tony Haddou must realize that many react negatively when they learn that municipalities have the scope to grant financial assistance, which comes from our hard-working taxpayers, to persons in Sweden who are here illegally. It is also a fact that illegal migrants today function as a workforce for the illegal economy, which is constantly growing due to this labor.

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

Johanna Haraldsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to ask a question to the member who concerns integration policy. The Palace Agreement is very non-specific regarding the issue of integration and the establishment of newcomers in the labor market. SD has previously wanted to scrap virtually the entire active labor market policy because they consider it to constitute a hidden immigration cost.

What can we expect now with the new government, with the Sweden Democrats as the largest party in the government base? Will you continue on the path taken with cuts, Nima Gholam Ali Pour, or how will it be?

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

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Madam Speaker! The member poses a question that should be directed to the government or a minister who actually has responsibility for integration issues. What I can say is that illegal migrants can never be integrated into our society because they do not have permission to be here, to touch upon what I spoke about.

From what I have read of the Tidö Agreement, it appears that there are proposals for a requirement-heavy integration, where people truly become a part of society so that we do not get areas of exclusion like Rosengård in Malmö and all the other areas of exclusion that the Social Democrats have been involved in creating over the years, through an irresponsible immigration policy and a non-existent integration policy. There are proposals for a requirement-heavy integration policy so that one can become a part of Swedish culture, learn the Swedish language and become a part of Sweden for real.

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

Johanna Haraldsson (S)

Madam Speaker! We are quite in agreement that we need to set requirements and ensure that people become part of society, especially by participating in the labor market.

The Speaker refuses to answer the question because it should be directed to the government, but I am directing the question to the party that is the largest in the government base and actually governs the government's policy to a very large extent. I believe that one, just as the leader of the Sweden Democrats says, must take responsibility for the entire policy.

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

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Madam Speaker! I answered the member's question by describing the proposals regarding integration that are contained in the Tidö Agreement.

But we are not in agreement. When the Social Democrats were in power, we had hardly any integration policy, and what we got were areas of exclusion where people live in parallel social systems. You had no integration policy from the Social Democrats' side, Johanna Haraldsson.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! Being Sweden's Workers' Party obliges us to be a voice for all who work, all who have worked, and all who want to work. We promise therefore that you shall be able to live on your wage or pension, that work shall pay more than benefits, and that all who can work shall also work. In Växjö we called this the Växjö Promise. Now we can finally have the Sweden Promise. The Tidö Agreement is a problem-solving program with a comprehensive benefits reform as a fundamental pillar.

A job is independent income, security, and community. But it is also effort. Our society becomes strong through people's toil, diligence, and trust in one another. Despite this, it should be more convenient to work than not to do so. Requirements are about caring.

The unemployed shall educate themselves, learn Swedish, participate in internships and seek full-time work in order to receive benefits. According to the Tidö Agreement, the activity requirement may also include socially useful activities.

Madam Speaker! It should never be more profitable to live on benefits than to work. Therefore, a benefit ceiling and reduced tax on work were needed.

Contributions should go to those in need, not to fraudsters. Therefore, better control was needed - a grant authority that handles the payments and a grant account that prevents stacking and reduces the risk of fraud or inaccuracies. A national census, revocation of coordination numbers, and a ban on Malmö grants, i.e., that municipalities can pay out social grants to people who are in the country illegally, shall together with activity requirements against black market work and home visits take back 20 billion tax kronor from the fraudsters - to welfare, security, and the wallets of hardworking Swedes.

Do your duty, demand your right - in that order - has built our country. The Tidö Agreement contains important reforms to get immigration in order and strengthen the qualification principle in the welfare system.

Asylum seekers should live and participate in activities at transit centers. This facilitates the return for those who are refused, and it facilitates the establishment for those who are accepted. During the establishment, requirements for counter-performance shall be set for both housing and benefits. A mandatory social orientation with a national curriculum and a knowledge test - Sweden introduction, as we called it in Växjö - is another important reform in the Tidö Agreement.

Madam Speaker! The work line is the campfire of a good society. Not everyone has a secure family or good childhood friends, but everyone should be able to get a really fine colleague.

There on the workshop floor, Ahmed and Simon meet. They might not always have the same lunch box, but they find really good routines for changing tires quickly together. It turns out that they agree with each other that diesel prices are too high - and yes, now we are actually going to change that - but maybe not on who has the best taste in music. And that is something one can live with.

There on the workshop floor, they solve many problems, not only for the customers or for each other, but also for society. At work, people learn Swedish, create understanding for one another and for what applies in our society, get their own income, and are recruited into the V75 company with their colleagues instead of into gang crime.

Madam Speaker! Now the Sweden Promise is needed because Sweden works when Sweden is at its best.

(Applause)

In this speech, Erik Hellsborn (SD) agreed.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the speech! It is always easy to say that one should be able to live on one's pension, but you voted against such an increase last spring. There are not particularly many job initiatives among the Moderaterna.

It is very good with matching and so on if there is something to match against. But we have already tried this labor market policy, the so-called work line. How well do you think it went? People were thrown out of the sickness insurance. The sick and unemployed had to pay for the rich's tax cuts. This increased the inequalities in society even more.

Now you are there again and want to absolve yourselves of responsibility. If you want to create jobs, you invest in welfare, healthcare, schools and housing. It is an active labor market policy that creates jobs, but we do not see those investments. Then you blame immigrants. Why?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! It will be tough for the Social Democrats, because in their opposition basis there is a very sharp criticism of the policy with stricter requirements that the Social Democrats now at least claim to advocate for. From Vänsterpartiet, it is heard as usual that we should only squeeze out the unemployment.

The truth is that this is not a conflict. We obviously need a combination of sharp requirements and proper support. It is a policy that has worked in many moderately-led municipalities with good results, just as it was a policy that took hundreds of thousands of people out of exclusion into the workforce under the Alliance government. Now, with a restored work line, we will be able to do the same thing again.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Madam Speaker! Excuse my lack of decorum, but that is simply not true!

The Leader of the Opposition claims that we want to hug away unemployment. I have just spoken for a minute about wanting to invest. We want to make investments in school, welfare, and housing construction and ensure that people get into work and that we get a climate transition that also creates jobs. The Moderaterna exempt themselves from all of this. When people then see that society is being destroyed, the Moderaterna point fingers and blame immigrants.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! The Member of Parliament misses that there are twice as many vacant jobs reported to Arbetsförmedlingen as there are long-term unemployed in Sweden. The problem we have in the Swedish labor market is not primarily that there is a lack of job opportunities, but that those who are without work do not have the ability to take the jobs that exist. Therefore, we need to tighten the requirements that one must educate themselves, learn Swedish, participate in internships, perform socially useful tasks, and take the jobs that are offered, apply for those jobs, and exert themselves full-time for that.

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

Johanna Haraldsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to ask another question to Member Rosengren. It concerns the Settlement Act. The Settlement Act has been an important reform to achieve a more even distribution of newcomers between the municipalities. This has shortened the time until employment and the wait to be placed in a municipality.

Now the government parties want to abolish the Settlement Act. How does the member believe that this will improve integration?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! In order to achieve better order in integration, one must first get order on immigration. Therefore, we propose, for example, new transit centers, where those who are asylum seekers shall live and have activities while awaiting their decision. For those who receive a yes and are allowed to stay in Sweden, the establishment must function easily. With transit centers, we will also be able to perform a better mapping in advance, so that these people can enter the municipalities in a better way.

In the Tidö Agreement, it stands clear and distinct that we shall continue with a distribution, but this fact that one can, as of today, override municipalities needs to be reviewed. It is also reasonable in a country with a strong local self-government.

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

Johanna Haraldsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates want to return to what did not work. Even though we have transit centers and similar measures and can conduct mapping, an abolition of the Settlement Act means that certain municipalities can oppose receiving newly arrived people. It is close to the hand to think that one listens more to prosperous Stockholm municipalities than to Uppvidinge or Sävsjö.

We know that the reform has had a positive effect. What is it that makes one still want to abolish the law?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is not so long ago that I was in Uppvidinge. I would say that the member has a completely wrong perception when it comes to the idea that it would work so very well in Uppvidinge after eight years with the Social Democrats.

I believe the Social Democrats are alone in the description that it works with the establishment reform and the settlement law that has been in place now. It has not worked well enough, and we will ensure that it does. But that requires reforms in a number of different areas, not just forcing people out into municipalities where the reception might be lacking. And Filipstad is not a wealthy Stockholm municipality.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! I note that the paradigm shift we face in migration policy occurs against the background of the fact that if, for a long period, one says anything about people, one can also do anything with them. We know what this has led to historically, and we see consequences here and now, primarily for those who are deprived of the protection they are entitled to but also for those who have received protection.

We have seen consequences in the form of burning asylum centers, daily hate crimes and discrimination, and an increasingly raw and racist tone in the public debate. Thus, differences are created in society. The brutal class society is maintained and racism is reinforced.

I note that it is precisely in the palace agreement that the brown and the blue nationalist right meet, at the intersection between cuts and racism. It is there that the worst-off are attacked and pitted against each other.

Mr. Speaker! We will face a new wave of deregulation, hollowed-out safety nets, a welfare state on starvation rations, and wages and benefits that are not enough. The rich will be able to get away, and the poor are left behind. At that crossroads, the new government needs racism. Regardless of whether it is about unemployment, the housing crisis, or the neglected welfare, it is the government that is obsessed with pointing at immigration in order to escape responsibility themselves.

By portraying the people seeking protection here as a threat and a burden, it becomes easier to condition welfare and deny them rights. The right wants to cut back on the safety nets for everyone, but it is always easiest to point at these groups. And that is what the right has done, with a tone that completely distorts what everything should be about, namely that people are fleeing from war, persecution, terror, and oppression.

It should be about how we create the best possible conditions for those who come here to become a part of our society and about how we create a humane, dignified and welcoming refugee policy where one's grounds for asylum are examined in a legally secure manner. It should be about how we make Sweden a better and more spacious place - a place with more rights and opportunities instead of fewer. It is how we invest in society and the people in it that determines how well we succeed.

But the government does not have these ambitions. The government wants to cast people into insecurity and uncertainty and ensure that even fewer succeed in making it here. And for this, a policy of division is used that makes Sweden a smaller and worse country to live in for all of us. It is a policy that I strongly oppose.

Before I conclude, Mr. Speaker, I want to turn to all parents and children in split families who are already today facing the consequences of an inhumane migration policy. We know how terribly you have been treated. And to all of you who are afraid of the future, I want to say: Your children also have a right to freedom, safety, and family. Your lives and your children's future matter and count.

We will stand in solidarity and fight for every family that lives in insecurity and uncertainty and wants to be reunited.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! We need to take back democratic control over migration policy. It is obvious that the migration policy that has been pursued in Sweden for a longer period has lacked anchoring among the Swedish people. In order to be able to pursue the policy over time, one must naturally weigh one's values against reality, and in reality, there is not only the budget but also the anchoring.

My question to you, Tony Haddou, is: How do you want to regain the legitimacy for the migration policy that you yourself advocate for? It seems to be lacking among those whom we are elected to represent.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is precisely the racist and harsh tone that we have heard for a long time in Sweden that has distorted the debate and what it should actually be about. Then it is not correct when it comes to the anchoring among the Swedish population in this issue. The Red Cross produced a survey - I believe it was Novus that conducted it for them. Seven out of ten Swedes want families to be reunited - Swedes want it. That is a majority, isn't it?

It is not the case that you have an anchoring when you come with these proposals, Oliver Rosengren. I do not believe either that people who have voted for you were prepared for the Sweden Democrats' policy to be passed entirely. They are holding the member here on a leash, Mr. Speaker. It is the Sweden Democrats' policy we are talking about. It is not the Moderates', the Christian Democrats', or the Liberals'. They have said yes to this and agreed to this, but they will be on a leash.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! When I read the parts of the Tidö Agreement regarding migration, I can only state that even if we had not needed the Sweden Democrats, we should have carried out the investigations and the proposals that are now in the Tidö Agreement, possibly with some single exceptions.

It is a wise realignment and a wise review of the migration policy that is being proposed. One should not applaud all parts of it, but it is necessary. Policy is sometimes reduced to just that: what is necessary. And that is exactly what this is.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! I do not know how necessary it is to investigate whether we are to go against the principles of the rule of law and dismantle democracy in Sweden. It makes me very thoughtful when a member defends it in this way.

We are going against the principles of the rule of law, which we as a democracy and we in this chamber vote on. Then there is a whole host of insane things, such as for example punishing crime victims. It is an insane policy.

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats have long, with their policy, wanted to send a very clear signal to people fleeing: Sweden is closed. You are not welcome here. Do not come here! And if you do come here, your rights shall be minimal.

That signal is now becoming a reality when the Sweden Democrats' migration policy is to be realized point by point by Moderates, Christian Democrats and so-called Liberals.

In recent days, we have repeatedly heard that there will be a paradigm shift in Swedish migration policy, and it is absolutely true. Sweden has long been a country that has taken responsibility for people on the run - people fleeing war, oppression, and horrors that we cannot even imagine. It is a shift towards a historically conservative and nationalist migration policy.

Let me be clear! For me as a liberal and for me as a member of the Centre Party, the right to asylum is inviolable. The person who comes to Sweden shall have their grounds for protection examined. If one does not have grounds for protection, one shall be returned, but if one has grounds for protection, one shall be met with: Welcome home! And one shall be given the best possible conditions to be integrated and become a part of our common society.

Politics is about compromising – that is something one knows as an old local politician. But when it comes to human values and certain issues, such as migration policy, one as a liberal-minded person must have certain red lines that one never compromises on. This is not for show. This is for real. No one flees because it is fun. One does not flee from war, oppression, persecution, and bombs because it is fun. One flees for their life. The new government's migration policy is a hard blow for all those who are now forced to flee.

There is much in the new migration policy direction that is directly bad policy. The humanitarian basis will become narrower. It will become harder for children to be reunited with their parents. And the permanent residence permits are to disappear.

Mr. Speaker! There is much that is noteworthy. Since the 1950s, Sweden has been a proud and very large recipient country when it comes to quota refugees. Quota refugees are some of our time's most vulnerable people. Among those whom UNHCR most often identifies as quota refugees are women, children, young girls, those wounded in war and tortured. They are our time's most vulnerable refugees. Last year, Sweden received over 6,000 quota refugees. With the new so-called bourgeois and liberal government, we shall receive fewer than 900 per year.

Mr. Speaker! Last Friday was a dark day for Sweden and for Swedish migration policy, but above all for people on the run.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! In Jonny Cato's contribution, he spoke in favor of those who receive a rejection returning or leaving Sweden. My question to Jonny Cato is: What is the Center Party's view on the proposals in the Tidö Agreement regarding transit centers, so that the police and other parts of the state apparatus do not have to devote large resources to finding persons who have received a rejection and who have then gone underground?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Oliver Rosengren, for the question and welcome to the Swedish Parliament! I had the honor of sitting in the Migration Policy Committee that investigated Sweden's new migration policy. The Center Party believes that return is an important issue and was also prepared to turn and twist how we can achieve exactly an increased return in Sweden. The Center Party was actually the only party that, in connection with our adoption of a new migration policy, tabled a motion that we should obtain a broad investigation looking at how return in Sweden can be improved.

I am prepared to look at the type of proposals that the government presents so that the return shall become better and more efficient, but it needs to be combined with other things, for example, increased legal certainty.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to the question of return and transit centers, though then called reception centers, there is already an investigation. The reception investigation has already moved forward with an alternative proposal regarding this type of reform. We could implement this significantly faster than by sitting down in some new Center Party-led broad group. We could have the chance to move forward quickly here. Therefore, it is good that the Center Party seems to welcome it. Then we can hopefully do this with a broader majority in the Riksdag.

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! I did not propose any new group, but it is as usual when Moderates want to cooperate with Center Party members these days: One invites a little with the elbow.

(Applause)

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Four years ago, I stood in this rostrum for the very first time. I then highlighted this regarding freedom of religion in Sweden.

I meant then that it was a freedom that actually does not apply to everyone here in our country, and I still mean that. It is, in fact, still uncomfortably quiet when it comes to the situation of Christian refugees and converts in Sweden. It is a silence that is incomprehensible, because we know that one is persecuted here - even though we have freedom of religion as a very cherished and important freedom.

The Crime Prevention Council states in its hate crime report that christophobic hate crimes have increased in Sweden. The organization Open Doors has shown that religiously motivated persecutions against Christian refugees in Sweden are extensive, that they are directed primarily against converts, and that it is often migrants who commit the abuses.

I have raised the situation of the converts an innumerable number of times in this chamber, and I am therefore pleased that both in the Tidö Agreement and in the government statement that we listened to yesterday, the situation of the converts was included.

Here in the chamber, I have also repeatedly argued that Sweden needs an inspection for migration issues similar to the one we have within the social insurance in the form of ISF. ISF has a very important role to fill for those of us who work with social insurance to be able to make it better so that it is as effective as we all, regardless of political party, believe it should be.

Why we do not have an external, independent party within the migration area is and remains a mystery. But now a change will occur. Despite the fact that interest here in the chamber has been very lukewarm for this inspection of migration issues, this very point is included in the Tidö Agreement: to review whether we should have an external party who looks at how the process works and how good the legal certainty is for the individual when decisions are made.

For us Christian Democrats, two very pleasing things have happened in the last few days. And it is not only converts who should be in focus. We also know that the process behind a decision on grounds of protection for LGBTQ persons, i.e., a yes or no to being allowed to stay, can be improved in many parts.

We therefore hope very much for the new government, not least from the fact that these specific groups are being highlighted as important. We need quality and uniformity in Sweden so that we can trust that a decision of yes or no is always correctly made.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Hans Eklind, for the speech! I am glad that the member brings up the situation for converts and LGBTQI persons - naturally sad in a time when Sweden is closing and shutting itself off.

Over 100 million people are in flight, Mr. Speaker. Government representatives themselves state that one says one thing before the election and another after the election. The Christian Democrats wanted to counter human smuggling and protect the most vulnerable refugees before the election. I am very happy that one wants to protect the most vulnerable refugees, and the best method for that is indeed the quota refugee system. But you have moved away from that now, even though we both thought it was good. I believe that Hans Eklind thought it was good before the election.

But now that is not what is being done. Now, one wants a system where one moves away from taking care of those with the greatest needs, the most vulnerable cases in the world, those who should be protected through legal means. You are breaking this system by going as low as the Kristdemokraterna have agreed to. Why?

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Tony Haddou, for an important question! Safe and legal routes are what we usually talk about within migration policy, and that includes the quota refugee system. During the election campaign, I have highlighted another safe and legal route that I believe Sweden, just like a number of other EU countries, has reason to consider, namely humanitarian reception programs. It is also about safe and legal routes. We have also highlighted sponsorship as an additional way to create a safe and legal route.

The number of quota refugees is decreasing; that is entirely correct. Despite this decrease, we must still be careful to say that we are at the top of the world when it comes to the number of quota refugees. Even though I accept that one can criticize the decrease, we shall therefore know that we still rank at the top of the world.

What is important here and now, so that we can ensure safe and legal routes function, is that irregular migration is significantly reduced. There is much left to work on there.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! I do not quite understand that logic. The reduction will lead to other countries also coming to a conclusion.

What happens when you reduce the quota refugee system is that people fall into the hands of human smugglers and are forced to make these life-threatening journeys through the Sahara or across the Mediterranean with their children. No one puts their child on a boat if it were safe on land. That is why we have the quota refugee system.

Now you are turning away from it, Hans Eklind, straight into the hands of the people smugglers.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! One cannot begin a speech by saying that we have 100 million refugees, which is correct, and at the same time assert that the number of quota refugees is decisive for whether these end up in the hands of human smugglers or not.

The quota refugee system is one of the systems, and if we are to create more safe and legal routes for all those millions of refugees who exist, the solution is not that we in Sweden take responsibility for this. The solution is that more countries that today do not accept quota refugees, or accept very few, should step up. Then we can establish a good quota refugee system for all refugees.

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! I had not intended to request the floor, but when Member Hans Eklind speaks about increased legal certainty, I thought it might be appropriate for us to quote the Tidö Agreement, which states that the individual's rights during the asylum process "shall not be more extensive than what EU law requires, meaning that, for example, the right to an interpreter, a publicly funded legal representative, assistance or counsel shall be reviewed."

How does this square with increased legal certainty during the asylum process?

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The short and simple answer is that legal certainty means that both a yes and a no must rest on correct grounds.

For that reason, I mean that legal certainty gains from the Tidö Agreement. It is about establishing an inspection for migration issues and about, for example, doing what Ulf Kristersson underscored in his government declaration yesterday, namely to review converters' and LGBTQ persons' opportunities to have their grounds for protection examined in a correct manner.

This is about legal certainty, and I want to ask a question back to the member: Does the Center Party have any proposals that increase legal certainty? Is the Center Party now ready to support an inspection regarding migration issues, which is actually included in the Tidö Agreement? Or does the member believe that it doesn't matter if we have an independent external party looking at how legal certainty can be increased in Sweden?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! I am, of course, prepared to look at everything that can increase legal certainty.

I still do not understand how one can stand in the rostrum and speak about how we are to increase legal certainty for converts and LGBTQI refugees and at the same time remove their opportunity to make themselves understood with the help of an interpreter and legal counsel.

This will not increase legal certainty. We do not need any inspection to establish that; we can establish that here. It will decrease legal certainty.

(Applause)

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The member has in several replies said that he is prepared to review matters and things. But it would be nice if the member acted so that we would do something instead.

The member knows that I have raised an inspection for migration issues at every debate in this chamber for four years. I have never once heard the member agree that this is an important requirement, neither for the member himself nor for his party.

We actually have concrete proposals for increased legal certainty. I just hope that the Center Party is on board and supports these proposals when they hopefully end up in the chamber for a decision.

Healthcare and welfare issues

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

Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to raise important issues concerning the future of our children and youth.

General political debate Migration and integration

We live in turbulent times. Children and young people have a right to life, survival, development and hope for the future. The key factors are to help those children and young people who need it most and at an early stage.

Mr. Speaker! 2022 is not only an election year but also a year designated as the European Year of Children and Youth. The gaps, the mental ill-health, and the child poverty will increase. No children should live in child poverty, but this year's child poverty report shows that approximately 196,000 children in Sweden live in child poverty.

Today, one can read in Örnsköldsviks Allehanda that in only my home municipality, Örnsköldsvik, more than 200 children have been removed this year in connection with their parents being removed. This is happening at a time when we find ourselves in a serious security situation and economic situation. There is inflation, and we have a tough winter ahead of us with price increases on food and fuel as well as rent increases. It affects companies, civil society, our families and thus our children.

We are now witnessing how many young people are terminating their membership in associations with various activities because the membership fees have been raised far too much.

General political debate Healthcare and welfare issues

All our children and young people shall have the right to a rich association life regardless of the parents' incomes. The fees shall be low, and more physical meeting places need to be created. The support for community halls and civil society organizations needs to be increased. Likewise, we need to develop cultural life throughout Sweden.

We know that education is the key when it comes to countering youth unemployment. Those young people who do not complete their upper secondary education run the risk of ending up in long-term unemployment. Therefore, it is the young people who lack upper secondary education who must be supported. It is worrying that the number of young people who neither work nor study is consistently high and is expected to rise.

Mr. Speaker! Throughout the entire election campaign, we Social Democrats pushed the issue of stopping profit extraction in schools. Our common tax money should go towards hiring more teachers, creating smaller classes, buying textbooks, and establishing school libraries. Our election promise was also more resources for sports, stopping the sell-off of BUP, expanding first-line psychiatry, and introducing a national support line for mental ill-health.

I know that there is a great responsibility on our municipalities and regions when it comes to preventive measures. A crime-preventive measure can be to actively offer preschool places to children who have a need for language development or who have other needs.

Mr. Speaker! The state needs to take its responsibility as soon as possible and provide our municipalities and regions with the conditions to invest in welfare. It will be crucial for our children's and young people's future. Unfortunately, nothing was mentioned in the government's statement regarding resources for municipalities and regions.

(Applause)

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! During the last eight years, Sweden has had a weak government that has governed our country without a clear course. During the last eight years, Sweden has had a government that has lacked both decisiveness and the ability to tackle the large and serious problems that Sweden has. During the last eight years, Sweden has had a government whose governing base has lacked a common idea of how we should prepare our country for the challenges of the future.

But now, Sweden has finally received a new government. Finally, Sweden has received a government that puts substantive policy and Sweden's problems at the center. Finally, Sweden has received an action-oriented government that, based on a strong and clear reform agenda, will begin the laborious work of getting Sweden in order. Finally!

Mr. Speaker! In the area we are now debating and for which I feel a very strong commitment, namely social policy, the to-do list is long and the need for reform is great. This applies to both healthcare and social services as well as the bridge between the two areas. Today, many people with extensive needs are getting caught in the crossfire or falling between the cracks. This concerns, for example, many seriously ill elderly people who do not receive sufficiently coordinated care and support, as well as people who struggle with both addiction and other mental ill-health. These are people who need to receive coherent care and treatment but who instead are often referred here and there.

Addiction care is an area for which I feel a great personal commitment, and therefore I am very pleased that strengthened addiction care is a specific point in the Tidö Agreement.

Mr. Speaker! Since 2014, the healthcare queues have doubled. Now, all capacity within healthcare must be utilized and coordinated better. Therefore, it is important that a national healthcare brokerage is put in place at the same time as the capacity within healthcare is expanded, not least within primary care. The key to succeeding with that is spelled competence supply. For that, the state must now take a greater responsibility.

The lack of accessibility and the long healthcare queues are one of the fundamental problems of Swedish healthcare. Another problem is the inequality across the country. It is a serious problem without simple solutions, but it is a problem that we now seriously need to address. Need, not where one lives, or for that matter which queue one is in, shall determine what care one receives.

Just as the problem of lack of accessibility, the unequal healthcare is largely about competence supply but also about the need for increased state governance as well as the need for investments in more equal healthcare. Increased cooperation in more regional centers is an important step in the right direction as well as investments in women's diseases and health, which are important proposals from us Moderates that will now become a reality with the help of the Tidö Agreement and the new government.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would like to highlight the need for measures to strengthen mental health. Mental illness is today a real public health problem, which causes enormous costs and a very great amount of suffering. Many suffer so poorly that they choose to end their lives. Last year, it was more than 1,500 people who took their own lives in Sweden. From these utterly appalling figures, the Moderaterna and the government have concluded that the work with suicide prevention must be given a much higher priority.

Mr. Speaker! Now the laborious work of getting Sweden in order begins.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! The member has a completely wonderful way of blackening Sweden, I must say. The image of Sweden right now in national and international media is not at its peak. So, I would like to begin.

When I read the so-called palace agreement, I find it very difficult to perceive how much is written about elderly care. It is not much. Much of what is written under health and medical care are things that we agree on, for example, addiction care.

But the interesting thing, Mr. Speaker, is what comes next, that is the budget. All these fine words and all these promises must also be fulfilled with great force, with money directed, for example, to the state grants so that one can live up to what is written.

Does the member have any idea how these objectives are to be fulfilled financially?

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, we are facing a very tough economic situation. It is impossible to ignore, and it will require tough priorities.

From the Moderates' side, we will of course stand up for the need for a responsible economic policy that does not fuel inflation. We will stand up for and safeguard the core of the welfare state, where healthcare is an incredibly important part - as is elderly care.

When it comes to elderly care, there are certainly many points concerning exactly that in the Tidö Agreement. Karin Rågsjö perhaps unfortunately has not read the agreement thoroughly enough. But we highlight, for example, the need for a new Social Services Act. We highlight the need to introduce language requirements within elderly care so that our elderly can feel secure that they are understood and can make themselves understood. We highlight the need to ensure the municipal access to doctors out in elderly care, which both Member Rågsjö and I know is extremely important to ensure good care and healthcare for our elderly.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! We have truly scanned the castle agreement thoroughly, and we will, of course, return to it in a number of debates that we will have ahead.

What will be interesting is what happens in the next step. With such powerful promises being made regarding health and medical care - and we think parts of it are fantastic - proper money is required, especially for the staff within elderly care and health and medical care. It will be interesting to look at.

(Applause)

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! We are going to have a lively budget debate here in the chamber; I am absolutely convinced of that. Member Rågsjö will be one of those who contributes to that liveliness, so I look forward to that debate.

I also look forward to our regions, where Vänsterpartiet unfortunately gains increased influence in many places in Sweden, also delivering investments in staff and increased staffing. This is something that Vänsterpartiet has had very high advocacy for, and now it is up to be proven also for Vänsterpartiet and the red-green government that unfortunately will take seats in many regional boards in Sweden moving forward.

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

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! In his speech, the member gives a rather gloomy picture of Sweden, just as the previous speaker pointed out. Then we must remember that we have gone through a historical pandemic. I also want to remind the member that the previous government made historical investments in healthcare, elderly care, and school.

Therefore, I would like to ask Member Johan Hultberg: What will your priorities look like when you present the state budget in a month? When one reads your so-called palace agreement, one sees an enormous amount about migration and crime and punishment, but very little about elderly care and healthcare.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! The basis for us to have sufficient resources for our welfare is spelled a strong work line. It will be one of the most important missions for the new government - to re-establish the work line that the red-green government has consistently dismantled in Sweden, which has resulted in us having serious concerns with long-term unemployment and Europe's lowest growth when Stefan Löfven promised Europe's lowest unemployment.

If we are to get more resources for welfare, it is based on more people entering the workforce. It is more important than ever now that we are facing tougher economic times.

Naturally, we from the state side will also do everything we can to support the municipalities and regions, which, regardless, will face tough times ahead. Exactly how, yes, I am sure we will return to in the budget that is presented within the coming weeks and in the budget debate that I am sure Mikael Dahlqvist will also participate in.

We will prioritize accessibility and elderly care. We will prioritize cancer care, just as we describe in the Tidö Agreement. We will also have careful follow-up and a focus on results.

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

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Johan Hultberg, for your answer!

Unfortunately, Johan Hultberg and I have different views on the facts. I just want to briefly highlight this. When it comes to unemployment, we have actually created over 100,000 new jobs within the common welfare sector. We have the EU's highest share of people in employment. That figure can, therefore, be discussed. But I look forward to your upcoming budget, Johan Hultberg.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! I also truly look forward to our budget. It will be an important tool to address the many and large problems that Sweden has and to truly present a new course for Sweden, which our country so much needs.

We need to get migration in order. We need to get the insecurity in order, and insecurity has many faces. It is about crime and punishment, but it is at least as much about the area that we are now debating. One must be able to feel more secure that there is healthcare and care available when one needs it, and the government that I stand behind will work day and night to ensure that it becomes a reality.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! The market and politics is a hot topic these days, and I do not believe that the newly appointed government will regulate the market's influence on health and medical care.

Health and class go together. The difference in life expectancy between the different education groups increased from 4.4 years to 6 years between 2006 and 2019. One must say that is a great failure. Then we can no longer embrace the freedom of establishment or have private health insurance as a security blanket.

There is a skew in the systems that hits those who are furthest away from care. It concerns the elderly, the multi-morbid, those with mental ill-health, those with poorer finances, those who live in rural areas and those who live in neglected areas. This is documented.

Today, approximately 700,000 people have a private health insurance. The largest proportion are, according to Vårdanalys, those who work within financial services, law, and economic consulting. It may not be exactly the group that is the sickest, but it has, so to speak, a high market value.

We do not want to ban the insurance companies. But we do not think that the private healthcare providers that have agreements with the regions should be allowed to have patients with health insurance who come in through another door. They use the same doctors, the same clinic, and the same nurses. Guess who gets care first! It is clear that it results in a type of displacement.

In Region Stockholm alone, a digital company conducted over 350,000 video visits within primary care during 2021. That sounds good. 275,000 were for physical ailments. It is not the interior of Norrland that is calling the digital private doctors. It is not Västerbotten or Västernorrland, but rather Stockholm's inner city. This is also documented. This company received 138 million kronor from Region Stockholm for video visits during 2021.

The most expensive patient visits for a health center are those that require some form of referral, for example to X-ray. It is quite common, and the health center pays a part of it. The more patients who need to be investigated, the worse the profitability becomes for the various health centers, if one is to express it in blunt economic terms.

But the digital company that had 275,000 video visits did not have a single one that they forwarded for X-ray examination. Isn't that strange? None of these had a need for X-rays, according to this company. One can wonder about that. Now those patients turn instead to the health centers where they are registered, and the company moves on to the next one. It is a wonderful logic, I must say!

Cash is king - that is the motto within healthcare when it comes to the market. We believe that these anomalies must be regulated. Sweden cannot afford for politics to give carte blanche to the healthcare companies. Tax money must be used equally for equal healthcare.

(Applause)

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

Torsten Elofsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We live in a digitized world. More and more authorities, banks, and companies are closing down traditional customer service and placing the responsibility on the individual when it comes to processing matters using digital tools in the form of computers, smartphones, bank-id, etc. In many respects, this development is of course positive; it enables many of us to handle contacts with authorities, banking matters, and other things regardless of where we are, as long as we have a good connection.

The idea is good, but it requires both that the digital solution works and that the user has access to adequate equipment, as well as, not least, the capacity and ability to handle the tools. That is not always the case.

The digitalization that is now occurring excludes two large groups in our society: partly many elderly, partly persons with various forms of disabilities. A transition to pure digitalization can therefore be seen as discriminatory, as persons risk being excluded from entitled services, regardless of whether it concerns authorities or private companies.

In my role as a legal guardian, I meet people who lack these necessary tools. They may not be able to purchase equipment due to low credit ratings or they may have – like a person I am helping – a form of nerve damage that prevents them from handling the tools even if they intellectually understand how they work.

The previous government had the stated goal that the Swedish public sector should be the best in the world at taking advantage of the possibilities of digitalization. The ambition certainly existed, but when the OECD compared the digital maturity in the member countries' public administrations, Sweden landed in last place.

The EU Commission also notes that Sweden is falling behind other countries. This is a problem in itself, but what is truly serious is that a poor digital service coupled with a shutdown of traditional customer service implies almost insurmountable obstacles for groups in our society.

The National Audit Office submitted an audit report, RiR 2021:8, in which they stated that every third audited authority has unreasonably long waiting times on the phone and that only a few authorities that receive visitors follow up on the waiting time through controls.

There must be alternatives for individuals who, for various reasons, cannot carry out their affairs or manage necessary contact with authorities digitally. Not least, authorities have a requirement for equivalent service and equivalent treatment, even for those who find themselves in a digital exclusion.

We Christian Democrats want to build society from the bottom up and we hail subsidiarity, a principle which, among other things, is about a higher level working in a supporting role for the lower level. From that principle, one can easily draw the conclusion that the individual should have the right to expect that an authority is digitally reachable. But an authority absolutely does not have the right to demand that the individual resident use digital tools. It is always the individual's right to choose for themselves how they want to communicate with an authority that is to govern. It is the authority's duty to meet the individual where they are.

Society is for everyone, and everyone has the right to be included on their own terms without having to explain themselves or defend themselves.

(Applause)

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to bring up three different areas within healthcare and welfare. Two of them were mentioned in the Tidö Agreement, but one was not.

I will begin with that which was not addressed in the agreement. It concerns gender-affirming care, i.e., care for trans people. There, we have seen a very sad development over the recent years. The queues to get a first visit amount to approximately two years - at least - if there is even a queue to stand in. In some regions, there is no longer any care to seek.

There is much to be done here. Socialstyrelsen has been tasked with implementing national highly specialized care in this area. That work seems to have stalled. I hope that the government intends to push forward so that this becomes a reality.

There is also a lot of research that would need to be done. In the revised knowledge support concerning care for young people, particular emphasis was placed on the importance of the care being provided within the framework of research. In that case, resources for research must exist. There is also a lot that can be done from our side.

An area that, however, was addressed in the Tidö Agreement is personal assistance. I want to particularly emphasize that this is not a healthcare issue but is about welfare and rights for persons living with disabilities.

In the Tidö Agreement, it was among other things mentioned that one wants to review the possibility of introducing a state principal for personal assistance, which can be a positive development. What is missing is that one does not emphasize the importance of seeing the basic needs as a whole. This is something that both the Liberals and the Christian Democrats have previously pushed very hard on. The Liberals were also the initiating party to this reform, which revolutionized the reality and the lives of people living with disabilities.

Many of us perhaps took part in Börje Salming's story in Expressen this week. There, another reform that needs to be implemented in the area of personal assistance was mentioned. Börje Salming and his partner raised the problem that the age limit for access to personal assistance is 65 years. It creates an unsustainable life situation. This perhaps applies particularly to people like Börje Salming, who has ALS, but it also applies to others affected by diseases with rapid progression and for people who may have lived with personal assistance their entire lives and who then became older and subsequently lost it. This is not functional. Miljöpartiet wants this age limit to be reviewed.

The last area that I intended to bring up, Mr. Speaker, is the care for women and others who live with a uterus. Several areas were also mentioned in the Tidö Agreement, including endometriosis. In the Tidö Agreement, it was stated that investments should be made in this. However, it is very unclear exactly what these investments should look like, so I would like to take this opportunity to offer some tips.

There are guidelines that Socialstyrelsen has developed, but these have not been followed up. There is much there that one could address.

Even here, much research is lacking. What does endometriosis actually depend on, and how can it best be treated? How do we ensure that Swedish healthcare is truly based on the latest knowledge? How shall we increase competence within primary care so that as many affected people as possible can receive the best possible care?

Maternity care was also raised, in some kind of context of nationalization in general. We from Miljöpartiet want to add that what is important here is largely about the staff's working conditions. This is something that we have raised a lot. It will not be good care if people who work within healthcare do not have the opportunity to perform their jobs in a reasonable way. Among other things, that is why we have been involved in pushing through the recovery bonus. We want to see that continue as well.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Westerlund for the contribution and warmly welcome her to the Committee on Social Affairs. I look forward to many debates together with the Member and a constructive work in the Committee on Social Affairs. It is, in fact, that spirit that has characterized the Committee on Social Affairs during the four years I have worked there, and I hope that it is that spirit that will characterize the committee's work moving forward as well.

Mr. Speaker! I just want to comment on the issue of women's healthcare that was raised here. Of course, the government will need to specify and return to exactly how this initiative is to be implemented. But we have seen how unacceptable it is that women get access to care to a lesser extent than men and that many of the female diseases are not sufficiently researched. This truly requires investments in research, and that is what we have promised in the Tidö Agreement.

Since then, we have also promised specifically strengthened monitoring of the quality of care. It is a general problem that the guidelines we have within Swedish health and medical care are not followed. This does not only concern the area that Member Westerlund highlighted, but it actually concerns care in general. It is an important message from the newly inaugurated government that the monitoring shall be strengthened.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the welcome to the committee and also to the Riksdag. This is my first speech here in the chamber, so it feels a bit big.

I naturally welcome these initiatives. I just want to encourage people to follow and see what has already been done, so that one does not start from scratch. A good deal of measures have already been taken. As said, one must not forget the staff's conditions in this, because I do not believe it is possible to implement any large, extremely revolutionary and costly changes without including the conditions for the staff as a very central part.

We are, of course, also in favor of research being encouraged, partly in the area of endometriosis, which was specifically mentioned here by Member Hultberg, and partly, as I mentioned earlier, gender-affirming care. There, too, we believe that research is really lagging behind. It must be encouraged to also invest in this area. Despite the media discussion of recent years, I hope that decisions in the Riksdag and by the government are made on the basis of facts and science.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am glad that Member Westerlund has obviously taken on the ambition to contribute to the constructive climate in the committee by coming forward with these constructive suggestions to the government parties.

When it comes to personnel, we are in complete agreement. It is also highlighted in the Tidö Agreement that a national plan and management of the competence supply is now required, because if we are to address the many and large problems we have within Swedish health and medical care, the personnel within these areas are the keys, also in this area.

A national plan and governance of skills supply will become an important part of the solution to the challenges that we in this debate turn have discussed.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I also hope, just as Member Hultberg did before, that the good atmosphere for dialogue can continue in the areas that have already been raised, but also in other areas, and that one does not shrink from also addressing issues that have been highlighted in a negative way in the media and therefore created a certain fear of touching upon them. This has not been done when it concerns endometriosis, whereas it has when it concerns gender-affirming care. Both areas deserve equal attention so that we can ensure that everyone who is in need of care also receives it in a high-quality manner.

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

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Mr. Speaker! In the Swedish healthcare system, we are all equal, but some patients are a bit more equal than others.

About 700,000 Swedes today have a private health insurance, a purchased ticket straight into the Swedish healthcare system. Everyone else must rely on receiving care within the 90-day guarantee. In the agreements with the insurance companies, however, a visit to a specialist within seven working days and an operation within 14 working days is often guaranteed.

Mr. Speaker! The problem is not only that we have received an A-team and a B-team within Swedish healthcare. The problem is also that those without private health insurance are being pushed aside. In other words, it hurts longer. The risks for serious medical conditions are increasing. This is actually quite brutal, I must say.

Now there is a proposal from the previous government to do something about this. The proposal implies that it must be clarified in agreements that those who sell private healthcare packages are not allowed to do this by simultaneously worsening healthcare for those without private health insurance. Who can reasonably be against this? Yes, the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates, the Christian Democrats and the Liberals can and are against this. They argue in their joint motion that the previous government submitted the proposal for ideological purposes. And in that part, they are one hundred percent right, because the core of Social Democratic ideology is that human value takes precedence over market value. The only reason I can see for why the Riksdag seems to be saying no to ordinary people being given better care is the link between the money, the lobbyists and the politicians.

Mr. Speaker! The palace agreement states to read: The digital infrastructure shall create conditions for an innovative and market-driven development. Not care based on need, but market principles shall dictate the conditions.

It is obvious that the chain of money, lobbyists, and politicians stretched into the castle. We have received a new kind of multimillionaires in this country who do not get rich from their own work but from our tax money through lucrative deals and privatization of the welfare. And they spend large sums of money to buy influence so that the tap to the tax money remains open. The money reaches the lobbyists, who do everything to steer the politicians in their direction.

A tip for everyone listening to this debate is: Every time you see that the government is not working for you, follow the money! Often you get an answer. To you who want it to be you and your tax money that your politicians should work for, email a right-wing politician who now has the power! Perhaps you can get the person to change their mind and vote for order, decency, and justice within healthcare.

(Applause)

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is quite obvious that the red-green government, which has now finally resigned after eight years, has failed with accessibility in healthcare. We have seen how the healthcare queues have grown and grown. They doubled already before the pandemic, and during the pandemic, they have naturally worsened for natural reasons.

To shift the focus from the fundamental problem, the Social Democrats have wanted to debate private health insurance throughout the entire election campaign. Private health insurance is not the big problem in Swedish health and medical care, but rather it is the lack of accessible care. To solve the problem with that, something must be done, but in that regard, the outgoing government has been responsible for the answer.

It is also the case that the private health insurances are largely driven by trade unions, which offer them to their members. A tip for the Social Democrats is therefore perhaps to, within the framework of trade union political cooperation, speak with the trade unions about whether it is really a growth of the private health insurances that they desire.

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

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Mr. Speaker! One thing I know, and that is that healthcare does not receive more resources by investing in completely different subject areas, which we have now seen in the palace agreement.

It is also the case that the Social Democratic government had the motto Welfare First, and large resources were added to the regions. Many regions have had bourgeois governments. Now we see that it is changing in some places, and that is welcome.

That private health insurances are pushing people out of the care they need within a reasonable time, I think is completely obvious. Therefore, I find it very difficult to take anything else as a truth.

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! There is no strong support for the idea that it would be displacement. But the person who has a private health insurance actually pays for the care twice over, and that obviously should not be the case.

Let me address the question that was raised at the end of Member Lantz's statement regarding that we should drive market-oriented development. It also concerns the life science area, where Sweden is a major nation. We want a research-based pharmaceutical industry in Sweden that contributes to developing new, revolutionary healthcare treatments. In that case, it is important that the infrastructure is in place.

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

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Mr. Speaker! If there is no risk of displacement, it should be completely harmless to agree to a wording that says one shall ensure that. Why this resistance? Why is it precisely Vårdföretagarna and Svenskt Näringsliv that oppose it in the consultation round, not those who work in healthcare, and who approve or have no remarks on the proposal?

(Applause)

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

Ulrika Heindorff (M)

Mr. Speaker! For me, life began after 100, said the fantastic, now unfortunately deceased, Dagny Carlsson before her 104th birthday.

We Moderates want to strengthen all seniors' right to a good life, regardless of whether one is as active as Dagny or if one needs support and assistance in the form of care and home healthcare.

All seniors shall be able to live an active life and have influence both in society and over their own everyday lives. Everyone shall be able to age in security and with maintained independence, and all elderly people shall be met with respect and have good access to care and services.

Mr. Speaker! The recently entered Tidö Agreement, which is the agreement between the governing parties M, KD, L and the cooperation party SD, has a section on health and medical care. At the bottom of page 8, the issue of strengthened family support is highlighted, and that made me very happy. I raised this in the speaker's chair a number of times during the last parliamentary term, and I have also pushed the issue together with my Moderate colleagues within the framework of the Committee on Health and Welfare.

Over 1 million people in Sweden support someone close to them today. In a report that came out in 2019, it is stated that the family's care efforts annually correspond to approximately 200 billion kronor, which is twice as much as the municipal efforts in Sweden over one year.

Many relatives find themselves in the middle of life with everything it entails. Taking care of a relative while simultaneously being a present parent, partner, and employee can become overwhelming. Many reduce their working hours to make life work. It can create worry and stress, and one can even feel helplessness and sorrow. That is why it is important that we strengthen support for relatives.

In the Tidö Agreement, it is described that relatives shall be given a contact person, and I believe that will make a big difference. It is also highlighted in the agreement that a national relative line shall be available around the clock.

The Tidö Agreement has more good provisions regarding seniors. For example, an investigation shall be appointed to strengthen the high-cost protection for dental care. It is specifically mentioned here that older people with the worst dental health shall be prioritized. Since we know that the connection between general health and oral health is strong, this is a proposal I truly welcome.

Mr. Speaker! For a number of years, we Moderates have championed the issue of language requirements within elderly care. We believe it is reasonable and good that one does not need to speak perfect Swedish but intelligible Swedish. This is also included in the Tidö Agreement, and the Ministry of Social Affairs is tasked with investigating and producing proposals on how such a language requirement could be implemented.

Finally, I want to say a few words about the finances of seniors, as that is also important. Within the framework of the Tidö Agreement, the direction is clear. We want to lower taxes on both incomes and pensions. A clear direction in the agreement is also that pensioners' finances shall be strengthened and freedom of choice protected.

Much has been said about the Tidö Agreement, but as an advocate for senior issues, I look forward to the upcoming parliamentary term with confidence.

(Applause)

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! After having read the palace agreement, I still wonder about a few things. It is very good that one looks at ensuring that teeth, so to speak, shall become a part of the body, with a high-cost protection. It is an issue that Vänsterpartiet has championed, and it was sad that you did not join in when the time came. We will, however, continue, because we want all people to have access to this so that an apartheid healthcare does not emerge. This is something one can reflect on.

I also want to raise this regarding money and pensions. We have an insanely large number of poor people, and their living conditions during skyrocketing inflation and so on are extremely difficult.

I wonder if the member has any news. It is not just about lowering taxes, your eternal mantra, but also about raising pensions.

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

Ulrika Heindorff (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Rågsjö for the questions and reflections. It is pleasant to meet in the chamber when we no longer sit in the same committee, the Social Affairs Committee.

Regarding dental care, it is pleasant that we can sometimes meet across party lines. I look forward to the investigation that will come regarding how the high-cost protection within dental care can be strengthened. With the clear connection between general health and oral health, this is an important step.

When it comes to the finances of seniors, I raised both the tax and strengthened finances in their entirety for pensioners. It is also a matter of safeguarding freedom of choice, and here we perhaps differ slightly. We will return to this issue, which is also included as a clear direction in the Tidö Agreement, as it is called.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! In the palace agreement, as we call it, the older ones are still only addressed very marginally.

Does the member have any information on how to track the money? M, KD and V made a joint commitment of 5 billion annually for elderly care. Nothing of this is visible.

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

Ulrika Heindorff (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think there will be reason to return to this and continue the discussion when the budget is presented shortly.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Mr. Speaker! Single mothers are the group in society that has the lowest economic standard. Even before the high inflation, they had difficulty making ends meet and had to choose between football boots for the children and having money for the rent.

Recently, Oxfam released a report confirming what we already know: that inequality in Sweden is increasing at an avalanche pace. Sweden ranks first at place 20 in the ranking when it comes to how much we do to combat inequality. The report also establishes that Sweden's tax policy is a contributing cause to the increasing gaps.

Mr. Speaker! We have a new government that has established in its palace agreement that the tax reliefs for the rich shall become even more numerous. The top layer shall, as usual, receive tax discounts and subsidies and pay less in tax, while at the same time, the possibility of a decent standard of living for others will be worsened.

Inequality will increase dramatically with this government. In light of the skyrocketing inflation, the compensations in parental leave and the housing allowance would need to be reviewed. The temporary increase of the housing allowance that was introduced during the pandemic disappears at the turn of the year, unless a new decision is made. This would mean an average of 750 kronor less in housing allowance for those who receive it. At the same time, inflation in September was 9.7 percent. 750 kronor less per month and high inflation can perhaps be managed if you are sitting in a castle and negotiating, but ordinary people will find it very difficult to manage their daily lives, especially if they already had small margins before. But this is being spoken about very quietly.

Many in civil society, such as Stadsmissionen, Röda Korset, and Svenska kyrkan, testify that more and more people are seeking them out for help. Many people in Kristersson's Sweden cannot afford food or basic needs. Instead of coming up with proposals that could ease the situation for this group, it is established in the government agreement that fewer and fewer people shall have access to our collective safety nets.

By driving a wedge between people and focusing the light on that people who have immigrated to Sweden should not live on benefits, one tries to hide that nothing shall be done either to improve the lives of other people with small margins. In the agreement, it states that benefit ceilings shall be introduced. There are no benefit ceilings for the rich, but it is about a classic reverse Robin Hood policy - to take from the poor and give to the rich.

This is what unites the four parties that have now entered into a palace agreement. They do not want to do anything about the very serious poverty that many families with children, especially single women, will fall into over the coming years, as a result of both the neoliberal policies pursued in recent years and the now skyrocketing inflation. Instead, they want to focus the spotlight on the immigrants, while enriching themselves at the same time.

The right-wing nationalist government, which likes to talk about fighting crime, should understand that poverty is a breeding ground for crime. Increased poverty is, however, exactly what this government's policy will lead to.

Mr. Speaker! We in Vänsterpartiet want to see a completely different policy instead – a policy that aims to reduce inequality in Sweden and towards a society where the single mother can afford both football boots and to pay the rent.

In the very uncertain economic times we live in, we need a government that understands that people will not be able to manage everyday life if the compensation in important security systems does not increase. People need security here and now. People need a roof over their heads and food on the table. The government's policy seems to guarantee everything except this.

(Applause)

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! We have for a long time organized healthcare in Sweden based on the logic of the funnel. It would be perfectly efficient and rational if it were not for the fact that patients are human beings and not individual diagnoses.

That patients are actually human beings is particularly clear if we look at the most common patient, who is the elderly patient. Those who are 65 years and older make up approximately 20 percent of the population, but they account for half of all healthcare encounters and an even higher proportion of the total healthcare time. It is not strange at all. With age come ailments, and with ever-better healthcare, the diagnoses manage to line up. Today, one lives a long time with diabetes, and the one who survives a heart attack can very well manage to return to care with a completely different serious illness.

Which diagnoses that cause a patient to need healthcare have changed over time due to medical developments, but the patient can still have a great need for care, support, and nursing from primary care, home healthcare, social services, and relatives. As a long series of government inquiries has stated, the entire healthcare system is interconnected, and progress in one area can have consequences in a completely different part of the system.

Based on the investigations by Göran Stiernstedt and Anna Nergård, a gigantic transformation work is currently underway in Swedish healthcare, moving towards a more personal care. Personal care is not a new organizational level but a changed way of working, a changed approach, from a focus on organization to a focus on person and relationship.

The closest care is, of course, self-care, the care that the patient performs themselves, but self-care also requires a person-focus from all levels of care, so that advice, support, and interventions are provided based on the patient's needs, circumstances, and ability.

There is a broad consensus in Sjukvårdssverige that this – local care – is the right approach. It is not only good for the patients, who avoid being sent like pinballs between departments, but closer care and new ways of working in healthcare also mean that resources within health and social care can be used better and thus last longer.

The best, but far from the only example from my home region, Region Örebro län, is the mobile team for the elderly, frail patients who run a great risk of spending their final time in life moving in and out of hospitals. In the team, the region's doctors join forces with Örebro municipality's nurses and care staff and travel to the patients' homes to provide care there. It is better care for the patients and provides greater security for both the patient and the relatives.

That is why there is every reason for concern when we now see how they here, in the Riksdag and government, seem to be heading in a completely opposite direction. Now, new focus is being placed on how healthcare should be reorganized instead of on how to create the best conditions for the transition that is already in full swing.

Instead of a focus on local care, it should now be investigated how the responsibility for healthcare can be moved as far as possible away from the patients, from Örebro, from Ystad and from Haparanda to Stockholm and to the state.

Mr. Speaker! For me as a Social Democrat, it is obvious that we should have the patients as the starting point in Swedish healthcare and for Swedish healthcare policy, not new government silos.

(Applause)

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! I must unfortunately say that I think Member Sundin reads the Tidö Agreement as if he were reading the Bible. There is a very strong ambition from the Moderaterna and the coalition parties that have signed the agreement that we shall continue precisely that development with good and close care, which I think Member Sundin describes well. It is an ambition that we, broadly across party and bloc boundaries, have agreed upon. We want care to come closer to the patients. We want care to come closer to those who need care and nursing.

We have important initiatives in the Tidö Agreement on a strengthened primary care and on expanding healthcare, not least in rural areas, on creating the conditions for the cooperation that the member was referring to, in the form of for example a national digital infrastructure, so that we can share patient data between different healthcare providers and between municipalities and regions.

Then, Mr. Speaker, as I was mentioning in my speech, it is quite obvious to me that if we are to manage to address the large regional differences in the quality of care and in the range of care services, increased state governance is required. More state leadership will be required to address these problems. Is Member Sundin not of the same opinion?

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! Member Hultberg highlights great ambitions. If these ambitions are to be lived up to, economic resources must be provided to the welfare system. There is no trace of this in the Tidö Agreement; on the contrary. The expression given in the Tidö Agreement is about putting focus on organization instead of on content.

I choose to quote Moderate Party member Peter Danielsson, who is the new chairman of SKR, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner. His comment regarding yesterday's government statement was that one "lacks clear announcements that the state will support municipalities and regions financially through the crisis."

You have ambitions, Johan Hultberg, but you have nothing that shows how you will be able to live up to them. Instead, you shift the focus from the content of the welfare to the organizational form. I have not heard any Moderate or Christian Democrat who has been able to explain in what way a state-run healthcare system will become better for the patients.

(Applause)

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! We have seen that the work with the regional cancer centers has been a very successful concept to ensure that there is access to high-quality and advanced health and medical care. It is a concrete example of how we can develop this.

I am of the opinion that in order for us to have good content in healthcare, we also need a good organization. And I believe that we need increased state governance of healthcare. I have previously understood that this has also been the Social Democrats' view. But if they back down from that, I am curious to hear how the Social Democrats believe the regional differences should be resolved.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! I note that Member Johan Hultberg highlighted the regional cancer centers. It is an absolutely excellent example of how cooperation between levels of care within Swedish health and medical care can be achieved without us needing to nationalize cooperation.

(Applause)

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

Marléne Lund Kopparklint (M)

Mr. Speaker! We have a wicked pandemic that is spreading rapidly in society and which has been allowed to spread for far too long. It constantly reaps victims. And according to the statistics, we know that of approximately 115,000 children, 30,000 children will be affected every year. In 2014, for example, it was calculated at Allmänna Barnhuset that 20 percent of all children are exposed to this. According to the latest survey in August 2021, it has increased to 25 percent. We are therefore talking about eight children in a normal school class. This pandemic must come to an end.

Mr. Speaker! I am speaking about different forms of sexual abuse of children. It is a subject that is heavily taboo, and the culture of silence is widespread. The reasons for it are many. It is largely about the perpetrators placing a gag on their child victims. They say: If you tell about this, you will have to move away from your mother. If you tell about this, I will harm your mother or father. And I will subject your siblings to the same thing. This makes it so that many cannot cope with living with this when they get older and live with this axe hanging over their heads. They begin to think about suicide.

Mr. Speaker! This is completely unacceptable. But it is constantly among us, and we need to bring this into the light and talk about it.

I have for several years questioned the measures that the previous government took. And I will continue to question this government if the statistics do not turn at some point.

During the corona pandemic, we saw how this evil virus spread, and we made global efforts to alleviate, stop, and prevent it. We have also seen how gang crime has spread like an evil virus throughout our society. Here, we have pumped in money and taken measures. But we have not done the same when it comes to this other horrific pandemic that we know claims victims. It claims, above all, children's lives. We know, in fact, that when a person is subjected to traumatic experiences—such as sexual abuse—in childhood, it increases the risk of suicide in adulthood twelvefold if they do not receive help.

When I entered the Riksdag and had written my first speech on this subject, it was suggested to me that I should probably tone it down a bit because the Riksdag was not mature enough to hear about the terrible things I was going to describe. It was considered too crude. I was to describe how a child is subjected to it and what it can look like. I myself did not think it was crude language and thought immediately: If the Riksdag is not mature enough for it, how are the children who are subjected to it supposed to feel?

Shall we omit their harsh reality because it might be a bit difficult to hear a description of it? No, we shall not. But it is also why we so rarely speak about it, because it hurts and there are many taboos in this.

That is why I have taken the opportunity to highlight this issue once again here in the speaker's chair. I wish that more could do so, so that we can put a stop to this pandemic that exists in our society. Now, the children must be put in the foreground, and we must put a stop to this.

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

Louise Thunström (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking you for the opportunity to, in this manner in a general political debate, test my wings for the first time in the chamber's rostrum.

Today I have listened to speeches on major political issues and on what seemingly appears to be the small things, but which are so important for the whole.

Mr. Speaker! I want to devote my minutes here to speaking about menopause. Today's menopause care is not equal. It is also not accessible. And it is not sufficient.

Menopause occurs during a time in women's lives when they can and want to live their lives to the fullest, but when many are limited by hot flashes, brain fog, sleep difficulties, mood swings, pain, depression, and a multitude of other more or less bothersome symptoms. These are symptoms that can both be alleviated and removed if care were available and knowledge were greater.

Socialstyrelsen published Mapping of care and treatment for menopausal symptoms from the perspective of equitable care in February 2020. The mapping shows large differences in the country regarding the proportion of women who have sought help but also regarding the dispensing of hormone medications.

In Stockholm County, for example, the number of healthcare contacts for menopausal symptoms is seven times more common than in other counties. Regarding the dispensing of medicines, the dispensing per 1,000 women is 60 percent higher in Stockholm and Uppsala counties than it is in, for example, Blekinge, Kronoberg, and Jämtland.

The type of care and treatment offered to women thus varies across the country. It is unclear what interventions are provided within primary care and what competence the healthcare staff possesses.

Women's own knowledge about menopause is also lacking. Diffuse symptoms lead to unnecessary worry and stress. The information that women receive comes at best from female friends, older relatives or the media, not from healthcare. Furthermore, for many women, it is still a taboo to talk about the female body. And many testify that they do not even know where to turn for help.

The significant differences regarding the care offered apply both in terms of geography and socioeconomics and lead to unnecessary suffering and diminished quality of life.

Mr. Speaker! Menopause has symptoms that in many cases resemble exhaustion. Women of middle age are an overrepresented group who are signed off work due to exhaustion. There is therefore reason to believe that many are misdiagnosed and diagnosed with exhaustion instead of menopause, with incorrect treatment as a result.

Mr. Speaker! Menopause care needs to be improved in several different ways. The National Board of Health and Welfare emphasizes the need for national guidelines. Women's own knowledge needs to be increased. And updated and relevant menopause knowledge needs to be provided to healthcare staff. Updated and relevant menopause knowledge also needs to be provided to HR managers and occupational health care.

It should not matter where in the country you live, what you earn, or how well you can stand your ground in the fight to get help. All women in Sweden are worthy of having the conditions to live their best lives, even during the years they go through menopause.

(Applause)

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

Sofia Skönnbrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! During a lifetime, we encounter a number of situations where we feel extra vulnerable and are in need of being seen and well cared for. One such occasion is when we give birth to children. It is therefore extremely important that every woman receives the support and care she needs to feel safe during her childbirth. No woman should have to feel anxiety or fear in facing childbirth. The experience should be positive, and the risk of medical injuries should be minimized.

For that, a safe environment with present midwives and other healthcare personnel is required. Unfortunately, that is not the case today, and very many women state that they carry a fear of childbirth. The fear is based on the risk that there is no room in the maternity ward where the woman wants to give birth, the risk that she will be left alone in the room, or the risk that she will suffer serious birth injuries.

Mr. Speaker! In order to increase safety, we need to create a more individualized care process that takes greater account of individual women's needs and wishes. It is also important that there is a continuity in the care chain and that the aftercare is expanded so that any potential birth injuries can be detected and addressed in a timely manner.

More than every other woman requests greater continuity in maternity care and would like to be followed by the same midwife during the pregnancy, the birth, and the time thereafter. This is what happens with the "Min Barnmorska" approach, a method that has been shown to yield very good results – including fewer interventions during childbirth, fewer cesarean sections, fewer injuries, shorter hospital stays, a greater chance of full-scale breastfeeding at four weeks of age and, above all, more satisfied women and midwives.

Min Barnmorska is a way to increase continuity of care and the attractiveness of the midwifery profession, but in addition to this type of way of working, further initiatives were needed in the severely strained maternity care, where several employees testify to an unsustainable work environment without time for recovery or reflection.

Mr. Speaker! Shift work, staff shortages, a lack of competence development, and high stress levels mean that many midwives today choose to leave the maternity wards in favor of other tasks, primarily within primary care. To get more midwives to stay, we must work actively to improve working conditions. It is necessary to secure competence, maintain good patient safety, and ensure that midwives with less experience receive the supervision they need to manage their work tasks.

To manage this, it is important that we continue to work in broad agreement with SKR and strengthen the efforts for women's health and maternity care. It is important to achieve change, as it provides the opportunity to jointly formulate a vision and steer in a desirable direction in the long term.

The powerful economic investments that have been carried out shall benefit the operations, and the goal should be one midwife per birth. It is not only about reducing the fear of childbirth but also about improving the working environment for the employees.

Mr. Speaker! Welcoming a new child into the world should be an experience associated with security, joy, and anticipation for both the mother and her partner as well as those who work with the birth process.

(Applause)

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

Zara Leghissa (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now I am going to tell you about Linda. She works as an assistant nurse in elderly care, and her working hours are scheduled for daytime, evenings, and weekends.

She cares for elderly people who are multi-morbid and who risk becoming very ill in the event of infection. If Linda becomes ill, she has no choice; she feels that she must take sick leave so as not to expose those she works with to risk. It happens quite often that she feels anxious when her throat hurts or when her body aches and feels feverish. She feels anxious because she knows that it is difficult to get a substitute, but primarily because she knows that the quarantine deduction will create a hole in her wallet.

Linda cannot work from home because her profession involves human contact. And Linda's situation is not unique – more who work within healthcare, school and care feel the same and are in the same situation. This also applies to construction workers, cleaners and bus drivers, as well as those who work within trade and hotel and restaurant. It also applies to food workers, industrial workers and many others. It is about those who cannot work from home and who go to work even though they actually should be on sick leave – those who ensure that society keeps running.

Four out of ten women in manual occupations state that they cannot afford to be sick. The corona pandemic put the sickness benefit deduction in the spotlight. The Corona Commission's reports clearly show that economy and occupation strongly influenced the risk of being affected by covid-19. In dialogue with trade unions, the S-led government therefore eased the regulations. It was another important step on the way toward a more equitable sickness insurance, and it contributed to reduced spread of infection - in particular among those who were in a risk group. It was a political decision that contributed to lives being saved.

Mr. Speaker! That illness and the spread of infection are harmful is no new knowledge. As we know, among other things, influenza and stomach illnesses are diseases that affect us all and can be fatal for the elderly and the sick. That workers are exposed to infection, diseases, and injuries at work is a workplace environment issue, and the prevention of this is vital. Of course, everyone should be able to participate in our common security systems in a fair, solidary, and equal way. Those who are affected by illness and cannot work should be able to rely on the sickness insurance, and it must not be discriminatory.

In August this year, we Social Democrats were informed: the maternity allowance deduction creates an economic injustice that hits hard against the members of the LO unions and others who must physically be at work. The maternity allowance deduction must be made more just and have high legitimacy in the sickness insurance. Welfare shall come to all who have a right to it. An investigation mandate has been started and is expected to be finalized on 29 September next year.

How does Sweden's newly appointed government stand on this? Is there the will and ambition to invest in a fair, equal, and solidary health insurance? Will the carer's deduction benefit everyone regardless of gender, occupation, and position in the labor market, or will these people have to pay for tax cuts with a diminished welfare and a deteriorated security system?

Welfare creates security, and our general welfare is built on a common basic idea that everyone gives according to their ability and receives according to their need. A secure and fair health insurance characterizes a strong society. It demonstrates solidarity and equality, something we Social Democrats will always stand up for.

(Applause)

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

Lena Johansson (S)

Mr. Speaker! In times of crisis, war, disasters, pandemics and gray zone issues, the resilience of society and organizations is tested.

We are probably all in agreement that we should have a good preparedness and capacity regarding pharmaceuticals and medical supplies. We are certainly in agreement that we should have a total defense that is resilient and strong, as well as stable and good conditions for water, energy, and fuel to be delivered on time and at reasonable prices. We should have a well-developed and well-functioning infrastructure with high security regarding shipping, railways, roads, and aviation. Infrastructure and security surrounding cyber and IT is also crucial in the new times.

We must not forget food production and other important industries here. We can manage all these areas, and many more, if we have sufficiently good financial conditions and if we jointly contribute to the construction of society through the tax crown. We can manage it if we interact, coordinate and cooperate with different actors in society.

Mr. Speaker! I ask the question: Who is it that truly builds our robust society? Well, it is the people in Sweden, Sweden's inhabitants. It is ordinary people, who need support from us politicians. We shall distribute support and resources in an equal, wise, and and solidary way. We need each other.

When the staff shortage is national across many occupations and professions, no strong and robust society is created. It does not help that we have new batons and harsher punishments if we do not have police, judges, and prosecutors to convict and apprehend the perpetrators. It does not help that we open more care beds or have more expensive, finer, and faster surgical robots if we do not have staff to man them. And it does not help that we have combine harvesters and cows if we do not have anyone to drive them or milk them.

We need them all. We need the nursing assistant Fehmi Paulus in Region Västmanland. We need Carl-Johan Nordström, prosecutor in Västmanland, and we need the caregiver Marie Persson within LSS in Köping municipality. We need the dairy farmer and farmer Johan Sommar at Svånö farm in Rytterne and many, many more, for together we constitute the robust society - every single one of us.

Mr. Speaker! With that said, it is understandable that all people are equally worthy and needed. It is our responsibility to provide the conditions for residents in Sweden to build the country strong and robust for everyone's benefit. These are important investments. The conditions for and need to contribute must be seen from the perspective of each individual. Thus, it is also about where one stands and is.

(Applause)

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

Jessica Rodén (S)

Mr. Speaker! For us Social Democrats, accessibility is about shaping a society where everyone is needed and can participate on equal terms. All people should be able to be fully involved in all parts of political, social, economic, and cultural life. In doing so, we create a stronger society and a safer Sweden.

Language is absolutely crucial for all of us to be able to exercise our civil rights. It is needed for us to be able to access education, communicate with family and friends, and participate in working life and in society.

During the toddler years, linguistic communication skills develop rapidly. Therefore, it is of importance that all children get access to their language early in life - on equal terms. In Sweden, in addition to Swedish, there are several minority languages. Since the year 2000, five of Sweden's minority languages have been granted status as national minority languages. This means that the Swedish government has committed itself to protecting these languages a little extra.

Swedish Sign Language has, however, not been designated as a national minority language. But according to the Language Act of 2009, Swedish Sign Language shall be protected and promoted. This means, among other things, that hearing-impaired and deaf children as well as other children with a need for sign language have the right to learn Swedish Sign Language and use it in school. The Language Act has been status-enhancing for Swedish Sign Language. It promotes the language's survival.

Mr. Speaker! Do sign language children have the right to mother tongue instruction? No. Just like all students who have a mother tongue other than Swedish have the right to mother tongue instruction, sign language students have the right to mother tongue instruction, but the conditions are different. In practice, the law makes some distinction between hearing and deaf or hearing-impaired students.

For hearing children who have deaf, sign-language-using parents, the condition applies that the municipality is obliged to arrange mother tongue instruction in sign language if at least five students request it. Deaf and hearing-impaired students attending primary school can receive mother tongue instruction in sign language if the language is the parents' mother tongue. Most of these students, however, have hearing parents who do not have sign language as their mother tongue, which means they do not have the right to mother tongue instruction.

A stronger right to sign language means that no one should be left behind and that everyone who needs sign language shall receive it. The right to sign language shall apply regardless of hearing status, parents' native language, school choice, cultural background, and age.

The unclear legislation regarding whether sign language is or is not an official minority language means that many sign language users risk falling through the cracks. Therefore, the government now needs to clarify what is meant by protecting sign language. What does it mean, and how should one ensure that all hearing-impaired and deaf people get access to sign language and thus equal access to our society throughout their lives?

(Applause)

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

Kalle Olsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! The idea behind our social insurances is as brilliant as it is sympathetic. The idea is that we, together in a spirit of solidarity and community, take care of one another through life's various fluctuations. We are not alone; we stand together.

When people from other countries are to tell something distinctive about our Sweden, it is not uncommon that they, after ABBA and IKEA, mention precisely different aspects of our social security system, for example the generous parental leave.

In these times of great uncertainty and rapid pace of change, we Social Democrats believe it is crucial to stand guard over our public security systems. What the new government wants, however, is more unclear. In the Tidö agreement, social insurance issues are hardly mentioned at all. In the government's statement, an appreciative reference is made to the previous bourgeois government's so-called work line—a work line that for many became a fast track into poverty and even worse, ill health.

There are, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately reasons to remind how it looked the last time a bourgeois government ruled Sweden. Then it was the unemployed, chronically ill people with lifelong diseases and cancer patients who paid the price for the tax cuts. Closer to 100,000 people were thrown out of the health insurance while the queues of sick people grew outside the municipalities' social offices.

At the same time, the largest party in the right-conservative government base, Sverigedemokraterna, in opposition, has had very high expectations and created a great deal of anticipation regarding sickness insurance. SD has, for example, demanded that people who have been incorrectly disqualified should receive financial compensation, that the quarantine deduction should be removed for healthcare and school staff, and that a parliamentary committee be appointed to develop a national strategy for what they call a more humane and sustainable sickness insurance. Given how much else was to be investigated in the Palace Agreement, it would have been a rather narrow matter to appoint a parliamentary committee, if one truly intended to be serious.

If one looks at the agreement, one can however observe that the sharp proposals are completely missing. Perhaps it is as it usually is when it concerns right-wing populist parties' striving for power. First, one sets immigration against welfare. Then, when one has reached power and influence, the welfare policy initiatives are conspicuous by their absence.

From the Social Democrats, we mean that social insurances are a cornerstone in a modern welfare society. During our time in power, important steps have been taken for a safer and more understandable sickness insurance. The detestable "stoppage" (stupstocken) has been abolished, as has the previously absurd assessment of work capacity against pure make-believe jobs. The regulatory framework for assessing work capacity on day 180 has been changed so that the assessment of work capacity can now be postponed if there are good conditions for the employee to return to work after rehabilitation, something that has led to a significant reduction in the number of people who are denied sickness allowance. The economic security for people with sickness and activity compensation has been improved, and the important principle of income loss has been strengthened.

But we are not satisfied. At this moment, several important investigations are underway which in different ways aim to strengthen the sickness insurance. This includes, among other things, reviewing the position of the doctors issuing sick leaves in the sick leave process, as well as reviewing the sickness benefit and the activity benefit and how well the principle of income loss is fulfilled.

The work to restore security in the face of illness must therefore continue. The risk is, however, imminent that this work will now stall or, in the worst case, be rolled back. It would be a betrayal but at the same time a confirmation of what many of us suspect, namely that the Sweden Democrats' promises on the welfare area are merely empty words.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! During the ongoing pandemic, all parties agreed that the working conditions and the quality within elderly care must be strengthened. During the election campaign, however, these issues were invisible from the right-conservative side, which instead spoke only about crime and punishment.

We Social Democrats changed the direction of the Swedish elderly care policy before the pandemic broke out. We saw the challenges that exist: that elderly care struggles with a lack of competence, high staff turnover, and low staffing levels.

Elderly care needs to be lifted and the staff's status re-evaluated. We have focused on increasing the municipalities' resources and making reforms with the help of legislation. As an example, Madam Speaker, it can be mentioned that we have wanted to strengthen the nursing assistant's position. Our elderly care lift, where staff have been able to study during paid working hours, has become a success. Over 25,000 people have so far started or completed the training.

During the 2019-2022 mandate period, the previous government increased the general state grant to municipalities and regions by 22.5 billion kronor. I particularly want to highlight the specific investment in elderly care of 4 billion kronor, where the municipalities were given the freedom to make quality improvements within elderly care specifically.

Given the upcoming recession with sky-high inflation and rising interest rates, the municipal and regional sectors face increasingly tougher challenges.

What do the Moderates, the Sweden Democrats, the Christian Democrats, and the Liberals want for the welfare and in particular for the care of our elderly? From the Tidö agreement, I can read very few promises concerning elderly care. One that stands out is the language requirement. Where is Ulf Kristersson's promise of an ambition increase within elderly care through more money? Where is Ebba Busch's promise to solve the problems within elderly care here and now?

Welfare is facing major challenges. In two surveys conducted by Kommunal, one as recently as this summer, four out of five members say that staffing is inadequate or even catastrophic.

What is needed moving forward, Madam Speaker? First and foremost, we need new legislation where elderly care is highlighted, something that the previous government took the initiative on and which is now being investigated. The pandemic revealed in a flash the great challenges within elderly care, above all between regions and municipalities. We also need to secure the availability of nurses and assistant nurses around the clock in our residential homes and in home care. But above all, we Social Democrats want to continue to strengthen the resources for our welfare and then in particular elderly care. The welfare staff are our heroes, who give us security and stability when the needs arise. Their status must be upgraded.

(Applause)

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Madam Speaker! Now a long series of Social Democrats have taken the rostrum in the general political debate on the social policy area. One concluding reflection is perhaps: Why have the Social Democrats not implemented everything that they have now engaged in speaking about, when they have held government power for eight years?

Madam Speaker! I then turn to Mikael Dahlqvist and state, because, unlike him, I have obviously read the Tidö Agreement a bit more carefully, that we have many initiatives and points concerning precisely elderly care. The language requirement was raised, but we also have points concerning what I highlighted in my speech, namely that we need to bridge the large gap that exists between municipal elderly care and the regional health and medical care. For this, for example, a national digital infrastructure is needed so that we can share information in a better way. We also need to strengthen access to municipal doctors out in the municipal operations.

I really urge Mikael Dahlqvist to read the Tidö Agreement again. I look forward to a continued debate with the member.

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

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for your question, Johan Hultberg!

General political debate Healthcare and welfare issues

Why have no investments been made, the member asks. Has the member missed the historical investment that the previous government made during the pandemic and earlier? Never have so many billions been invested in our municipalities and regions.

What happens now for the new year when 12 billion disappears? Will the current government have those funds left in its state budget and preferably increase these sums?

When I read the palace agreement, Madam Speaker, I do not find a single line about resources for welfare. Many of the increased ambitions that are needed, including to strengthen the staff's working conditions, are about money. Therefore, my question goes back to Johan Hultberg: Will you invest money in elderly care?

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

Johan Hultberg (M)

Madam Speaker! Mikael Dahlqvist is answering a question that I actually did not ask. It is an interesting rhetorical trick, perhaps, but of course, we will make important investments in elderly care and health and medical care. We will return to that in the budget debate and in the budget that will be presented shortly.

I note, however, once again that no answers are coming from the Social Democrats on how we can strengthen resources for the welfare system. It is a matter of a work line, and there the Social Democrats have no answers. If we are to have a strong welfare system, we must get more people into work, and there Member Dahlqvist, just like his party, lacks answers.

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

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Johan Hultberg, for your reply!

We have several proposals and have implemented several measures to strengthen elderly care. But fundamentally, money is lacking. There, I unfortunately see no solution from the bourgeois side today. But I welcome the upcoming budget and the upcoming debates. We will hunt you with a flashlight, member of Parliament.

(Applause)

The justice system

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

Lars Isacsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I am new here in the Riksdag, but after twelve years as a municipal council member in Avesta, I have considerable experience of the crime prevention work in our municipalities.

The debate about disadvantaged areas, as it is written about in national media, most often concerns the suburbs of our major cities. I intend to speak a little about how it can look in our industrial towns and how a negative development there can be reversed.

In Dalarna, we have two areas that have been described as vulnerable areas. They are Tjärna ängar in Borlänge and Krylbo in Avesta municipality. Krylbo is the proud railway junction with roots dating back to 1873. Oscar II inaugurated Krylbo station in 1902. Krylbo was then the wealthy part of the municipality, where one had state jobs at SJ and the Post Office, compared to the ironworks workers in Avesta.

In the 1980s, a decline began with a large loss of state jobs. The municipality sold its housing stock; it became increasingly unserious owners. Then came the refugee crisis in 2015-2016 with an unfair and unsolidary distribution of responsibility and EBO legislation that went completely wrong. There was also social dumping from wealthy Stockholm municipalities. Persons in active substance abuse and with a criminal lifestyle had their first rent paid, and then it was thanks and goodbye.

The combination of overcrowding, black sublease contracts, drug abuse and crime was anything but favorable and led to more serious crimes, arson and general insecurity, peaking in 2017-2018. The municipality and the police then decided together that we must turn it around.

The police started a project called Trygga Krylbo. A new, serious property owner also arrived for a stock of nearly 800 apartments. They renovated, installed door locks, secured basements, and evicted people who did not pay rent. The local business community and the local associations stepped up. Above all, the residents of Krylbo themselves were part of the change.

Madam Speaker! When all parties do their part and when the police are involved and leading, the municipality can do what we are best at. We equipped the school, opened a youth center, hired field assistants, installed safe lighting, equipped parks and cycle paths, built a new artificial turf pitch, a library, and so on.

Now, crime in Krylbo is no higher than in any other part of Avesta municipality. Unemployment is falling, and school results are improving. There is much left to do, but we are on the right track. Perhaps the most important thing of all is that the pride among the citizens is returning. The great sorrow, which it has been for many, especially among the elderly, over how it had become, is beginning to change into a sense of revenge and straightened backs again.

General political debate Justice system

I am pleased that we Social Democrats have clearly raised the issue of preventive measures through the program for crime prevention work that was developed in 2017. The pledge that every krona invested in the justice system would be matched by a krona for crime prevention work, I think, was the best pledge we had. I also think it is right that the municipalities are given the primary responsibility for crime prevention work. But, Madam Speaker, the state must also take its responsibility. There must be access to police in every municipality in the country.

The new government has a great responsibility to continue developing the crime prevention work. Not everything can be solved with harsher punishments. It does not have to be either or. It must be both. Unfortunately, I see very little focus on the preventive work in the Tidö Agreement. The preventive work and cooperation between school, social services and police is absolutely crucial if we are to succeed.

One must be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime, as Tony Blair said.

(Applause)

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

Angelica Lundberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! On March 18, 2017, two men enter a woman's home while she is sleeping. For several hours, the woman is then raped and assaulted by the men. The violence used against her is severe. She is struck with punches and kicked, and repeatedly the men choke her, once in such a way that she loses consciousness. They threaten her to death. They say that they have a pistol and will shoot her.

Just over a month later, two men kidnap a woman and lock her in a basement. She is mistreated under torture-like conditions. They threaten her with what she perceives as a knife and a pistol. They spray cold water on her, bind her, put a rag in her mouth and rape her. The unimaginably cruel rape, where a total of seven men assault the woman, lasts for 17 hours. The whole thing ends only when the police storm the place and free the woman.

The aftermath of these bestial abuses received attention. The man who was convicted of, among other things, aggravated rape in two cases did not only receive an unreasonably low sentence. He was also able to settle a compensation of 840,000 kronor, as when the judgment was passed, he had been deprived of liberty for slightly longer than the time the final sentence constituted. What the women had to experience was probably a lifetime.

Madam Speaker! The government that took office yesterday has, together with the Sweden Democrats, presented an agreement for Sweden where our four parties agree to take responsibility for the country through a number of different directives. Among other things, the penalties for violent and sexual crimes shall be tightened, the sentence reduction shall be removed for perpetrators over 18 years of age, and recidivism shall be punished more severely. Compensation for wrongful imprisonment shall be able to be denied or reduced if the perpetrator is convicted of the crime. There is also, pleasingly, a much greater focus on the crime victim's right to redress, support, and consideration in the new agreement.

Madam Speaker! It is reassuring that the Tidö Agreement also addresses the announcement that the Riksdag twice during the previous mandate period made to the then-government to as soon as possible appoint an inquiry to streamline the payment of compensation to crime victims. Now, the regulatory framework for crime damage compensation is finally to be reviewed, with the aim of reducing the crime victim's responsibility to personally pursue damages from the perpetrator. It should not be a crime victim's task to personally go through the long and often complicated process to obtain the money they are entitled to. A state damage guarantee is therefore something very positive.

Madam Speaker! I hope that Sweden will once again become a country to be proud of, a country where perpetrators sit behind bars and a country where crime victims receive justice. The Tidö Agreement comes not only at exactly the right time. It is also the beginning of a new era for Sweden.

(Applause)

In this speech, Erik Hellsborn (SD) agreed.

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

Gudrun Nordborg (V)

Madam Speaker! I have read the castle agreement with horror. It is permeated by contempt and a harsh view of humanity. The word "punishment" is mentioned 60 times, "prevent" 9. That alone shows an authoritarian policy. The rule of law is threatened by proposals for, among other things, anonymous witnesses, secret coercive measures, visitation zones, and threats of deportation on vague grounds such as lack of conduct.

The Palace Agreement focuses on gangs and gun violence. In the Left Party, we also focus on violence against women. For both, it applies that men dominate greatly as perpetrators and that the violence has fearsome effects, while there are also connections. The shootings primarily affect young men from politically neglected areas where the living conditions are worse than in the rest of society. In a segregated society where inequality is now allowed to increase even further, crime also increases.

Violence against women is an expression of certain men's need to control "their" woman. Yes, Swedish equality hides still dark patriarchal values. That violence continues in the midst of us and exists in all social groups. It results in many children in Sweden being forced to experience violence in the home. This applies to every 10th child, and every 20th child often experiences it. Research shows that boys risk learning violence as a means of power. If the son becomes aggressive and criminal, a single mother is often blamed. It would be more relevant to blame a violent father and a society that fails.

Violence is a poison. It strikes victims with pain and suffering. Violence also causes enormous costs. According to the European Institute for Gender Equality, the societal costs of men's violence against women in Sweden in 2019 amounted to 6.6 billion euros. I honestly have no figure for the cost of gang and weapon violence, but a single prison place costs on average 3,300 kronor per day. What should protection and preventive measures cost?

To reduce crime and strengthen safety, a policy is required that reduces class inequalities and increases equality. The general welfare must be strengthened. Violence must be countered with a clear zero tolerance and a sharp questioning of macho ideals. The school has, like the social services, an extra responsibility to early and actively counter bullying, racism, and sexual harassment. When the school, leisure activities, and society at large function well, children gain hope for the future and the competencies to meet it. In this way, in harmony with research, we can counter recruitment to criminal gangs and break the chain of men's violence against women. Vänsterpartiet has the solutions.

(Applause)

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

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Madam Speaker! I am a new member here in the Riksdag.

I am also new as the Center Party's spokesperson on justice policy.

There is a lot of talk about crime policy these days. I am not happy about the reason for that. But given the situation and the crime we have in the country today, it is good that the newly appointed government and we in the liberal opposition, similar to the previous government, have a great commitment to the issue. We see domestic violence, which takes many lives in Sweden today, primarily women's. We see thefts, burglaries and vandalism both in cities and in the countryside. All these crimes are serious. We need to put the crime victim in a clearer focus than before but also give the perpetrator opportunities to get out of their situation as well as prevent more from ending up there.

But we also have crime that, in addition to affecting individuals, threatens to affect our entire democratic system - system-threatening crime. Employees and elected officials within the public sector risk being subjected to threats, bribes, or other pressures in their duties. This is done by organized crime, which systematically commits crimes for profit, most often through trade in drugs, weapons, labor, and waste as well as trafficking, but also through protection rackets and welfare fraud. This is serious.

Madam Speaker! As I have said, I am new here in the Riksdag, but I have done other things previously. I am on leave from my job as a prosecutor in Dalarna, but I come most recently from 14 years as the chairman of the municipal executive board in Leksand. I know that there are more here in the chamber who have a municipal background.

I have been told that we municipal councilors often enter here in the Riksdag with the attitude that we can certainly speak about how things look in reality – in the municipalities – but that we then quickly become federalized and see everything from a state perspective. I will do my best not to become such, because I see the necessity that we elected representatives see ourselves as active in the public sector and do not limit ourselves to just our level. Sweden is everywhere in our entire country. Then we have, for good reason, divided the responsibility politically. But that division must not become a reason not to together do our utmost for those of us who live here.

In the area of justice policy, we have the entire judicial system at the state level. In the regions, we have healthcare, and within the municipalities, social services, school, and care. In a time of scarce resources and great challenges, I am convinced that we need to cooperate more clearly and smarter. It could be a question of more modern secrecy legislation, co-locations, and clearer requirements. We can also learn from collaborations such as MUR, where 22 state agencies now, at the initiative of Försäkringskassan, cooperate to strengthen the work against benefit fraud and abuse of the welfare systems.

I believe that the only thing that should be shot in this country, except perhaps now during the weeks of the elk hunt, is chairs. We in the country's municipalities, regions, and the Riksdag need to pull the chairs together so that no one – neither young nor old, neither crime victims nor perpetrators – falls between the chairs and falls through our safety net.

Madam Speaker! I know my role as a Member of Parliament, but I intend to continue to join forces with both regions and municipalities to combat organized crime that threatens the system for all of us who live in this country.

(Applause)

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

Ingemar Kihlström (KD)

Madam Speaker! For nearly 25 years, the zero vision has guided Swedish traffic safety work. Nevertheless, more than 9,000 people have died in traffic since it was introduced. A large share of the blame for this lies with those who break traffic rules through illegal driving, recklessness in traffic, and not least driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs. There are many tragic examples throughout history, and every month and year they only increase.

We have debated this in the Riksdag for a long time. Already in my first interpellation debate with Morgan Johansson in 2019, I requested harsher penalties for repeated traffic offenses. In the debate, I raised one of the many heartbreaking examples that exist.

In November 2017, a 14-year-old girl was run over by a man in Central Sweden. The man did not call the police. He did not stop at the scene to see if the girl had been injured or survived. Instead, he fled.

It was not the first time he stood before the court when he was subsequently sentenced. He was a known user of both drugs and alcohol. He had been convicted of drunk driving, fleeing and reckless driving. He had no driver's license but nevertheless owned 32 cars. He functioned as a getaway driver.

A 14-year-old girl on her way home was hit and died from her injuries. The driver left the scene without checking to see how the person who had been hit was doing. So we cannot have that.

Madam Speaker! During 2021, a radio documentary, Döden på vägen, provided further examples of how repeat offenders can commit a large number of traffic offenses without society having the opportunity to prevent it. The documentary described, among other things, a horrific accident that killed two people and left a family and relatives in mourning. That was what happened when a driver continued to drive while intoxicated.

This is an example in the series of traffic accidents that shows how people have been killed by reckless and often drug-impaired drivers who have a repeated history of traffic offenses. Families are left to live a life of grief and longing because society has not had the tools and has not also put its foot down hard enough to meet this type of criminality. For us Christian Democrats, it has been clear for a long time that the penalties must be increased to stop these irresponsible drivers.

Madam Speaker! Every day, according to relevant assessments, approximately 14,000 people drive while intoxicated. One of the reasons for this is that the penalties have historically been very low in Sweden. The average sentence for driving while intoxicated, aggravated driving while intoxicated, and unlicensed driving is only one month of imprisonment. It is unreasonable.

As early as the autumn of 2019, an investigation was on the government's desk, referred and ready for legislation. For just as long, we in the Christian Democrats continued through written questions and other pressures to the responsible minister, who unfortunately did not fulfill the task.

Finally, the government took action. In 2022, a government bill was submitted with proposals for harsher penalties. But they did not take a sufficient step. They did not introduce the penal provision proposed in the investigation on serious traffic crime.

We Christian Democrats see the advantages of the proposal that repeated traffic offenses should, in some cases, be met with a stronger reaction from society. We believe that one should also proceed according to what the Riksdag announces regarding the introduction of such a penalty level.

Madam Speaker! We also believe that the police should be able to carry out screening tests for drugs. We have also long advocated for a ban on drinking after the fact. Current legislation prevents those who have driven under the influence from being punished sufficiently.

Madam Speaker! To avoid more families being affected, society needs to act forcefully to stop these irresponsible and dangerous drivers. It is truly time to move forward with even more far-reaching legislation to make traffic safer for us all.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! Gang crime is one of Sweden's greatest social problems. It was an area that rightly took up a large space in the election campaign and which will most likely also be given a large space during this mandate period. In that matter, there is agreement both between the blocs and between the political parties.

To address the problem of gang crime, a lot needs to be done. It was a priority area for the previous government. The Social Democrats and the Green Party worked strongly and with a great focus on the issue during the years we governed Sweden. But very much remains.

The preventive work needs to be strengthened. The young guys who leave school and start building a criminal career must be taken care of immediately. Completed schooling with passing grades is a vaccine against crime. Note well: Even those who are vaccinated can become ill, but the risk is significantly reduced.

Madam Speaker! The law enforcement authorities need to be strengthened. Investments and reinforcements have been made. Several have received new instruments and tools to work with, but this needs to continue over time. The police authority is naturally central in that work. But it is far from the only one. The prosecution authority is extremely important, but also the customs, the Swedish Tax Agency, the Financial Supervisory Authority and the Swedish Economic Crime Authority, to name a few of them.

There are things that the new right-wing government has signaled in the area that are good. The construction with a dedicated social services minister is one example. To consolidate the joint work across authorities is another.

Madam Speaker! There are also parts that the government has signaled which are directly counterproductive. Visitation zones are one such. Anonymous witnesses are another. The measure that is proposed in the migration area regarding the de-registration of permanent residence permits will worsen integration. It risks having negative effects also on such things as crime.

Madam Speaker! The Green Party will be a tough but also constructive opposition. There are things where many parties share a common view. But where we do not agree, we will criticize but also come forward with our own proposals. We will consistently scrutinize the government, and we will consistently stand up for the rule of law.

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

Erik Hellsborn (SD)

Madam Speaker! It was good to hear that Rasmus Ling sees gang crime as one of our greatest challenges. But it becomes a bit contradictory when he simultaneously protests against all the immigration policy legislative changes that the Tidö Agreement now includes.

Let us speak plainly about who it is that is responsible for the crime. It is young men with an immigrant background. The problems we have would never have occurred if it were not for the immigration policy driven by Miljöpartiet.

I must ask the member: Do you not see any connection between your immigration policy and gang crime?

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! The proposals that the new government, with the Sweden Democrats as a coalition partner, has presented will lead to a deterioration of integration. That people will not have permanent residence permits will increase insecurity for children growing up and for families.

It will result in fewer people entering the labor market, and vulnerability will increase. All of this is a breeding ground for crime. It is not an explanation or any excuse for an individual person. But we see very clearly that when conditions deteriorate, crime increases.

The government is now doing this deliberately. It will lead to a great risk that crime will also become worse. It is a really bad policy that the government has signaled. In those parts, the Green Party will do everything to stop it.

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

Erik Hellsborn (SD)

Madam Speaker! What constitutes bad policy is, in my opinion, quite obvious after what we have seen during the recent parliamentary terms. We have seen what the policy advocated by Miljöpartiet leads to. We are living with its consequences.

I am very pleased that we have entered into the new Tidö Agreement and are introducing the measures required to rectify the mess that the red-greens have caused.

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

Rasmus Ling (MP)

Madam Speaker! Once again: The new government with the Sweden Democrats deliberately wants to worsen integration. That one deliberately worsens integration with the consequences it will lead to in the form of increased exclusion, poorer participation in the labor market and also an obvious risk of increased crime is extremely irresponsible.

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

Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)

Madam Speaker! Following the now concluded government formation, we can state that Sweden will receive a different political direction than the one that was previous. A new cooperation agreement, the Tidö Agreement, guarantees that certain political issues will be handled continuously during the mandate period we now have ahead of us. Through the mandate the Swedish people have given us in the latest election, this political direction is now made possible.

I particularly want to highlight the area in the Tidö Agreement concerning crime and measures linked to preventing and countering crime. According to the Tidö Agreement, a review shall be made of the camera surveillance act in order to enable camera surveillance in more locations and for longer periods than is possible today. The municipalities and the police shall simply be given better conditions to maintain safety in society through regulatory simplifications and legislative changes.

Madam Speaker! Here I particularly want to highlight the wording in the Tidö Agreement that is linked to the municipalities and concerns that camera surveillance that does not require a permit shall be able to be expanded. It is precisely such a change that many municipalities in Sweden are requesting today. One sees a need for camera surveillance, but the applications then get stuck in long bureaucratic permit processes within responsible authorities - this is due to current legislation.

In order for our municipalities to be given better conditions to work on crime prevention, a change in the legislation also needs to occur. It is not reasonable that while we see a wave of crime sweep through a municipality, often limited to a few specific districts, a sluggish permit process hinders the municipality's ability to increase the residents' safety.

I can recall here how young people in a particular part of my home municipality Gävle were subjected to pure acts of humiliation on several occasions. Current legislation made it impossible for the municipality to act promptly. It is not reasonable that current legislation makes it difficult to just act promptly when there is such an obvious need.

Madam Speaker! Being able to act quickly and resolutely is a must in order to counter crime, but also to prevent, for example, criminal gangs from having time to move on and commit new crimes in other places.

But it is also as much about creating evidence for our law enforcement agencies so that they can investigate, prosecute, and have these individuals prosecuted for the crimes they commit. It can and will provide redress for the crime victims who have been subjected to [it] when society can punish the criminal individuals.

Maintaining safety and security in our society, for our citizens, is one of the state's most important tasks. This also applies when it comes to facilitating for our municipalities to combat crime.

I am glad that we are now four parties in agreement to simplify and improve the legislation linked to, among other things, the camera surveillance act. In this way, we can make more places safer and ensure that more people dare to move about to a greater extent than today. In Sweden, you should be able to feel safe. With the Tidö Agreement, the first steps are now being taken for a safer Sweden.

(Applause)

In this speech, Erik Hellsborn (SD) agreed.

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

Mikael Damsgaard (M)

Madam Speaker! Organized crime is spreading in Sweden. The most visible sign of this is the epidemic increase in gun violence. This year, the violence is setting new grim records regarding both the number of shootings and the number of people who have died as a result of the violence.

Another form of organized crime is the international theft gangs that account for a very large proportion of residential burglaries and other serious thefts in Sweden. Today, it is estimated that these gangs are behind more than half of all residential burglaries in Sweden. They also account for up to 90 percent of other serious thefts of car parts, boat engines, agricultural machinery, diesel, etc. It is about crime with a high degree of organization, where the gangs have developed a well-established logistics and capability when it comes to handling stolen goods, accommodation, and transport. Large profits, small risk of detection, and low penalties are strong contributing causes to why the theft gangs plague just in Sweden.

The problem is an illustration of how organized crime has become increasingly international over the years. A person commits a crime in one country, transports the stolen goods to another, and then sells them in a third. The crime also occurs in both directions. While stolen goods are taken out of the country, for example, drugs and weapons are smuggled into Sweden.

These crimes are grossly invasive of privacy and affect a large number of people in Sweden. It is also a crime that costs private individuals, companies, and insurance companies billions of kronor every year. This type of crime must therefore be combated more effectively than is the case today.

Despite the fact that the phenomenon of international theft gangs has been well known for many years, the efforts from the previous Social Democratic government have been very weak. The improvements that have nevertheless been achieved have come into place after we in the previous opposition in the Riksdag have pushed through budget decisions and announcements. The previous Social Democratic government, on the other hand, has had limited capacity for initiative.

Now a new bourgeois government under the leadership of Ulf Kristersson has taken office, and with this, the largest offensive against crime in modern times in Sweden begins. This also applies to the fight against theft. In the Tidö Agreement, it is established that Tullverket's crime-fighting powers shall be expanded and that the export of stolen goods shall be criminalized.

It is also necessary to establish tougher penalties for those who engage in systematic theft crimes. It is about the sentencing scales for theft crimes, about abolishing quantity discounts in their current form, and about recidivism being punished more severely.

Through low risk of detection and mild penalties, Sweden is an all too attractive place for crime networks that travel here to commit crimes. This is what we now want to change.

(Applause)

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Madam Speaker! In recent times, the political debate has been dominated by crime policy. Stopping gang crime is one of the greatest challenges of our time. We must stop the ruthless violence on our streets. In this debate, however, we often forget the violence that primarily affects women. Violence in close relationships and honor-related violence is an acute and serious societal problem. It is high time that these issues are placed at the center of the crime policy debate, where they actually belong.

Men's violence against women most often occurs behind closed doors. Every day, women are subjected to harassment, violence, and sexual crimes in a close relationship. Every month, at least one woman is killed by a man she has or has had a relationship with. This deadly, ruthless, and brutal violence has devastating consequences and causes great suffering. The most dangerous place for a woman to be is her own home, and it is completely unacceptable.

Equally unacceptable is the violence and oppression that occurs in the name of honor. It can range from hate, threats, and harassment to virginity tests, female genital mutilation, and in some cases, death. According to researchers, 240,000 young people in Sweden may live under honor oppression. The dark figures are large, and a large silent group are adult women. Therefore, we must react powerfully against all forms of oppression that limit women's lives and erode their freedom. The culture of honor has no place in Swedish society.

I am proud of the previous Social Democratic government's work to combat men's violence against women. Now we must take the next step, because more needs to be done. We need to strengthen the justice system's efforts to resolve these crimes. We need long-term and permanent support for women's shelters, and we need to further tighten the legislation. Therefore, we want to toughen the penalties for repeated cases of serious sexual offenses, introduce a specific crime regarding psychological abuse, and tighten the legislation concerning innocence checks. We also want to introduce lex Lotta, which means that if a woman is murdered despite an authority having known about her situation, the authority shall take its responsibility and report itself.

The list can be long. These are just a few examples. The point is that we must move from words to action before it is too late.

Madam Speaker! I want to conclude my speech by emphasizing the following: When we are silent, it is these women who suffer. When we do not listen, it is these women who are silenced. And when we look away, these women's freedom is but a memory.

We all have a responsibility. Men's violence against women requires political action here and now.

(Applause)

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

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! A construction site that looks like a high-security prison with fences, remote-controlled gates and camera surveillance, a convenience store in a suburban square where turnover goes up when the police arrive and down when the police leave, and a factory that has to change its schedule because the employees do not dare to travel to and from work late in the evening and early in the morning - these are three examples from my hometown Gothenburg of the reality that many business owners and employees experience today.

In the survey "The Costs of Crime 2022" from Svenskt Näringsliv, the impact of crime on entrepreneurship and jobs is described. More than half of the companies surveyed have been affected by crime during the past year, many multiple times. In total, the report authors estimate that the costs of insecurity and crime in the Swedish business sector exceed 100 billion kronor annually. 42 billion are direct costs for crime, and an additional nearly 30 billion are various security-enhancing measures.

The estimated revenue losses amount to 18 billion, and in addition to that, an assumption is made that there are at least an additional 10 billion in costs due to cybercrime, fraud and so on.

The costs are alarming in themselves, but perhaps even worse are actually the consequences of the insecurity: 6 percent of the surveyed companies have, during the past year, chosen to refrain from investments due to vulnerability or fear of crime. Almost as many have considered closing down parts or the entire company's operations for the same reasons.

Madam Speaker! That companies and workplaces are exposed to crime is not just a problem for the individual. It is fundamentally a threat to our open society.

Firstly, there is rarely only one legal entity that is a crime victim. There is often also a physical victim. It is about the treasurer who is robbed, the entrepreneur who is deceived in a telephone fraud, and the craftsman whose car is smashed in a burglary.

Secondly, crime hits the economy of society at large. When almost 1 in 20 companies have refrained from investments or shut down operations, it also means lost jobs and tax revenues.

For the third, crime risks tearing down entire industries when illegal company facades are systematically used to expose law-abiding companies to unfair competition.

Therefore, I am pleased, Madam Speaker, that the newly appointed government will now initiate perhaps the greatest offensive against organized crime in Swedish history. In addition to a complete review of the entire penal code, the justice system's efforts are also being focused. A unified council against serious organized crime is being established at the Ministry of Justice. But perhaps most importantly for combating crimes against business is that the secrecy legislation is being reformed with a new main rule: All relevant information shall be shared with law enforcement authorities for the purpose of combating crime.

Madam Speaker! Crime against companies and entrepreneurship has unfortunately not been noticed much in the political debate or by the previous red-green government. But if we are to address the insecurity and achieve a functioning business climate in Sweden, these problems must be taken seriously. To be a driving force in that work, I will see as one of my most important tasks as a Member of Parliament over the coming four years. For, Madam Speaker, it should not have to be part of a business plan how one protects oneself against crime.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Kärrholm (M)

Madam Speaker! Honored members of the Swedish Parliament! Many of us warned at an early stage about the development of violent and system-threatening criminal networks. The reactions were sluggish. Sufficient measures were lacking. The situation has gradually worsened.

Fortunately, we now have a majority in the Swedish Riksdag that understands the seriousness and is prepared to do what is necessary to reverse the development. The new government's policy implies the largest offensive against organized crime in modern times.

The government will, among other things, carry out a complete review of criminal law. With this, there is an opportunity to once and for all settle the naive treatment ideology that has characterized the Swedish sentencing system.

Highly active offenders and dangerous individuals need to be locked up - not because longer prison sentences make someone a better human being, but because the person who is locked up cannot commit crimes and can also not recruit young people into criminality. Here we have a long-overlooked incapacitation effect.

In Sweden, there are over 8,000 people who have been prosecuted ten or more times.

Madam Speaker! I believe in a second chance in many cases, but I do not believe in a twentieth.

Prison is not the entire solution, however. Nor has anyone claimed it to be. Fundamentally, crime is based on values, culture, and morals. The most important crime-preventing communities are the family and civil society. These are the communities that we need to promote. Society is greater than the state.

It is the state's most fundamental task to safeguard the citizens' security from external and internal threats. Crime must be combated, and that requires more and longer prison sentences.

However, it is not cost-free. The correctional services are now to be significantly expanded, and there is an urgency because there is a shortage of space. While waiting to serve their prison sentences, dangerous individuals are going free, and they are committing new crimes. But this capacity increase in the correctional services needs to occur with great respect for the taxpayers' money.

The prison places in Sweden are 50 percent more expensive than in our neighboring countries Finland and Denmark. They are twice as expensive as in England and Germany. It is unjustifiable.

We now in Sweden have not only a crime crisis but also an economic crisis. In addition to reducing the costs in the criminal justice system per prison place, we need to rent prison places abroad to the greatest extent possible.

Crime must be combated. It needs to happen more effectively, but it also needs to happen cost-effectively.

(Applause)

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

Camilla Brunsberg (M)

Madam Speaker! What an honor it is to stand here in the chamber today representing the Moderates! For my part personally, it is possible thanks to the people of Blekinge giving me strong voter support in the election. Therefore, I intended in my first speech in the chamber during this parliamentary term to speak about precisely that which was important for the people of Blekinge before the election.

I could, of course, have spoken at length and in detail about the importance of the naval base and the air wing for Sweden's external security now that we find ourselves in a shaky time. I could also have spoken about how important it is that jobs are being created and that Blekinge's companies - many of which operate on a global market and contribute to Sweden's GDP - are dependent on infrastructure investments. But, Madam Speaker, I intend to speak about something else. I intend to speak about security.

When knocking on hundreds of doors during a campaign, one is met with both pleasant and honest conversations about what is important for people in their everyday lives. I met, among others, a young father who had moved here to Sweden from war and oppression. He said to me: I came here to create a safe life for myself and my children, but Sweden has changed.

Yes, Sweden has now qualified to be one of the countries in Europe with the most gang-related shootings. We have seen shootings almost every day and fatal shootings practically every week. One in three women is afraid to go out in the evening, and children and young people are being robbed and humiliated in the open street.

In my home municipality, where I have been an opposition councillor during the mandate period that has passed, we Moderates, together with the Christian Democrats, have gathered broad political support to make extensive safety investments. We have invested heavily in the school, doubled the field group, and hired safety wardens. Why do I mention this here in the chamber? Yes, I do it because these are incredibly important preventive measures that need to be made precisely at the municipal level. But it is not enough. Now it is finally time to take a crack down on insecurity and crime. I look forward to being part of voting through reforms here in the chamber to restore Sweden as a safe country, where criminals sit behind lock and key.

Since then, the definition of security is, of course, different depending on where one is in life. Right now, there are many who risk having to leave their houses and homes because they cannot afford to pay their electricity bill. Now it is time to immediately have a high-cost protection in place and ensure that nuclear power can be expanded in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! Safety is about much more than more police and harsher punishments. For us Moderates, safety is about our children being able to attend safe and secure schools, that our elderly should have access to good elderly care, that people should be able to afford to pay their electricity bill, and that women should be able to go out in the evening without having to look over their shoulder.

But if this is to be possible and if we are to have the means to implement these necessary changes, everyone who can participate must be able to contribute and support themselves.

Now, four parties have secured the Tidö Agreement, which means that we Moderates can implement everything we campaigned on to tackle crime and insecurity. I look forward to four constructive years here in the chamber where we get Sweden in order. And, Madam Speaker, as a Member of Parliament for Blekinge, I will always have insecurity as my greatest and worst enemy.

(Applause)

In this speech, Robert Stenkvist (SD) concurred.

Infrastructure

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

Peder Björk (S)

Madam Speaker! An increased pace in the climate transition means large investments and new jobs across the entire country. Sweden cannot let the opportunities that the climate transition entails disappear elsewhere. New and developed industries contribute to more jobs, a stronger economy, and a better welfare.

In northern Sweden, the green industries of the future are already emerging. We see, among other things, a development of fossil-free steel, battery manufacturing, and the production of green hydrogen. Industry and industrial workers are just as crucial today for building the world's first fossil-free welfare state as they were when we built the Swedish welfare society.

The transition, however, requires a well-functioning infrastructure. We need large investments in Sweden's electricity grid, railways, roads, broadband, and charging stations. During the last two parliamentary terms, Social Democratic governments have made record-breaking investments. But it is not enough, and continued investments are required.

General political debate Justice system

Madam Speaker! For Västernorrland, the region where I live and represent here in the Riksdag, an expansion to double track between Gävle and Härnösand is absolutely crucial. Today's Ostkustbanan is Sweden's longest bottleneck with 27 miles of single-track railway on the Gävle-Härnösand stretch. Today, the line is overloaded over its entire length, and there is very limited space for more transport.

By building double tracks, the capacity can be quadrupled and travel times halved. Rail transport is crucial for exporting the products of the green industries in an environmentally friendly way. The new Ostkustbanan is simply good for the environment, the economy, and the jobs in all of Sweden.

But even with an expanded railway, the need for transport of goods by road remains. And people need to be able to transport themselves by car where public transport is not an option. For a long time, the coastal municipalities in northern Sweden have expressed a need for new sections on today's E4. In our county, it concerns a new bypass at Örnsköldsvik.

Madam Speaker! Instead of an offensive investment in green jobs, the right-conservative bloc is now choosing a completely different path. In their cabinet agreement, it is stated that Sweden's environmental and climate ambitions shall be lowered. Furthermore, there is not a single syllable in the cabinet agreement regarding investments in infrastructure. Oh, excuse me, Bromma Airport is mentioned and shall remain. The right-conservative government's lack of interest in climate issues and infrastructure is a real threat to green growth in northern Sweden.

General political debate Infrastructure

Sweden has the technology, we have the expertise and we have the will. By uniting around the opportunities in a transition, we can become the first fossil-free welfare country with a renewable energy production.

The right-conservative policy in this area is not just negotiated in a castle - in reality, it is a castle in the air. Sweden needs a different policy that wants to prioritize investments in roads and railways throughout the country with the ambition to build a sustainable society for everyone.

(Applause)

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is very good that the Social Democrats have invested historically large amounts of money in infrastructure. The Social Democrats have been in power for eight years. Where are the double tracks in Norrland that are requested by Member Peder Björk? I do not know. Where are the investments in shipping? Where are the investments in infrastructure?

We have a national plan until 2033, where the Social Democrats have tasked the Swedish Transport Administration with investigating how the money can be distributed. But in 2033, I shall say, the infrastructure will be worse than it is today.

Madam Speaker! I would therefore like to ask Peder Björk where the historically large investments are.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem and Robert Stenkvist (both SD) concurred.

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

Peder Björk (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the opportunity to answer his questions.

Regarding the Ostkustbanan, an expansion of double tracks has been initiated with investments of nearly 10 billion kronor. The Social Democratic government has begun the expansion of the Norrbotniabanan, and historically large resources have been invested in shifting freight from road and rail to maritime transport.

My question to Member of Parliament Jimmy Ståhl is: What are the Sweden Democrats' priorities and investments for the infrastructure in northern Sweden?

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! We have quite a few. We also consider the railway to be very important. Above all, shipping is important. Via shipping, we can load out enormous amounts of cargo from, among other places, Luleå and down to the rest of Europe. There we make quite a lot of investments.

We are also investing in the airports, which I understand the Social Democrats have no interest in at all. We want an infrastructure that covers all of Sweden. Bromma is important.

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

Peder Björk (S)

Madam Speaker! If Member of Parliament Jimmy Ståhl is so convinced about investments in both the railway and shipping, I wonder what the member thinks about the fact that this is completely missing from the government statement delivered yesterday. Above all, it is missing from the palace agreement that has been concluded with those who now constitute the government basis here in the Swedish Riksdag.

The question remains for the member to answer: What investments do the Sweden Democrats want to see in northern Sweden when it comes to infrastructure?

(Applause)

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! I have listened to the debate during the day, and on several occasions, crime in Sweden has been brought up. Then one must also keep in mind that crime is on wheels. It is, therefore, moving along.

Our roads are Sweden's largest crime scene. The road is the criminals' most important tool of trade. We have extensive unauthorized professional traffic in Sweden, and in that traffic, transports of weapons, drugs, and in some cases even people are hidden. In the opposite direction, stolen goods worth approximately 2 billion per year leave the country.

This traffic has been opened up by dismantling the traffic police. There are no controls on the road that can push back this activity, and instead, it has been allowed to grow unchecked over the years. One of the most important measures to tackle this type of activity is therefore to expand the traffic police. The machinery for the criminal networks must be ground down.

I have myself worked within the traffic police, and already in 2012, the county police in Gothenburg, with whom I had a close cooperation when I was regional manager for Sveriges Åkeriföretag, stated that the illegal traffic in Sweden generates money for other criminal activities. Investments are made in drug trafficking and so on.

This is what we see the effect of today with all the shootings and the violence spreading in society. If we are to reach the criminal networks and really stop this, we must get controls on the road. We must in every way crush the criminals' business activities, and then the road must not be completely open for this type of activity. That is one concern.

I therefore come from the trucking industry and thus have a lot of contact with both trucking companies and drivers, and another concern is that there are very many Russian vehicles moving in Sweden right now. One must then ask the question: What are they doing here? With all the sanctions against Russia, there reasonably should not be Russian-registered trucks in Sweden.

I have on several occasions received information from drivers who are out and have handed it over to the Armed Forces so that they can in some way be prepared for what they might be engaged in here. I have also spoken with my former colleagues at the traffic police. Stop these cars! What equipment is on board? We were reminded a few weeks ago when they blew up Nord Stream. The Russian vehicles moving freely in Sweden can prepare attacks, for example, on our electrical infrastructure.

This has been left completely open. One hasn't even bothered to develop the traffic police and ensure that we have controls on the road that curb this type of activity. Instead, one has increased the number of speed cameras and thinks that one can manage traffic monitoring in that way.

It is remarkable how poorly this has been handled by the previous governments. There is reason here to rethink and ensure that resources are deployed to curb the criminals' progress in society. Then we must have controls on the road.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem and Robert Stenkvist (both SD) concurred.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to address a bit of what Member Morell states in his contribution. It is not consistent with the truth that nothing has been done. The Social Democratic-led government has taken a number of different measures to rectify the Wild West that prevails in many cases on Swedish roads. It is about both fair conditions and the fact that we have the highest sanction fee when it comes to foreign companies that cheat.

I would like to ask another question to Member Morell. A few weeks ago, a motion was submitted to scrap the plans to build new main lines. How does Member Morell view how we should solve future transport?

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question.

We are talking about the control of professional traffic. Proposals have been submitted by the government which, among other things, are based on the mobility package that has been adopted in the EU. Fundamentally, this was initiated by a Sverigedemokrat who was a member of the European Parliament.

The package is very good. But for it to work, it requires that there is someone out on the road who makes stop signs and looks at the vehicle. What type of transport is it? Who is behind the wheel? Are there permits? What has the driver been doing? That function does not exist today.

When I left the traffic police, we were in Skara three shifts with nine men in each. Today, there are a total of five who have authorization for heavy vehicles. That is how it looks in every single unit in Sweden, and it is alarming because it has created conditions for criminals.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Madam Speaker! These questions are important. There we can agree on what we need to do, and some of it has been done.

But what is Member Morell's answer for solving future transport when today's railway system is undersized and when the companies cannot get their goods out in the southern parts of Sweden? What is Member Morell's answer to that?

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! We have submitted a motion to stop the high-speed train. The answer is yes. This is in order to create the conditions to stabilize the railway system because the maintenance is lacking. Furthermore, bottlenecks shall be expanded. Then it will be possible to create conditions for freight transport.

Just before the debate, I was sitting and talking with representatives from a railway company. Then we discussed future transports, and we said that if we were to increase freight transport on rail by 100 percent, freight transport by road would decrease by 8 percent. Those are the dimensions.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! Thomas Morell speaks about the fact that there are too few traffic police officers. I can agree with that. During my time as traffic councillor in Stockholm, I have many times spoken about that too little is being done to manage the traffic. I have requested that municipal traffic police be established – traffic monitors, as I call them – to get the speeds in order. No one is monitoring the environmental zones, and much of it concerns the traffic.

What Thomas Morell is talking about is using traffic police to tackle crime. Isn't it a problem that these are being mixed up? One reason why one does not want municipal traffic police is that when the police go out to hunt criminals, they want the possibility to stop the cars and conduct a house search in the car. That complicates things for the other area. Should one not separate them so that the police focus on serious crime and the traffic police take care of traffic?

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is interesting that Daniel Helldén raises this issue. We have submitted proposals to build a special unit directly under the police leadership that shall handle road control, not in contact with the regional police chief and so on.

There is an advantage with police officers who have the authority to conduct mobile inspections compared to vehicle inspectors. They do not need a search warrant to enter a vehicle. When I have stopped a vehicle on the road to perform a check, I essentially own the vehicle until I am finished—not before can the driver leave. I have access to the vehicle to perform a technical inspection. In connection with that, other crimes can be discovered. In that case, contact is made with the investigation lead or prosecutor.

We must get police on the road who stop the criminals. It is a poison in our society that they have been given free access to our infrastructure, and no one is curbing the activity.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! I can understand the problem, but I think that in some way we must try to keep this separate. I understand the point of conducting house searches in cars. It is a coercive measure that the police hardly have in any other area. The problem is that this also affects other activities, namely road safety and environmental zones.

If the proposal was to do something such as that, it is something to look at. The question is whether it is.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! I then recommend that Daniel Helldén read our motion. We want a special unit for the control of professional traffic. The regular police can preferably devote themselves to ordinary speed monitoring, breathalyzer checks, environmental zones and so on. But it should be a special unit that devotes itself to professional traffic because it is a very complex area that an ordinary police officer cannot devote themselves to.

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! Sweden's main lines, and with them large parts of the Swedish railway network, are facing a collapse. This was stated by the Transport Administration in 2010 when explaining the capacity shortage and the punctuality on the over 150-year-old Södra stambanan.

In response to this, the then Alliance government issued a clear announcement first regarding the construction of Ostlänken and then regarding new trunk lines. I know this because I was there at Stora torget in Linköping when the Alliance's party leaders presented this in 2012.

The coalition government's requirement was that the investments should generate new jobs, more housing, and regional growth. The municipality undertook to plan housing, the region undertook to strengthen regional development, and the business sector undertook to invest.

After intensive negotiations, and a change of government in between, we managed to reach an agreement in the Sweden negotiations. I also know this because I was there. I was involved in the negotiations with the then, now deceased, Moderate politician HG Wessberg.

Madam Speaker! That was then, and now is now. All agreements, all consensus, and I dare to say all trust between the parties who entered into the agreement on a sustainable Swedish railway now face a collapse.

The political inability to reach clear decisions and the reluctance to contribute to solutions have resulted in us now facing a reality where the trust between the state and municipalities is damaged, where the trust between the public sector and the business community is scarred, and where the general public are the big losers and pay the highest price in the form of a railway that all too often fails to deliver.

Madam Speaker! The right thing to do now would have been to show leadership. Instead, a motion was submitted, written by those who today make up the government constellation, with the aim of stopping everything that Sweden has worked on for decades. It was a motion that claimed to want to stop high-speed trains but which in reality would strongly contribute to stopping all trains. It was a motion that was also so poorly communicated that it sent shockwaves among many of the motioners' party comrades in the affected municipalities.

Madam Speaker! It did not get any better when we received the government statement. Everything mentioned regarding rail infrastructure is a few lines that read: "Investments in the railway shall primarily facilitate commuting and freight traffic, which strengthens jobs and growth." These few lines are all that remains of the once so proud Sverigebygget that the Moderates, Christian Democrats, and Liberals pushed through together with the Centre Party.

When we add the motion on high-speed trains to the items in the government statement, we realize quite quickly that the new government completely lacks a vision for the railway and for Sweden's development.

Madam Speaker! When the state demanded co-financing from the Östergötland municipalities for the Citybanan in Stockholm, we did not complain. We contributed. When the state demanded housing from the Östergötland municipalities, we did not complain. We contributed. That is what we have learned, that is to say, one keeps what one promises and one contributes.

Now the question is how it is going to be. Are all the investments that the Östergötland municipalities have made to be scrapped? Are all the travelers to be left on the platform?

(Applause)

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! There is a high-speed train per hour between Malmö and Stockholm today, a high-speed train per hour in each direction. Only a small percentage of the rail journeys consist of long-distance journeys.

Taking this into account, I have a question for Member Demirok. Does the Center Party consider it reasonable to build a high-speed railway for a high-speed train per hour between Malmö and Stockholm for 400-500 billion, when we see that we have an infrastructure that is wearing down and becoming worse and worse?

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! I shall answer Member Patrik Jönsson quite simply.

What is a high-speed train? What is being planned today and what we have planned for Ostlänken and the new trunk lines is 250 kilometers per hour. If we went out into the world and declared that this is our view on high-speed trains, I think they would laugh at us.

That is the planning today. What we are planning is new main lines, an upgrade of the Swedish railway that has needed to be done for at least a hundred years. That is what we face - the need to expand the railway. But with the motion that has been submitted and the direction that lies ahead, we will not even expand the main lines - not for high-speed trains but not even for regional commuter trains.

How are you going to respond to the work commute when you do not want to expand the railway?

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! That is exactly what we want, but it is not what the Center Party wants. You want to spend all the money on the prestige project of high-speed trains - 400-500 billion for a train per hour between Malmö and Stockholm. It is possible that your voters think it is a good proposal.

I am quite convinced that our voters would rather see us expand existing railways with conventional technology where it is truly needed. New main lines were needed, and it was necessary to build away bottlenecks. Above all, strengthened maintenance was needed, and that is where C stands firm.

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! I used to sometimes, as a municipal commissioner, be asked why we closed the roads when we needed to repave them. I tried to explain that sometimes you have to close the roads in order to be able to repave them.

How are we to upgrade the railways if we are not allowed to build new ones? How are we to upgrade them if we are not allowed to shut them down? With the Sweden Democrats' policy, we will end up in a situation where, for many long years, we will not have a functioning railway at all or an investment in future railways.

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

Gudrun Brunegård (KD)

Madam Speaker! All of Sweden must function.

My home county, Kalmar län, is one of Sweden's rural counties in terms of structure despite its location in southern Sweden. At the same time, it is one of Sweden's premier holiday destinations, where millions of people from all over Northern Europe seek out the fine climate and the distinctive nature with Småland forests, the alvars of Öland, and a lovely archipelago. Approximately half a million visitors per year come to my hometown Vimmerby just to visit Astrid Lindgrens Värld.

But in the report from the South Swedish Chamber of Commerce, "The whole kingdom and half the money," from this year, one can read the following: "Regardless of the analysis method, it is clear that, in particular Kalmar County, has long been situated far down on the government's priority list."

The share of investments per capita for 2018-2019 was in Kalmar län at an insignificant 0.3 percent - to compare with Skåne's 7.5 percent and Stockholm's 34.5 percent.

It looks even worse if one looks ahead. The investments per capita in the draft plan for 2022-2033 are distributed with 0.2 percent to Kalmar län compared to 8.7 percent to Skåne and 30.7 percent to Stockholm.

If one chooses to look at regional investments in the plans for 2022-2033, one sees that Kalmar has 3,100 kronor per inhabitant. This should be compared with the national average, which is 31,400 kronor per inhabitant, i.e., ten times as high. Our neighboring county Östergötland receives investments of 150,500 kronor per inhabitant.

The Sydsvenska Industri- och Handelskammaren writes in its report about "a significant historical and continuous distortion towards a few regions that has been ongoing for a long time, and which has been allowed to continue until now. If the trend is not reversed, we risk having almost 30 years of major imbalances in Swedish infrastructure."

A vital aspect of the deficient distribution of funds to Kalmar län is reflected in the number of wildlife accidents along the roads. A few weeks ago, Barometern wrote that Kalmar län is worst affected in the entire country by wildlife accidents. Since 2010, wildlife accidents have increased by 37 percent to 67,500 per year, according to Trafikverket. Furthermore, a wildlife accident costs a lot, both in money and in suffering for humans and animals. According to the Swedish Transport Administration's research institute, VTI, it concerns societal costs of 3-4 billion per year.

Wildlife fences can reduce wildlife accidents by 70-95 percent, according to Trafikverket, and are therefore judged to be the most effective way to prevent wildlife accidents. Where wildlife fences are installed, accidents decrease. In Kalmar län, there are approximately 7 miles of wildlife fencing. In the neighboring county of Kronoberg, which is smaller in both size and population, there are 23 miles - thus more than three times as much.

It is my strong hope that the newly appointed government reviews and corrects this type of long-standing structural imbalance. All of Sweden must live!

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Madam Speaker! Member Brunegård provides a description of how things look today regarding infrastructure and how the whole country shall live.

That is actually what this is about. How is the whole country to live? How are we to hold together city and country to create sustainable growth and development? It is one of the more important questions, together with managing the climate transition.

In the national transport plan that is currently in place and has been decided, historical investments are made in road maintenance and railway investments. Sydostlänken, which covers Kalmar, Kronoberg and Blekinge, is an important part.

But Member Brunegård is now part of a right-conservative government. It would therefore be interesting to hear a bit more about what the new government intends to do. That cannot be read from what we have received so far.

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

Gudrun Brunegård (KD)

Madam Speaker! Yes, it is true that as recently as yesterday we appointed a new government, a bourgeois government with the clear direction that all of Sweden shall live.

I cannot go into exactly what the plans will look like moving forward now. I have not sat in those negotiations, but there are others who have. What is clear is that we will be managing more money in order to be able to maintain the commuting.

The decision that was discussed in a previous exchange of remarks here regarding the high-speed railways, which the four coalition parties want to stop, is that instead those funds should be transferred to maintenance and improvements of the intricate road network and the regional railway lines - including the Stångådalsbanan, which I travel on several times a week.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Madam Speaker! The fact is that the new railway is a prerequisite for being able to increase regional traffic.

In the government statement, we can read that priority shall be given to work commuting and that we must ensure to maintain what we have. But that does not solve today's problems. I think the question remains unanswered.

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

Gudrun Brunegård (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is important that we see the time. I believe that much will be revealed when, in just a few weeks, we receive a budget where one can point to certain parts of the whole.

These are important issues. Both the member and I know that infrastructure investments span over a very long time; it is not possible to turn around so quickly and lightly.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! I am glad that I do not have to handle the area of justice policy in this chamber. The proposals from the new government seem to be beyond all rescue. The dismantling of the rule of law is extreme and alarming.

In the area of transport policy, we can still likely find constructive ways forward towards a sustainable society where transport policy benefits all of Sweden and creates smooth transport systems, good mobility solutions and a completely emission-free sector.

But that requires the incoming government to rethink. We cannot abruptly halt the expansion of the railway, and we cannot withdraw the reduction obligation within road transport. That would be irresponsible.

What stands out right now is that this government is literally stumbling over the rails. Do they actually know what they want? Just the future of the railway must not be neglected. The demand for sustainable railway infrastructure is screaming, and everyone knows that it takes an incredibly long time to get new tracks in place. These days, the relevant question is: What does the government actually want?

Madam Speaker! In large terms, the transport and infrastructure area is a blind spot in the government statement, and the little that does come is worrying. Not only have they chosen to downgrade the Minister for Infrastructure to a state secretary without their own department – there also come creeping words about investments that mostly sound like "We don't really know what we want, but we have to think something."

What does the Prime Minister actually mean when he states that investments in the railway should primarily facilitate commuting and freight traffic? Where is the conflict?

We received a hint in the government basis' follow-up motion two weeks ago - linked to the national plan - where they expressed that some high-speed trains shall not be built. No, they shall invest in commuter traffic and freight traffic. The strange thing about this is that there is no counter-relationship.

What we know is that the railway is full on the tracks. The freight trains are not getting slots, and passenger traffic is not getting more space. That which rolls gets stuck in eternal problems. It is too crowded, and the demand for sustainable transport that exists is being held back. We cannot solve the problems with anything less than building new main lines, and without new main lines, there will be no work commuting or freight traffic.

After the follow-up motion, we received a statement from the Liberals that everything concerning the distances between Stockholm, Malmö, and Gothenburg shall be reconsidered, that is, completely stopped. It is completely irresponsible.

Shortly thereafter came a counter-order from the Moderaterna that what is underway should proceed, that is, that the Ostlänken shall be built. But that in the middle, which ties the whole thing together into a redundant system, shall be stopped. How will it then be possible to get the train traffic in order?

Madam Speaker! I quote: "New main lines will relieve the most strained parts of the railway network and mean new opportunities for both passenger and freight traffic. The great need for maintenance on the existing network shall not stand against the need for new main lines; both need to be prioritized." These were not my words, Madam Speaker, but they come from a motion from our new infrastructure minister. Shall this minister, who comes from Jönköping, the hub of the new main lines, be the one who scraps these main lines? I truly hope not.

(Applause)

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the new member Daniel Helldén for an interesting contribution and would like to welcome him to the Riksdag; I forgot to say that last time.

We begin with the reduction obligation. It is devastating if we are to reach a sustainable society. It means that many will keep their old cars longer than necessary. It burdens household finances and does not create space to switch to something that is better. It also creates a burden for companies so that they cannot implement the changes that are needed.

We need to back off on that and take it at a pace such that both society, companies, and private individuals can keep up. One cannot rush blindly straight into this.

And then the railway – this eternal question. I lead SM in train delays. I am constantly and continuously sitting on trains that do not arrive. We must ensure that maintenance resources are allocated to the railway. In the plans, it states that the railway and roads will be in worse condition in 2033 than they are today, hence the motion.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! Thomas Morell describes the reduction obligation as a problem in this context. I listened to the Swedish Transport Administration's results conference the other day where they looked at how we are to meet the climate goals. They said that the reduction obligation means that we will likely meet it in the transport sector by 2030 - the year we have set as a goal - and then we must have it.

What is interesting about the new government is that there is no other solution. People talk about nuclear power that is supposed to do something with electrification somewhere far in the future. It is clear: If one - as some Sweden Democrats, perhaps many of them - does not believe in the climate goals, maybe it doesn't matter. But we must do this. It actually also leads to people switching to smarter vehicles, maybe not everywhere but, I believe, almost everywhere.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Member Helldén!

When it comes to this matter of transitioning, it is no problem today to go and buy a passenger car, or for that matter a truck, that runs on electricity. Today I can go and buy a timber truck that can have a gross weight of 64 tons. The problem is that I cannot charge it. This is where society is not keeping up. The technology exists, the companies want to invest in this, and in our motions we have allocated more money to this than the previous government did.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! I can agree that there are problems when it comes to the expansion of charging infrastructure. In the area of passenger cars, I would say that there is basically no problem if one does not travel long distances, and that is what one normally does not do. There are charging possibilities for most things.

A lot is happening regarding the heavy vehicle fleet. Much more is needed there, and we will of course invest in that. But we will not remove the reduction obligation. It is directly reprehensible.

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! When I sat and listened to Daniel Helldén, it sounded as if the high-speed railway was Sweden's salvation. There is talk that nuclear power is far away. In that case, I can tell Daniel Helldén that the high-speed railway is far away. Is 2044 a realistic goal? No, I do not think so - possibly 2050, 2060 or 2070. In the meantime, we need trains that can transport Thomas Morell from Skövde so that he can stand here and debate in the speaker's chair.

We spoke with, among others, Trafikverket and SJ. It is actually the train operators who decide where they should stop - not where the stations are located. There are major problems there. The freight must get through.

High-speed trains? Yes, if we win the lottery, but we don't do that in Sweden. It is tax money. We must protect these.

In this speech, Robert Stenkvist (SD) concurred.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! If we do not build new main lines - regardless of whether they are high-speed lines or not - we simply will not get there. A member spoke earlier about that a train runs every hour at high speed on the main lines. In that case, it is the fact that the different trains with different speeds will not manage this. No matter how we do it and how much we upgrade these tracks, it still will not work in a sensible way.

We will not be able to withstand the pressure from the public to travel by train. They want to travel by train. One can see that internationally as well.

We need new main lines. They have a price. If they are then for high-speed trains, it will be a higher price. It is not that it costs 325 billion to build new main lines because they are high-speed lines, but because they are main lines. That is what we should build. We can afford it, we must do it now, and it does not take 40 years.

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! We agree that we are to build more railway. In Mälardalen, for example, there are a huge number of people, and they may have a certain need to travel to Stockholm and perhaps also to Gothenburg - who knows? It is very beautiful here.

I agree that we should build more. But as Daniel Helldén also knows, energy consumption increases if you increase the speed, which is completely insane, and high-speed trains do not go at 250 kilometers per hour.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! A train traveling at 250 kilometers per hour is a fast train, but it is not a high-speed train. That is quite correct. My point was more that we must build new main lines.

The overhanging part to make it go really fast is not as high as people are trying to make it out to be in this debate. They are trying to make it sound as if the entire cost is for the high-speed train. That is not the case.

I believe that high-speed trains are what is needed and that we can afford them.

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Madam Speaker! I want to take the opportunity to highlight shipping, a mode of transport that has long had to struggle in the shadow of other infrastructure. Shipping, which is so important for Sweden, is forgotten, except when the previous S-government in writing wanted to get trucks off the roads. Then shipping was included in a corner. It was written that a shift from road to railway and shipping should occur. The problem is that very little was done to facilitate a shift. One should know that nearly 90 percent of everything we buy in stores comes to Sweden by boat. Why, then, has so little been invested in shipping? I do not know.

We need more Swedish-flagged shipping, and we shall commit to strengthening all sea transport: inland shipping, coastal shipping, short-sea shipping, and ocean shipping, as well as special shipping which is often forgotten. To reach that goal, here is a battery of proposals for our new government that I hope can provide shipping with the conditions that are needed:

Introduce a long-term and predictable net model and ensure that the model can be used by all types of competitive international shipping.

Develop the tonnage tax for more and growing shipping companies.

Facilitate for shipping companies to charter in and out vessels by implementing the proposal on bareboat registers for more vessels in Sweden.

Facilitate Swedish ship investments, that is, abolish the stamp duty.

Ensure access to green financing for ships that contribute to the transition.

Focus on green corridors for shipping, for example by developing the infrastructure for the use of alternative fuels to enable electrification and by extending the tax reduction for shore power for ships, including ships under 400 gross tonnage.

Introduce a maritime step, state green transport contracts for transport buyers and transport providers that contribute to the transition in the long term.

Ensure and promote the production of alternative fuels.

Implement a maritime and industrial initiative for green, safe and smart shipping.

Double research and innovation funds for shipping to 200 million.

Focus on implementing existing proposals and developing regulations for shipping with 15 million kronor per year for five years.

Ensure long-term sustainable funding for the Swedish Maritime Administration through appropriations, so that fairway charges and pilotage fees can be reduced.

Finance the operation of icebreakers with state funds.

Work for global rules in IMO and remove Swedish special rules.

Expand, broaden and complement the education system for sailors and officers at existing education and course providers.

Madam Speaker! This sounded like a large battery of measures. The thing is that they cost almost nothing for the taxpayers. Still, it is forgotten by the politicians. But now we place our trust in the new government.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem, Thomas Morell and Robert Stenkvist (all SD) concurred.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Madam Speaker! People's opportunities to live and work in all of Sweden presuppose a good infrastructure that creates accessibility but also accessibility. It is worth emphasizing that the calculation bases for investments in road maintenance should take more account of the different industries and not only the population size.

Jämtland County has a significant base industry in forestry, agriculture, and also tourism. These are industries that are strongly dependent on accessible roads. Many years of lack of maintenance, ground reinforcement, and paving create problems, especially with the load-bearing capacity of the gravel roads, where it is more palpable out in the forest counties. It is important that this is taken into account when the distribution of Trafikverket's grants is to be made. Jämtland has, for example, much more county road and more vehicle kilometers in total road load than the other counties. Jämtland County has an extensive proportion of gravel roads, just over 40 percent of the county road network. We have a population that is spread over the entire county, and many of the people travel daily on substandard gravel roads on their way to and from their homes. Many county roads lack in traffic safety, as they have sharp curves, crests, and depressions that would need to be built away. Trafikverket should, of course, take greater consideration of this in the planning of future grants.

What characterizes Jämtland County is its tourism, which is strongly seasonal. With our ski, hiking, and cycling tourism, we have a high load, especially during sports holiday and Easter holiday weeks, but one expands their operations to become more season-independent.

It is problematic if the infrastructure in this area is to an excessive extent adapted to an average load during the whole year. Tourism has increased by almost 100 percent during the 2000s and is significant, especially for Jämtlands län.

Lack of accessibility and uncertain transport for visitors also risk affecting the competitiveness of the county. This applies to roads, railways, and also aviation. For tourism in the country to remain strong in competition with others, and for other various industries that are strongly dependent on accessible roads and railways, it is important that in their calculation bases for maintenance and investments in infrastructure, they review the possibility of taking greater consideration of these factors.

I want to give examples of how distorted the distribution is regarding infrastructure funds. It should be added that I do not disparage Blekinge's infrastructure funds. I nevertheless want to point out unfair differences in the allocation of regional funds to Jämtland and Blekinge from the national infrastructure plan 2022. Blekinge county, with its 1,450 kilometers of county roads and 1.6 percent of the country's total county road network, is allocated 610 million kronor, while Jämtland county, with 5,017 kilometers of county roads and 5.9 percent of the county road network, is allocated only 598 million kronor.

It is important for the development of upcoming action plans for Sweden's infrastructure that these conditions on our roads are actually taken into account and that new calculation bases are initiated, all for a more equitable distribution of infrastructure funds in our country.

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! If people are to be able to live and work in the entire country, a well-developed and efficient transport system is needed. This concerns shipping, air connections, railways and, not least, the road network.

In its submission to the government regarding the national plans for transport infrastructure, the Swedish Transport Administration (Trafikverket) however highlights: "The condition of the state road network has gradually deteriorated over a longer period, and with the given funding levels, the rate of deterioration will be higher than the rate of repair." The road system will thus deteriorate faster than Trafikverket can restore it. Furthermore, Trafikverket cannot carry out necessary preventive measures to the extent that would be required. It is nothing other than pure capital destruction.

Mr. Speaker! When the roads are not maintained, the speed has instead been reduced on several stretches to maintain traffic safety. In Dalarna, it has been noted that the speed reductions have led to tourists choosing other routes, that businesses in smaller towns are affected, and that traffic is shifted to smaller, often more dangerous, roads. It is not a desirable development.

But instead of allocating resources to restoring the road network, the previous government chose to invest in high-speed trains. Such a prioritization affects large parts of the countryside, which then do not receive the infrastructure investments that are needed.

An example of this is Dalarna, which, in addition to being one of Sweden's most important export counties, is also the country's leading tourism county by far outside the three metropolitan regions. The Sälen-Idre-Grövelsjö area is Northern Europe's largest winter destination with over 100,000 visitors during the peak season. An example of an infrastructure investment that would be needed is grade separation on E16 past Yttermalung. It would contribute to shorter travel times and safer journeys.

The road section Särnaheden-Idre is also in need of investments, not least considering the large scale of mountain tourism. This section has not been improved in line with the increase in traffic since the 60s, while heavy traffic has simultaneously become both longer and wider.

Mr. Speaker! There are large planned investments in the business sector in Dalarna that are of clear national interest. But that requires a functioning infrastructure.

The railway is another example where shorter travel time on the Dalabanan is of great importance for the world-leading companies located along the route.

These were some examples from Dalarna, but the same thing applies to the whole country. Maintenance and new construction of railways, roads, and public transport is crucial for companies to be able to develop operations even in smaller towns. It is crucial to enable commuting and increased housing construction. It is a policy for all of Sweden to function.

I will, as a member of parliament from the Dalarna constituency, specifically monitor that Dalarna receives the infrastructure investments that the county needs.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! Infrastructure in all its forms has no intrinsic value in itself but is a means to meet the needs of people and society and to reach goals such as increased accessibility, more jobs, and expanded labor market regions. It is also about holding together city and country, meeting the needs of the business sector and improving competitiveness, and about Sweden reaching the climate goals and being a leader in the green transition.

In the decided national plan, investments and maintenance are made from north to south in the current road and railway network, from the Norrbotniabanan and the green industrial revolution to the Sydostlänken in southeastern Sweden - and much in between.

The plan also includes funds set aside for the construction of new main lines. It is not solely about building new railways, but about building society. It is one of the largest social construction projects in modern times.

Now, the right-conservative government and the Sweden Democrats have announced that they want to scrap the plans for new main lines. This is very serious. New main lines were needed to connect our three major cities with the regions in between.

It is remarkable that neither the government nor the Sweden Democrats seem to see or understand what the situation in Sweden looks like today. There is no additional capacity on today's railway, which is currently undersized in relation to our population size and the needs of companies.

Jönköping County is the fourth largest export county outside of our three major cities. Much of the heart of the industry is located in this part of Sweden. The companies need increased and reliable capacity for freight transport, and more goods need to be moved from road to rail.

The labor market regions are expanded as 75 percent of future passenger journeys will take place between the stations that will be located along the tracks. This provides a better opportunity to meet the competence supply in the private and public sectors. Increased housing construction is also an important part in this context.

Patching and repairing the current system is therefore not sufficient.

Of course, it involves a lot of money, but it must be put into relation to the fact that the time horizon is long. It is about 100-150 years. An investment in new main lines cannot only be seen as a cost here and now but must also be put into a larger context where it is a prerequisite for generating more and new jobs, incomes, and growth for the companies and for Sweden.

With the announcement to scrap the construction of new main lines, the questions naturally arise: What does one want to do instead? What is the proposed solution for the needs in Jönköping County and along the intended main lines? What is your, the government's and the Sverigedemokraternas, idea to facilitate for work commuting and freight traffic that strengthens jobs and growth in this part of the country? What is the answer to the Chamber of Commerce in Jönköping and other chambers of commerce and to municipalities and regions that have invested much time, money, and commitment in getting new main lines established?

The proposal to scrap new main lines tears Sweden apart instead of building it together. It is bad environmental policy, bad rural policy, bad labor market policy, and bad industrial policy.

Mr. Speaker! It is not acceptable to back into the future in a matter so important for Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for an interesting contribution.

In the national plan, it is written in plain text that both roads and railways will be in worse condition in 2033 than they are today. That does not rhyme well with the idea that all of Sweden shall live.

We previously listened to a member from Dalarna, Mathias Bengtsson of the Christian Democrats. I often travel that way because I have Vilhelmina as my final destination. It is interesting to travel through the inland of Norrland because the roads are in poor condition, and there is no alternative in the form of a railway here.

The high-speed train is eating up the money so that other parts of the country are left with an infrastructure that does not meet the standard. This is serious for those who run businesses in the areas and for those who live, work, and reside there. They are being left behind.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! One thing is certain: Never before have so many resources been invested in roads and railways for maintenance and for investment. But we see that it is not enough, and we need to do more in the future.

It is also important that the resources are used in the right way. Today we can see that the costs for road maintenance have increased by 60-70 percent. Then we must ensure that the money really goes where it is needed, and that is where the previous government has given a mandate.

The question remains: In Jönköping County and in the surrounding regions, the railway that is necessary today and that companies and society need does not exist.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer!

I understand the problem in Jönköping. I don't live very far from there myself, in Tibro. But large parts of the country have exactly the same concerns and do not get a single krona of the money that exists in the plans, but the peacock, the high-speed train, eats it all up.

The Leader of the Opposition said in his speech that we do not understand society, but I would like to assert that I am one of those here in this chamber who understands how transport works and the necessity of it.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is concerning when one does not seem to see or understand how we are to solve today's and the future's transport infrastructure for people and for goods. Thomas Morell describes it as a cuckoo's chick, but I would instead like to describe it as an investment for the future that is a prerequisite for society to grow and develop.

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is pleasing to hear that Carina Ödebrink speaks warmly about Jönköping and about the entrepreneurs. What is there in Jönköping, Mr. Speaker? Well, a hell of a lot of freight terminals. And then the Social Democrats choose to invest in passenger transport to Jönköping. If one does things correctly and does them right, one should invest in freight transport to Jönköping, where the freight is and where one can, of course, also run passenger transport on the same tracks.

The thing is that if we were to build a high-speed railway, it means that we will get the world's newest, the world's most expensive and the world's most outdated high-speed railway when it is finished. It is nothing that I look forward to. We shall, however, build more railway, but the right railway.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I cannot read that the Sweden Democrats want to build more railway from this far. It is not what I can read in the agreement, nor is it in the government statement, which the Sweden Democrats are a part of.

The new main lines are a prerequisite for us to be able to have fast passenger transport. It is secondary what speed it is, but new railway for fast transport is needed so that freight traffic can run on the current main lines to a greater extent.

The fact remains: I do not hear how the Sweden Democrats can solve the situation as it looks today. The need is pressing. It is agreed by the chambers of commerce, municipalities, and regions of southern Sweden. What are the Sweden Democrats' solutions?

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

Jimmy Ståhl (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is fun, interesting and pleasing to be able to offer Carina Ödebrink to read our motions, where it states our policy. In the cooperation agreement, it is quite rightly very little about just infrastructure, which means that we as Sverigedemokrater have quite a large freedom of action, as it is not covered by the agreement.

We can definitely, if Carina Ödebrink wants, sit down and talk about creating a good infrastructure in Sweden together.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I feel that this is a blind spot for the Sweden Democrats and the right-conservative government. Now that the Sweden Democrats have a greater responsibility for the future, I believe it would be commendable if they made a visit to our part of the country to see on the spot how things actually look.

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! In the Social Democrats' Sweden, travelers stand and freeze and wait for delayed trains on the platform. These are trains that do not come at all because they have been cancelled. Maintenance has been allowed to fail, and the railways and roads have been allowed to decay.

In the Sweden Democrats' committee motion on railways, it is clearly stated which investments we want to carry out: more double tracks, the Ostkustbanan in its entirety, the Norrbotniabanan, Hässleholm-Kristianstad and Alvesta-Växjö. I could make the list as long as I want, but time does not allow for it.

What do the Social Democrats and Carina Ödebrink want? Well, they want to let the railway continue to decay. With the plan that exists now, the maintenance debt for roads and railways will be over 100 billion kronor in ten years. Instead, the Social Democrats want to invest in the prestige project of high-speed trains.

I wonder: How do the Social Democrats and Carina Ödebrink think in this matter?

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! Preparing for today's and tomorrow's challenges is about doing both and also about having the strength to do this. It costs a lot of money, but it must be put into relation to what it will generate for companies, municipalities and regions and when it comes to improved skills supply.

Lack of maintenance, we can probably attribute to quite many different governments of varying colors. One thing I will give you in the Sweden Democrats recognition for: You have never been in favor of new main lines or new railways, whether locally, regionally, or at a national level. But it is not possible to back into the future. It is not enough to say no, one must actually also be able to present a solution for what one wants to do.

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! In the spirit of democracy, it is perfectly permissible to stand and tell blatant lies in the speaker's chair here in the Swedish Riksdag, as Carina Ödebrink does. I just rattled off many projects, and we have significantly more than the Social Democrats. I guess that Carina Ödebrink knows this deep down but simply chooses to utter a total falsehood.

The fact is that the railway is being dismantled in the Social Democrats' Sweden. People stand and freeze on the platforms and wait for cancelled and delayed trains. Then I wonder: What is Carina Ödebrinks's message to these people about the Social Democrats' policy?

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I can assure Member Jönsson that we will pursue an active and offensive policy. We have a national infrastructure plan that takes us a very good way forward, but we need to make continued investments.

We shall be the thorn in the side of the right-conservative government when it comes to holding the whole country together and building an infrastructure worthy of the name.

(Applause)

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is difficult to put a thumb in someone's eye when one is sitting on one's hands.

Countless are the travelers who have stood and waited for a delayed train or for trains that do not arrive at all because they are cancelled. Sweden has a very worn-out infrastructure, both on the roadsides as well as on the railway side.

When Trafikverket was in the Transport Committee, they stated that approximately 280 miles, or 20 percent, of all rail in Sweden needs to be replaced and also quantities of points. We also need to renew signal boxes, replace tens of miles of overhead contact lines and more. Trafikverket has calculated the maintenance debt to be a full 46 billion.

Now, the Sweden Democrats, together with the Moderates, Christian Democrats, and Liberals, have stopped the prestige project of high-speed trains. Through this, billions are freed to remove bottlenecks and strengthen maintenance.

But that is not enough. We must get more money out for direct maintenance on the tracks. Trafikverket must become more efficient. But the trend is unfortunately the opposite. Since Trafikverket was formed in 2010, a total of 48 percent more officials have been hired. It is over 10,000 now. Furthermore, the dependency on consultants has increased.

At the same time, it appears from a report from Seko that the number of railway technicians has almost halved in 25 years – those who actually perform the maintenance. The number has decreased from 7,257 in 1998 to approximately 3,800 in 2020. I believe that most see the connection between an almost 50-percent increase in Trafikverket's officials and an almost halving of the number of railway technicians, which has resulted in insufficient maintenance and delayed trains. It is a fact that Trafikverket has become an entirely too large bureaucratic colossus with a lack of necessary competence. One almost gets the feeling that the Social Democrats have allowed Trafikverket to become a labor market policy measure to reduce unemployment.

Mr. Speaker! Trafikverket needs to be broken up and return to a road authority and a rail authority. These were more manageable in their size. Furthermore, a proper review must be conducted so that there will be a more reasonable number of employees in parity with how it was when Trafikverket was formed. It should be a long-term goal.

Trafikverket, or rather a future road and rail authority, also needs to reclaim the competence that once existed when maintenance was performed in-house. That was the case until 2010 when Trafikverket was formed. Since then, the competence has gradually been watered down.

The absolute best thing would be for the state-owned companies Infranord and Svevia to simply revert under their own management as Vägverket Produktion and Banverket Produktion, and for the remaining part to remain as outsourced activity. Then the internal career paths would be restored and the expertise would, in the long run, be built up and stabilized. The quality of the tender documents would be strengthened, and with the highest probability, the cost would be lowered and the tax money used more effectively.

The possibility of comparing the maintenance between the state and the private companies is furthermore strengthened by this procedure, and it is also made visible whether any of the parties receive a deviating cost increase.

Mr. Speaker! With this said: Do it over and do it right. Re-establish Banverket and re-establish Vägverket. Re-establish Banverket Produktion, and re-establish Vägverket Produktion. Phase out Trafikverket. Reduce the bureaucracy and streamline the agency through fewer employees and by having more money go out onto the tracks and onto the roads for direct maintenance instead of to an endless number of desk jobs. This is the medicine that is needed to get more money for both maintenance and investments and to deal with cancelled and delayed trains.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem and Thomas Morell (both SD) concurred.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I can agree with Member Jönsson that Trafikverket is a colossus that is problematic. I myself have struggled with this institution, which is not particularly agile and cannot keep things in order. There are, therefore, things that are well worth looking at, I would like to say.

However, I actually do not understand the Sweden Democrats' ideas regarding the infrastructure. It is clear that we must ensure that we renovate the railway we have and ensure that switches and other things function.

But I do not understand that people do not see that new main lines are needed in southern Sweden. I do not know how you are going to be able to solve the problems that exist. We cannot continue to patch and repair in that way. We will not be able to increase the traffic. We will not be able to handle the traffic even in Dalarna if the hub of the entire infrastructure in Sweden does not function. And then new main lines are needed, regardless of what speeds it is about. But how are you going to solve that?

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Daniel Helldén for the question. It is good that we share the view that Trafikverket is a large colossus that we really need to look at properly. I am myself one of the officials at Trafikverket whom I mentioned, but I am on leave of absence.

With all respect for Daniel Helldén, he is still relatively new here. But Trafikverket conducted a capacity study in 2020 that points out the deficiencies. The major deficiencies concern, for example, Gothenburg-Alingsås above all. There are double tracks there today, and it is completely full on the tracks. We have Hässleholm-Kristianstad, which is Sweden's most heavily loaded single track. Alvesta-Växjö is also a heavily loaded single track. We want to build away many bottlenecks. We want to invest in tracks with conventional technology for both freight and passenger traffic, especially where the large bulk of travel is - the regional and the local travel.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Even if one does not sit in the Riksdag, one can read things and matters that come from the national level.

There are certain places where it is extremely problematic. But that does not mean we can manage without new main lines if we are to get the railway traffic in order. We could expand it and meet the future. In that case, we must have new main lines. You have no answer to that.

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

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! That is exactly what we have, Daniel Helldén. We really want to build away the bottlenecks that exist. For example, Hässleholm-Lund is a major bottleneck where we want to build faster than what is stated in the proposal. We see that there is a need for Ostlänken. These are new main lines.

But a significant difference between us is that Daniel Helldén's party wants to build main lines for high-speed trains with one train per hour in each direction between Malmö and Stockholm. And that is not something we will agree to.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Honorable members! I want to devote my very first speech in this assembly to speaking about a subject that should have been settled long ago, namely an eastern connection, that is to say a ring road that shall link the Northern and Southern links with traffic here in Stockholm.

That I choose to speak about traffic specifically, despite my relatively cool relationship to the subject, says quite a bit. But it is so pressing for those of us who live and work in Stockholm County, but also for people who are going somewhere else entirely but need to travel through the capital.

The need to carry out such a project has been known for a long time. In fact, it was discussed as early as the end of the 1800s. And we can state that this need has only become more and more tangible over time.

As I see it, there are three main aspects that make an eastern connection so valuable. They are the environment, the population size, and the time. I want to reject right here any potential argument that this project would encourage unnecessary car travel or increased emissions.

Firstly, car travel is primarily an expression of an existing need and not a consequence of merely political will.

When one also considers that future cars will become more and more environmentally friendly and that the total queuing and driving time would decrease with an eastern connection, not to mention all the emissions and all the noise in residential environments, the project becomes attractive even from an environmental point of view.

Then it is important to keep in mind that an eastern connection would also be used by public transport, which I believe the vast majority here consider to be positive. If one is serious about expanding public transport in Stockholm County, this will quickly become quite decisive in the long run.

Mr. Speaker! Judging by everything, the population in the Stockholm region will continue to increase and with it the pressure on our infrastructure.

We have for a long time been able to see how the terrible queues have plagued our residents more or less every day during rush hour. And this problem really requires that we take measures now.

Finally, perhaps the most important aspect, namely the time that the individual could save. To force people into car queues is directly mean, I would like to say. It is completely wasted time for everyone, and it does not only affect productivity but also negatively impacts the quality of life for, for example, our craftsmen or our healthcare personnel. Time is the most precious but often also the most forgotten resource we have, and out of respect for all residents and citizens, we politicians must ensure that we do not waste that resource unnecessarily.

Mr. Speaker! Efficient roads save fuel, electricity, and time. With a government that hopefully realizes that subsidized electric bicycles do not cover the much real need for a functioning transport infrastructure, I now look very hopefully toward the coming four years and the chances for an eastern connection.

In conclusion, I would therefore like to state the following: We will have traffic in what is called Scandinavia's capital - it is inevitable - and the question is whether we want the traffic to flow smoothly on a ring road or sluggishly in Stockholm's inner city. For me, the choice is very simple.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem, Rashid Farivar, Thomas Morell and Robert Stenkvist (all SD) concurred.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker and Member Yurkovskiy! It is exciting to discuss an eastern connection. It is as if everyone has forgotten that a bypass is being built for 60-70 billion - if one looks at the form of financing - which, when the proposal was submitted, would solve all problems and ensure that the Essingeleden became empty of cars. It is not finished. It is delayed and will not be finished until sometime in 2035, because Trafikverket cannot manage that even when they are building roads.

So, an eastern connection is to be started even though the project that was supposed to solve the problems you are chasing, Leonid Yurkovskiy, is already underway. The dilemma with an eastern connection when one looks at where people will be traveling on it is that the destination point is Stockholm's inner city and Värtan. It will become so crowded there, regardless of climate and environmental goals, that it will not work. We are only creating problems and generating a lot of traffic.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not share that image at all. Regarding previous projects that may be delayed or not, I leave it to those responsible to speak about them, but the need remains even with those projects completed. This is not a need that comes from nowhere or that we politicians make up, but there is a very large demand among the residents in Stockholm County that this is actually carried out – not least among the other parties, even on Member Helldén's side of the political spectrum, so to speak.

What I would like to say is, therefore, the same as the speaker before me said, namely: What is it that there is in Stockholm? Well, there are very many people, and if one wants to meet their needs, one must carry out this kind of project.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I would say that an eastern connection will cause problems for the people of Stockholm and create more congestion and problems in the central parts.

You are talking about public transport, Leonid Yurkovskiy, but what are we doing right now in Stockholm? Well, we are building metro lines. They run these specific sections. There is an idea about having public transport on the bypass; it is completely absurd, because one does not need to travel there. Nor is public transport needed on an eastern connection, instead, it is other solutions that are to be implemented. So, that is not correct.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The other solutions have not worked so far, and we see that the situation I described with congestion and long queues escalates over time – and this with a red-green and, in the city of Stockholm, Green Party-led policy that has focused on bicycle lanes and such.

I believe we are quite in agreement on the positive aspects of expanding public transport, and it is clear that there are different needs when it comes to it. There is, therefore, no disagreement, but for public transport to function and not be overloaded in itself, it must be complemented by a functioning road infrastructure.

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

Beatrice Timgren (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to take the opportunity to raise an important traffic issue, and I will begin with an example from my home municipality, Ekerö.

Unfortunately, the traffic situation on Ekerö is a very big problem. The reason can be spelled Förbifart Stockholm. By that, I do not mean the bypass itself, for it is good. It is even necessary, not just for the residents of Ekerö but for the entire Stockholm region. On the other hand, the Swedish Transport Administration and not least the former Minister for Infrastructure's handling of the traffic issues is under all criticism.

As most know, a reconstruction of Ekerövägen is currently underway, which is part of Förbifart Stockholm. In the long run, this will lead to better accessibility and reduced queues, which is of course good. The problem is that during the construction, accessibility has not been ensured. The most serious issue is, of course, the non-existent accessibility for emergency vehicles if an accident were to occur.

From Ekerö, there is only a single road connection, and if there is a stoppage on this single road connection, there are no alternative routes – except for a boat connection that does not run around the clock and which is also subject to a fee. With the construction of Förbifart Stockholm, the accessibility of this single road connection has been significantly reduced. This in turn means that the accessibility for emergency services cannot be ensured. This does not only affect the everyday lives of the residents of Ekerö very negatively, but it can also mean a danger to life. As you all know, every minute can be decisive if an accident were to occur.

Mr. Speaker! What is particularly noteworthy in this situation is that Trafikverket, during the construction and under the prevailing conditions I have just described, has chosen to prioritize the construction of cycle paths. Whether this is a result of the pro-environment policy that the previous S-government has pursued, I will leave unsaid, but I can state that it is obvious that Trafikverket has failed to ensure accessibility and to take the measures required to minimize the disruptions that can arise during a construction.

I hope that a new government can now review the Transport Administration's organization and methods of work, as the entire Förbifart Stockholm project is an example of that the Transport Administration has not met its commitments. The Transport Administration is, in fact, an example of how the previous government has mismanaged infrastructure issues. The Transport Administration has grown by 48 percent over the last eight years, and a review of the agency should be initiated to examine whether its increased resources have been used in an efficient manner.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem, Rashid Farivar, Thomas Morell and Robert Stenkvist (all SD) concurred.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker and Beatrice Timgren! Since I have also had some dealings with Ekerö, I just thought I would say: Yes, the bypass is being built, and you will get to see things when it is finished - how much traffic you get there and what it looks like on Ekerö then. My wife comes from there; I must not say Ekerö, for she comes from another of the islands. It will not be so fun there, I think.

I just wonder, Beatrice Timgren: When they are now rebuilding the road to Brommaplan, where nothing is getting through and where it is completely impossible to solve the connection, would you actually want an additional lane beyond the one that is now being built so that the buses can get through properly - instead of the cycle path. But that means that one would have to burn through the World Heritage site there in a way that is quite complicated. I do not think the King would be very happy if you did that. How are you going to solve that and get past with those lanes in this area?

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

Beatrice Timgren (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the question. One has now moved from a three-lane road, where there has been a bus lane, to it becoming four-laned on Ekerövägen, which is good.

I fundamentally think that it is good that one is building Förbifart Stockholm. My criticism lies in how the work has been managed and that they have started with the cycle paths. There is a great need, because there is only a single road from Ekerö. Furthermore, the cycle path crosses the roadway in one spot, and in the middle of rush hour, it affects things incredibly much. Also, this is a major problem.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Constructing a bicycle path is one thing, while constructing a road for cars is another; it is like different dimensions and things that must be done with a road for cars. It is also more complicated in this sensitive environment, so I would say that it is not so simple to do it.

As far as I know, the people of Ekerö want to be able to walk and cycle into Stockholm. The interesting thing is that it is the Moderaterna who rule there - or who have ruled, because I actually don't know what happened now after the election. But they have wanted to have this.

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

Beatrice Timgren (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I have nothing against bicycle lanes in themselves. I cycle from Ekerö myself sometimes, and it is a very practical way to combine exercise and transport. My criticism lies, as I said, in how priorities have been set and how the construction has been managed.

One has not been able to ensure the accessibility, especially for rescue vehicles, and one has simply not been able to minimize the problems and disruptions that occur during a construction.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen! We have a new government in the city of Stockholm. This government consists of MP, V and S. These parties have proudly declared that they intend to ban all fossil-fueled cars in parts of Stockholm. Only electric cars and hybrid cars shall be allowed.

To ban cars in this way, I mean, is to go against national interests. We are talking here about the capital, with everything that entails. Purely in principle, I also do not believe that a municipality should be allowed to enact rules like these. Of course, we shall have municipal self-government, but this self-government has never been absolute. We have seen it, for example, in the immigration issue, where municipalities were required to align with national interests—this said regardless of what I personally think about that law.

In the long run, we can imagine municipalities that prohibit roads, rail traffic, or power lines. It is not only the city of Stockholm that is dependent on the city's communications, but there are a lot of people in, for example, Stockholm County who work inside the city. A large part of these are dependent on cars to get to work. In their home municipalities, such as my own home municipality Botkyrka, there is a lack of charging stations for electric cars. This is so, despite the fact that I myself have submitted a motion on this in my home municipality. Nevertheless, these people in the surrounding municipalities are expected to acquire very expensive electric cars – electric cars that many cannot afford to acquire.

The new government in Stockholm says that these people, living in the surrounding municipalities and even further out, should use public transport. Yes, but public transport does not have the capacity to accommodate all current car drivers. The commuter trains are already overloaded. It is not possible to squeeze in more people.

The arrogant government in Stockholm is eager to ban cars but significantly worse at seeing the consequences of their proposals. It is also not the government in Stockholm that is responsible for the communications to the city, as that is a regional and national issue. That is also why I stand here and bring this up.

Another critical issue is the availability of electricity. Everyone should drive electric cars, say the parties in the new government in Stockholm. But exactly the same parties have, at the national level, shut down parts of the nuclear power, whereby a serious electricity shortage has occurred. If the government in the city were to push through its dreams of 100 percent electric car ownership today, our electricity system would collapse. The alternative is that we all in the surrounding municipalities would have to transport ourselves by horse and carriage. This entire proposal smells of what the horses leave behind.

Finally, I wonder how all goods and food transports will function in the capital. Will all small businesses that today handle the goods transport in Stockholm be forced to acquire expensive electric transport vehicles? How many of these companies will then go under? That is what I ask myself.

This is a national issue. A local municipal council should not be given jurisdiction over measures with such far-reaching consequences. National legislation should prevent a municipal council from being able to disrupt vital transports in the capital.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem, Rashid Farivar, Thomas Morell and Leonid Yurkovskiy (all SD) concurred.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, Member Robert Stenkvist - the new government in Stockholm wants to introduce zones where one is only allowed to drive with electric cars. The old government that was just phased out, where all parties except the Sweden Democrats were on the bourgeois side, want the same thing - though not as quickly. But the goal is an emission-free inner city in Stockholm by 2030. The new government also stands behind that. Everyone except the Sweden Democrats wants this. The Sweden Democrats do not want it.

There is, therefore, a consensus that in order to manage the air quality and the noise and achieve a living city, the politicians in Stockholm want to remove the emitting cars and have electric cars instead. We know that it is needed because there are international rules when it comes to, for example, air quality. WHO is introducing new emission rules that the EU is working on now. They are looking at how to meet them. We must do these things, otherwise the state will scold us.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Daniel Helldén is talking about the conservatives in Stockholm. I believe we all know that they are not quite like the conservatives in the rest of the country. They are a bit more towards another direction. There we probably have to make a distinction.

General political debate Infrastructure

Air quality - was it the EU that had come up with the rules? Yes. Then the air in Stockholm cannot be worse than in, for example, Copenhagen, Berlin, or other EU cities. We do not need to have better air than those cities, because then it is not EU rules we are talking about. But if it becomes worse than in, for example, Berlin's inner city, we must surely do something. I believe that the electric car industry is coming. I am not against electric power, I also want to point that out clearly.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! We could have a separate debate on this. In Stockholm, an expansion of charging infrastructure is underway. One does not see its equal anywhere in the entire country. There is also a system that I have initiated which ensures that charging takes place at night when there is a large surplus. It will not cause any problems for either Stockholm or the nation.

It is the World Health Organization that is issuing new guidelines regarding nitrogen dioxides. We will not manage to keep up unless we do this. If we do not, the state will be forced to introduce regulations here.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I must look more closely at what the WHO says and verify it. We are not going to have to be ahead of other major cities.

When it comes to charging infrastructure, I submitted a motion in Botkyrka municipality to acquire charging stations for the garages. It was rejected by MP and S in Botkyrka municipality.

Business and regional policy

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

Mathias Tegnér (S)

Mr. Speaker! It feels exciting to open the business and regional policy part of the general political debate. I hope it will be a clear debate with a good atmosphere.

Five weeks ago, Sweden went to the polls. A small majority voted for some form of right-conservative rule, and therefore Ulf Kristersson was also elected Prime Minister on Monday. Even though I am convinced that it would have been better for Sweden with an experienced government under Magdalena Andersson, I naturally think it is appropriate to congratulate Ulf Kristersson.

With that said, my speech shall not be about the election or the government issue, but about competitiveness and industrial policy. I do, however, want to bring up the election precisely because I believe that the election campaign to an all too great extent did not deal with either growth or industrial policy. It is a problem, because industrial policy is central to financing other parts of our society, for example, the welfare.

Mr. Speaker! I do not wish to downplay that there are problems in Sweden, or for that matter that crime is an issue that needs to be debated. I have, for example, met a grocer in Fittja centrum, and I am sure he agrees with me that one of the most important industrial policy measures is precisely an uncompromising fight against crime. But my point is that we must not solve the problems we see today by eroding that which has made Sweden successful - the open society, trust between people, education, security, and low corruption.

Everything is not black in Sweden, Mr. Speaker. We have problems, yes, but there is also much that is good. Several international surveys show that companies in Sweden have good conditions and framework conditions in relation to the rest of the world. For years, Sweden has subscribed to top-ten placements in various rankings of competitiveness, for example, the OECD's index. Sweden has also shown that we are a knowledge-intensive nation that is at the forefront when it comes to precisely innovation and digitalization. We have ranked first in practically all years when the EU has ranked the countries' innovation policies. We also rank at the top when it comes to green innovation.

But if we are to continue to be at the top, it is important that we continue to work and have a progressive policy in these areas. As a member of the Swedish Riksdag during the previous term, I know that when, for example, the Moderaterna have had the opportunity to influence the budgets for Sweden, they have also cut in just these areas. It would be unfortunate for Sweden if that happens again.

What I am talking about is what is called the deep determinants of growth in academic language, that is to say, what it is that creates growth. We know that what creates growth is education, infrastructure, trust and low corruption - such things that we also know statistically exist in equal countries, welfare states, countries with smaller gaps.

This is what the OECD and the IMF have realized. They speak of cohesion. It is indeed important, real and necessary that we pursue a policy where the gaps are reduced.

General political debate Business and regional policy

What worries me is that these issues are missing from the Government Agreement and the Government Bill. If Sweden is to continue to be at the forefront, we need a policy that recognizes the connections between a cohesive Sweden and a successful, active industrial policy.

(Applause)

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

PONTUS ANDERSSON (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Since humans became sedentary and organized themselves into societies, urbanization has been a constantly ongoing process. It is a natural development, as trade, services, and employment opportunities occur to a greater extent where many people live. The most intense period was during industrialization, when masses of people flocked to the cities where they were forced to work under harsh conditions during large parts of the day's waking hours.

We have both these people and those who chose to stay in the countryside to thank for Sweden being the prominent nation we are now. It is the people who stayed and their descendants who cultivate and harvest the food we eat. It is they who manage our forests and work in our mines. But it is also all healthcare personnel, all staff within home care, all self-employed individuals and everyone else who every day fights for all of Sweden to live.

If politics does not ensure good conditions for living in the countryside, the countryside dies. When politics ignores the potholes and instead lowers the speed limits on our country roads, it harms the rural inhabitants. When the tax on fuels is raised and the state forces the petrol companies to mix biofuels into the fuel, or when one destroys a reliable and functioning energy system, it worsens things for the Swedish countryside.

This negative spiral causes important community services such as bank branches, shops, and gas stations to close again, which in turn causes even more people to leave the Swedish countryside. This development must be reversed. Sweden is, after all, significantly more than our three metropolitan areas. If these three are to be able to live, then all of Sweden must also live.

For me, it becomes unreasonable that year after year we ship off billions to other countries, while in our Norrland regions, the potholes in the roads are ignored, there is a next to non-existent police presence, and there are enormous deficiencies in the maternity care. It is also unreasonable that Sweden, which is far ahead in the climate transition, punishes those who are dependent on the car – but also those who grow our food and manage our forests, which causes the prices of Swedish products to skyrocket and worsens the inflation figures.

We come from a country far up in the north, a country that does not have the most optimal conditions for creating a prominent nation. But that is exactly what we Swedes have done. Our ancestors' toil has brought us to where we are now. Regardless of whether you walk in Gamla stan in Stockholm, in Rydebäck or in Dorotea, you walk in the footsteps of the forefathers.

I am a patriot because I love our country, Sweden. But I am also a nationalist because I love our people, the Swedes. I will always stand guard for the well-being of Sweden and the Swedes. I see it as my duty as a Sverigedemokrat. We need politicians who put Sweden first again. We simply need to ensure that we solve the problems we have in our country before we try to save the world.

Yesterday, Sweden received a new government. With our influence in the Tidö Agreement, the Sweden Democrats will ensure that they work for an agenda that puts Sweden first.

Mr. Speaker! It is time to make Sweden good again.

(Applause)

In this speech, Mats Arkhem and Leonid Yurkovskiy (both SD) agreed.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! Welcome to the Swedish Parliament, Pontus Andersson! Pontus is an elected Member of Parliament for Västerbotten, so it pleases me that he highlights northern Sweden in his speech.

It is a speech that I can partly agree with. It is in northern Sweden and Västerbotten that the great development is now taking place, where we lack competence in every area, where there is a shortage of people and where we would need an active influx of people to ensure the great industrial revolution and that we have people who can go to work. We also have a large, flourishing forest industry which, among other things, has invested very much money in the fuel transition. SCA has invested over 6 billion kronor to meet what previous politics has pointed out: that biofuels are an important part of self-sufficiency and in meeting the climate crisis.

Now Pontus Andersson's party is going to make us oil-dependent again. We do not think that is reasonable. How does it benefit northern Sweden?

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

PONTUS ANDERSSON (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Member From! It is not the first time I have been elected to the Riksdag. I have been here since 2021, but I still thank you for the welcome. It is true that I am elected for Västerbotten. I am from Skåne, but it is of course important for me to raise the issues that are relevant for the constituency I am elected for.

When it comes to the reduction obligation, which Isak From highlighted in his question, a reduction is important so that people in Västerbotten can afford to drive a car. These are long distances. It is far from point A to point B. I therefore stand more on the side of the people in Västerbotten than on the side of the large companies.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! Pontus Andersson! When I fueled the car in Norsjö in the interior of Västerbotten on Monday, it cost 28.30 per liter. That is expensive. It is over 4 kronor up since the election. I drove almost 500 miles during the election campaign and fueled with diesel. It is clear that it is expensive. Something clearly needs to be done.

The increase right now is due to the fact that crude oil has become more expensive. The Sweden Democrats are now going to make us completely dependent on that crude oil instead of ensuring that we have an industrial policy that provides the conditions for our own production of biofuels.

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

PONTUS ANDERSSON (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Isak From.

Isak From is right that the fuel price is not solely affected by the reduction obligation. It is also affected by the taxes that the previous government chose to increase. But all in all, we need to ensure that we bring down the price and work to implement the measures that we can influence to get a fuel price as low as possible.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Mr. Speaker! Pontus Andersson from Sverigedemokraterna! I reacted to the word patriot and thought that a so-called nationalist is standing in the speaker's chair. Then I cannot help but start wondering what substance and background there is to these epithets and designations.

We know that Sweden is a fantastic country. Sweden and Finland constitute a third of all of the EU's forest. We have a lot of forest, branches, cones, tar and so on.

I have a question for Pontus regarding the reduction obligation. We Social Democrats want jobs in the whole country. The Sweden Democrats now want to undermine the jobs in the whole country and rely on Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Iraq, United Arab Emirates and Iran, which belong to the top ten producers of oil in the world. How does that go together with patriotism?

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

PONTUS ANDERSSON (SD)

Mr. Speaker! If we are to be able to have a Sweden where we can live and work in the entire country, we first and foremost need to ensure that people can afford to live in the entire country. Then we need to bring down the prices on fuel.

Just as the previous speaker, Markus Selin speaks about the fact that we need to work with more biofuels. I am in no way against more biofuels being used. But considering the prices that currently exist for fuel and how expensive it becomes for those people who have very long distances to travel, we need to implement the measures required to bring down the prices as quickly as possible. One of them is to reduce the reduction obligation to the EU's minimum level.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Pontus Andersson, for a so-called answer!

I am thinking about the word patriot. It echoes - patriot and nationalist. I wonder about the miracle cure with nuclear power, because nuclear power is the Sweden Democrats' answer to all questions.

I wonder how it can be that the uranium that the patriot Pontus Andersson wants comes from Kazakhstan, Niger, Russia, Uzbekistan and China. How does the patriot put that together?

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

PONTUS ANDERSSON (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It has to do with the fact that the previous government chose to ban uranium mining in Sweden. We have a country where there is a possibility to extract our own uranium. We should ensure that we can do that again. Those resources exist in Sweden, but the previous government chose to ban the mining of uranium. Therefore, the situation looks the way it does.

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

Kajsa Fredholm (V)

Mr. Speaker! Given how much the government parties highlighted the countryside during the election campaign, it is somewhat strange that it is mentioned relatively little in both the Tidö Agreement and the Prime Minister's government statement. In the Tidö Agreement, the countryside is hardly mentioned at all. One time it is about access to healthcare. Another time it is about Sweden's climate and environmental policy not harming industries and the countryside.

I believe that instead we should see the completely necessary climate transition as an opportunity to highlight the countryside and its resources. It is precisely here that large parts of the transition will take place. If the countryside is not given the right conditions to function, we also cannot achieve the goals in climate policy.

The countryside can provide and gives us today necessary raw materials, green jobs, carbon sinks in abundance, and food that can be produced with non-toxic ingredients. This is, together with investments in streamlining and expanding climate-smart transport, both locally, regionally, and nationally, absolutely necessary for us to meet the climate goals. Substantial investments in public transport, even outside our most densely populated areas, need to occur in the near future.

We also need to increase our self-sufficiency rate for food to Finland's level, which is at approximately 80 percent. It is a major concern that our current level is only 50 percent. In these uneasy times, we need to create conditions for an improved food preparedness. We have good conditions to develop a sustainable agriculture that can strengthen our national self-sufficiency in food.

Mr. Speaker! In order for us to reach an ecologically sustainable and fossil-free agriculture, support and steering measures need to be designed in such a way that we can reach our environmental and climate goals, the global sustainability goals, and the goal of a living countryside. Protecting the cycles and stimulating a small-scale and diverse agricultural landscape is important.

We should reduce the import of meat and instead ensure that we eat more plant-based food and meat that is locally produced in Sweden. We also need to increase environmental support for those farmers who manage grazing lands with special values for biodiversity.

Mr. Speaker! Another positive aspect is that many of the future jobs within the green industries are important for the countryside. If we develop them, we will create conditions for both more people moving in and - as I said before - development of the countryside.

In conclusion, I want to say that I believe we should see the absolutely necessary transition as an opportunity to improve the quality of life for everyone living in our country - if we can carry it out in the right way.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! What do Gotland and Jämtland have in common, besides the fact that it is very beautiful there? Well, there, companies with fewer than 50 employees are three times as important for welfare creation. In Åre, almost half of the municipality's revenues come from employees in small businesses. Since I myself am active as a business owner there, I know that ice cream vendors at the foot of Ottfjället are joined by both startup companies and slalom ski manufacturers. In other places, it is the large corporations that keep the small businesses alive. When it comes to LKAB, today half of those who go down into the mine on a regular day are subcontractors and half are employees in the large state-owned company.

Regardless of where one lives in Sweden, today the access to jobs is completely decisive for being able to live and reside in the location. In the Sweden I grew up in, the jobs were created in the public sector and in the large companies. Today, it is the small and large companies that account for both job creation and tax revenues. Almost 500 billion goes directly to municipalities and regions in the form of income tax. Both the access to preschool, school, and healthcare as well as the upgrading of local roads and bus traffic are completely dependent on how many companies exist locally. I call the companies Sweden's welfare creators.

Mr. Speaker! We are heading into a deep recession. Consumers are reducing their purchases. Companies are cutting back on their production and their exchange of services. Large corporations are taking the opportunity to restructure operations that may have swollen a bit too much during the good times. We will reach a spring where unemployment increases. Small businesses will, at most, adjust to avoid laying off staff, partly because it is often their neighbors, and partly because it is very difficult to recruit and train.

The Prime Minister's government statement yesterday contained some good proposals that in the long run will likely be good for the companies. But it completely lacked proposals that make a difference in the short term. Such proposals do, however, exist.

Firstly, lowering the tax on hiring is much more important than continuing to lower the corporate tax. The question of the corporate tax is naturally important for our international competitiveness. But it is the hidden tax in the employer contributions, which have nothing at all to do with the employees' insurance or pensions, that hampers growth.

Mr. Speaker! When I was last active in politics, in 2010, this hidden tax brought in 50 billion to the state treasury. Today, to my great surprise, it brings in 230 billion. It is a tax increase on companies of 12 billion per year. It is easy to realize that the budget room to remove it may not exist in the near term. But at least start by lowering the cost of hiring new employees!

Secondly, the weak Rule Council should be made into an independent agency with responsibility for the auditing and impact assessments of the companies. Also give the council the task of following up on all the fees that companies now must pay for all possible types of permits that they need just to develop their own operations!

For the third: Build out the digital infrastructure! Anyone who has tried to make phone calls in a car along the E20 or perhaps the E14 knows that it rarely works. Carrying out video calls or using drones and other precision equipment in the forest is out of the question. This does not need to be investigated. It can be prioritized and measures can be taken now.

Mr. Speaker! Allow me to liken the government's business policy to an early startup - interesting but somewhat unfinished plans in a PowerPoint and a team that seems enthusiastic but completely lacks experience in the field. What is required now are finished solutions that companies are demanding - not because we feel sorry for entrepreneurs, who usually manage, but because four out of five jobs are created in companies with fewer than 50 employees. In tough economic times, the priority must be a policy that makes a difference for precisely these companies' opportunities to hire and survive - for Sweden's growth, for the jobs, and for vibrant cities, communities, and countryside.

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! In this general political debate, I, as a new Member of Parliament for the Christian Democrats, in my first speech in the chamber, want to speak about the innovative power in Sweden.

We Christian Democrats often return with pride to our Swedish innovative power. However, there is more to be done, not least by us politicians, to facilitate for more actors to contribute with innovation that, among other things, strengthens Sweden's welfare. In the UN's measurement of which are the world's most innovative countries, Sweden places itself in third place this year, 2022. In Europe, we are at the top. We have the first place as EU's strongest innovation country.

Innovations are crucial for meeting Sweden's welfare and our major societal challenges, both in the short and in the long term, not least regarding the need for the green transition and digitalization in public organizations and in our companies. Innovation streamlines organizations and facilitates people's everyday lives. It is not only about technical innovations but also about social innovations.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden's top ranking as the most innovative country is largely due to the strategic research and development work that the technology companies carry out. In comparison with the state commitment of other member countries, there is more to be done to maintain Sweden's top ranking.

With that, I want to highlight a couple of challenges that Sweden faces. Those who are responsible for this innovative power are the large industries. For example, 37 percent of the Swedish patent applications come from one and the same company. The rest are all accounted for by Sweden's other companies, researchers, and independent inventors.

Sweden needs to take advantage of the knowledge-based assets that exist. We do this by enabling more actors to gain knowledge on how they protect intellectual property rights, such as patents, trademark protection, design protection, and copyright. Another problem is that it is only one type of innovation that can be patented, namely inventions. Innovations such as service innovations and digital innovations normally fall outside of patent law in Europe.

The innovation support systems often fall short in relation to knowledge-based assets. With them, Sweden does not receive sufficient returns on our high digital maturity and our innovations. The regulations surrounding knowledge-based assets are rooted in conventions from the late 1800s and therefore need to be developed. For the companies' competitiveness, world-class regulations are required. Sweden needs the power of all innovators to secure more patents among more actors.

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats often highlight the need to look at our neighboring countries that have gone ahead and show good results, where, for example, increased innovative power in small and medium-sized enterprises is enabled. The conditions for more patent applications from smaller companies can increase if we develop an intellectual property strategy similar to the one that exists in Finland. We can also stimulate various competencies concerning services in elderly care and healthcare that provide conditions for better physical and mental health.

Mr. Speaker! Innovation is a great asset for growth at all levels of development. Sweden's innovative power shall secure continued top rankings, and we must not lean back. We Christian Democrats are not satisfied. There is more to be done. I look forward to being part of securing continued top rankings for our country in the coming mandate period.

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

Mathias Tegnér (S)

Mr. Speaker! Welcome to the Swedish Parliament, member! I would like to start by thanking you for your speech. I believe we agree on quite a lot regarding what creates innovations and how Sweden is good at certain things and can become better at others.

One issue that the member raised was the structural prerequisites for innovations. One issue that was discussed during the previous parliamentary term was the state support through our agencies to various types of test activities and testbeds.

The reason for that was that parts of that budget disappeared in one of the conservative budgets. My question is simply how the member sees Sweden being able to continue to be an innovative country at the same time as there is a risk that the budgets that decisions are made on in Sweden's Riksdag under a new Prime Minister will not prioritize those types of issues such as testbeds and different types of incubators.

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Mathias Tegnér, for your question! There are a whole lot of other things to do that also do not cost money. We have regulatory frameworks that we need to change to facilitate innovation in Sweden. We also need to coordinate between different agencies.

Functional cooperation also concerns cooperation between regions and municipalities. There, the municipalities have close cooperation with SMEs and innovators. There are many things to do here. I look forward to us also being able to strengthen the regions' work with strengthening the innovation power there.

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

Mathias Tegnér (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer!

I agree with much, even though I think it is possible to both work with regulatory frameworks and also ensure that there are budgets for things that are important so that the state can be involved and help drive the innovations forward.

When the member now raises regional growth, I also want to highlight the issue of the regional export strategy. It is very closely linked to innovations. Even there, cuts have been made to the regional export strategy in the budgets that the Christian Democrats have participated in adopting. It has also affected exactly that which we agree is so important. How does the member view that?

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We will present a budget ahead. I am confident that we Christian Democrats will be able to participate in presenting a budget where we truly strengthen the innovative power. It is extremely important for our welfare. It is very important so that our regions can have a stronger development work.

I could only highlight the Swedish National Audit Office's report on regional development policy. That is where we have to act. That is what we are focusing on. We look forward to preparing a budget for this.

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

Markus Selin (S)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to speak about something as beautiful as industrial policy and Sweden's industrial policy. I intend to highlight it from three perspectives. It is about where we are, who we are, and last but not least, where we are going.

Yesterday we got a new Moderate Prime Minister. I thought back to the last time we had a Moderate Prime Minister. He came from the same municipality as I do, Täby municipality. His name was Fredrik Reinfeldt.

Moderate as he was, he traveled to the summit in Davos some nine years ago. It was then that he coined the now-winged words: "We used to have people in the industry, but they are basically gone." There were many of us who choked on our morning coffee and tea when we heard those words, Mr. Speaker.

It is as simple as many of us know. Nearly half of Sweden's GDP comes from our exports. Half of that half comes from what we can in one way or another call industry, heavy industry. It is forestry, steel, metal, vehicle manufacturing and all these different machines.

It was a bit about where we were. Somewhere there we Social Democrats began to raise our voices. With Stefan Löfven at the forefront, we began to speak about concepts such as new industrialization, industrial chancellor, and innovation council. The Moderates grumbled and muttered quite a bit in the benches when we began to speak about those concepts.

Mr. Speaker! Who are we then? Sweden is a technology-intensive country. We are an engineering nation. We often want to be pioneers. We have a large dependence on our exports. We are a small open economy in one corner of Europe.

At the same time, Sweden is a large country in terms of area. We are the EU's third largest country by area. Together with Finland, we have a third of the total forest in the EU. From the forest, we get twigs, spruce, cones, tar, and everything wonderful that we can, among other things, make biofuels from.

How do we get there? We Social Democrats have decided. There are deep ideological differences here in Sweden's Riksdag. We have decided that we want to go first. We want Sweden to be a leader in the climate transition. Thus, we create the jobs of the future.

We can kill several birds with one stone. One of three possible birds is that we create jobs across the whole country. I, who live 20 kilometers from the Riksdag building, know that jobs across the whole country create many IT services, headquarters services, and accounting even here in our constituency.

One possible fly, number two of several that we hit in one blow, is of course the export opportunities as a small export-dependent country.

The third point we hit in the strike is that it is decent and our duty to leave behind a habitable planet and get down the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere for our children and our grandchildren.

(Applause)

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

Yasmine Eriksson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We stand here now at the beginning of a new parliamentary term. A new government has taken office, and we have a different parliamentary majority here in the chamber. There are, of course, many issues that have large areas of conflict. But there are also those issues where there is hopefully a greater consensus.

One of them concerns animal welfare. We have high requirements for our livestock farmers in Sweden. Consequently, we are one of the countries in the world that uses the least antibiotics in our animal production. That is something that we, of course, should be proud of. But antibiotics are used lightly and routinely in many other countries, and then especially in animal production.

It is important that Sweden leads the way in this issue. A high use of antibiotics leads to reduced effectiveness as the bacteria become increasingly resistant. We must not end up in a situation where we can no longer treat diseases in animals and humans due to pure negligence.

Sweden is working on the issue in several ways, both nationally and internationally. But to counter the development of antibiotic resistance, a global consensus was needed.

Mr. Speaker! I and with the fact that we in Sweden set high requirements on our livestock farmers, they are unfortunately many times subjected to competitive disadvantages. This is something that needs to be made visible, and measures must be taken.

Our animals should be well-treated. Therefore, it is extra important that Sweden is a leading country within the EU. Animal welfare standards need to be raised around the world and also in the EU.

The Sweden Democrats have pressured the previous government on this issue and are therefore pleased that it is now included as a point in the agreement that the Sweden Democrats have entered into with the government parties.

We must safeguard the living countryside and ensure that there are reasonable conditions for our entrepreneurs to continue conducting their business.

From the agreement, it can be read that a review shall be carried out of the possibilities to balance the competition conditions for Swedish food producers while the high requirements for animal husbandry are maintained. The purpose of this is precisely to strengthen our competitiveness and at the same time improve global animal welfare.

Mr. Speaker! Animals should have it as good as possible in our Sweden. They have no power themselves, and it is entirely up to us humans to safeguard their rights.

In order for us to be sure that the laws and regulations that are established are actually complied with, it is important that we have good controls in our system. Animal welfare inspections must be legally secure. It is important that those who work with animal supervision have relevant competence for the purpose. Personnel working with animal welfare supervision should have their own experience of animal husbandry.

The control system works well in many parts, but as it concerns much else, there is also improvement potential there – something I hope that the new government will want to investigate in its entirety.

Something that could have the potential to both facilitate the control work and increase animal welfare is camera surveillance. I therefore view the investigation that is currently ongoing positively and look forward to its results.

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I intend to speak about the restaurant industry, which is a part of the tourism industry.

Quite exactly two years ago, I was here in the Riksdag and was substituting for Carl-Oskar Bohlin. Together with Ann-Britt Åsebol, I made a trip around Dalarna's 15 municipalities. We traveled around to hear how they had managed the pandemic.

The restaurant industry is an important part of the tourism industry, not only for Dalarna but for all of Sweden. In Dalarna, there are, among others, Sälen and Idrefjäll as two important nodes for the county. During our Dala trip, restaurant owners told us about guests who were missed because the number of guests one could receive was minimized during the worst period of the pandemic. Thankfully, several restaurant owners were innovative and delivered the food that the guests had ordered to the cabins they were staying in, which meant that several managed very well nonetheless.

Mr. Speaker! In many long conversations with restaurant owners, one often arrived at the same point: Why should it be so complicated to serve alcohol? Why must there be a varied selection of dishes, both starters and desserts, that perhaps no one requests?

I spoke last week with one of the local pizzeria owners in Mora; his name is Halim. In order for him to be allowed to sell beer and wine at his pizzeria, he needs to have appetizers and desserts. It is very difficult for him, because a large part of this is thrown away. So we cannot have that, Mr. Speaker.

My sister Anna and her family run several restaurants at Idrefjäll. During the pandemic, they were resourceful and delivered the food to the cabins when the number of guests allowed to visit the restaurants was minimized. With the alcohol law we have, it was not possible to order a bottle of wine to accompany the food delivered to the cabin.

Sweden needs to have an alcohol law that is in step with the times and that does not lead to restaurants being forced to throw away food that cannot be served.

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

Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Right now, a global climate race is underway where companies compete to develop technologies and products that replace the fossil ones. It is important that we ensure that the new technologies and jobs that the climate transition creates end up in Sweden. It is the countries at the forefront of the transition that will see the highest growth and the most jobs, not those that continue to be dependent on fossil fuels. We must ensure that the jobs are created in Sweden.

The Social Democrats' initiatives have enabled a green industrial revolution. We can now see that Sweden is on its way to becoming a superpower in battery manufacturing.

In August this year, AB Volvo announced that the company intends to establish a large-scale battery factory in my home municipality, Mariestad. In comparable establishments, investments of this size affect an entire region. It will involve several thousand employees in the factory and, in addition, another two to three jobs around Skaraborg for every job in the factory. To solve this, common resources will be needed, from local and regional but also national actors.

To receive such a large investment for a municipality with barely 25,000 inhabitants is an enormous opportunity. But oh, what challenges we also face to manage competence supply, infrastructure, energy supply, and access to housing! While investing in this growth, one also needs to ensure that the soft infrastructure keeps up—that there are good preschools and schools, that there is enough staff for elderly care, and that welfare grows in step with the number of inhabitants and jobs. This is something that all municipalities facing large industrial establishments need to handle, and in order for us to manage it, state support is needed.

The previous Social Democratic government announced, only a few days after the news of AB Volvo's establishment in Mariestad, that a battery coordinator would be appointed. The coordinator was to identify challenges and obstacles as well as facilitate cooperation between actors.

It is not many years since the previous Moderate Prime Minister said that the industry was basically gone. Since then, a Social Democratic government has contributed to the renaissance Swedish industry has achieved by taking the lead in the green transition. Then, one naturally becomes worried about how the industry will be affected by the fact that we once again have a Moderate Prime Minister.

Mr. Speaker! That the new government's industrial policy continues on the now established path is absolutely necessary - partly so that companies will continue to choose to invest in Sweden and partly so that the municipalities that get the opportunity to grow thanks to large industrial establishments will continue to have the conditions to manage it.

(Applause)

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

Peter Ollén (M)

Mr. Speaker and honorable members! My contribution concerns small businesses. For small business owners, it means a lot that we now have a committed government that understands the vulnerable situation they find themselves in. Small business owners cannot move or resign when times become difficult. One has invested their time, their work, and their money in a specific location where one believes they will find customers and labor. Unlike the employee, the small business owner cannot resign, because the company and the person belong together.

Therefore, it is important that we here in the Swedish Riksdag understand this vulnerability and show our respect by listening and doing what we can to facilitate their lives.

Let us be clear about one thing: For the small business owner, low taxes are the absolute most important tool that the public sector can provide. Avoiding the removal of the capital that is to build the next step in the company is important. The small businesses then thank you by producing what is needed, creating jobs, and being part of creating the very foundation of the welfare state.

Without companies, there is no welfare. Those who doubt can, for example, go to Cuba to see what happens when the public sector and not the entrepreneurs build the country.

Sweden has now received a government with the stated goal of making it easier for small businesses to grow. Already in its government statement yesterday, Ulf Kristersson stated that they want to lower the tax on low incomes. This is the absolute most important thing required in a company's early start.

Some who are particularly to be congratulated on the change of government are the many newcomers to Sweden who come from countries where the family business is the obvious basis for livelihood. Many tell the story of how, upon arriving in Sweden, they want to start as entrepreneurs, but VAT, social security contributions and taxes cause the dream to be stifled. Instead, perfectly healthy people feel forced to live on benefits.

Mr. Speaker! A very important matter for Sweden is to create new paths to self-sufficiency. Those paths shall not go through applications to state authorities but, on the contrary, by having the authorities on the sidelines. They support and encourage the building of companies.

I have for 28 years had the privilege of running a company with subsidiaries in Norway and Denmark. I have seen how one, especially in Denmark, has a policy to facilitate the starting and running of small companies. The reward has also come. During the last 30 years, Denmark has gone from having a GDP far below the Swedish one to now lying a bit above, and this despite that the country almost completely lacks natural resources in the form of forests, mines and hydropower.

Now that we have a business-friendly government and a majority in the Swedish Riksdag, let us immediately begin with the changes that facilitate the work of small businesses. The small businesses will respond by giving much back to society.

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

Mathias Tegnér (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the speech! I had the privilege of investigating the security systems for small business owners. It is stated there, among other things, that there are a number of hundreds of thousands of entrepreneurs in Sweden. My reflection is, in fact, whether it is truly reasonable when the Member acts as a spokesperson for all small business owners.

During my time in the Committee on Industry, I have met many entrepreneurs. My impression is that, just like the rest of the population, entrepreneurs think differently. Many of them I meet talk about other important issues than lowered taxes. It is about safety systems, regulatory simplification, and skills supply, for example the "växa-stöd" (growth support), which means that one avoids employer contributions for the first or, currently, for the first two employees. My question to the member is: Is the member certain that lowered income taxes are the most important thing for all of Sweden's small business owners?

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

Peter Ollén (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for asking that question! I will also try to answer it.

I see that the combined taxes – the VAT, the social security contributions, and the income tax – lead to a situation where especially those who have recently arrived in Sweden and want to support themselves end up in a situation where two-thirds of what they invoice goes towards taxes, fees for bookkeeping, and so on. Instead of getting started with what they want to do, they end up in a position where they see that they either have to support themselves and two others or live on benefits.

If one can find ways that instead provide a soft start into entrepreneurship, that is very good.

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

Mathias Tegnér (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer! Yes, we agree that business issues are extremely important. However, we have somewhat different starting points.

A question that still strikes me concerns the calculation that the member just mentions. My understanding is probably that if one runs a sole proprietorship and has low incomes, the tax rate also ends up at a lower level. If one, on the other hand, has higher incomes and is more successful – which I am sure applies to the member – one ends up at another level.

Finally, I want to ask the question: Since the Moderates have not lowered any social security contributions at all in their budgets during this mandate period, will there be a change in this, if it is an important issue for Sweden's small business owners?

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

Peter Ollén (M)

Mr. Speaker! I have sat in the Riksdag for three weeks and must admit that I have not yet been given the confidence to be involved and have knowledge of what will be included at that level in the budget. But I look forward with anticipation to seeing what is intended to be done to help and support.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! Welcome to the Swedish Parliament, Peter Ollén!

I certainly lift the small businesses regarding the VAT they actually pay. Then perhaps one needs to review the VAT jungle as well. We had a January agreement where we wanted to conduct a broad tax review and, among other things, clean up in the VAT swamp. Unfortunately, this did not happen, partly because the Liberals dropped out of that cooperation. But perhaps that is something this government intends to drive?

The second thing I heard was that the 3:12 rules should be reviewed. I think it is completely absurd that a public sector doctor pays more than 100,000 more in tax than a doctor employed by a staffing agency. It is completely unreasonably unfair. It is these rules that would need to be reviewed. Is it not completely unreasonable that a public sector doctor pays more in tax than one employed by a staffing agency?

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

Peter Ollén (M)

Mr. Speaker! I shall mention one thing that I have reacted to regarding the 3:12 rules. If I have lived in a house for 25 years and sell it, I pay 20-22 percent in tax. But if I have run a company for 25 years and have paid in very much in taxes and in many cases also created jobs for others, I shall pay 50 percent in tax on what remains when I then sell the company, if I have not been in the lucky position of having been able to take out more than 600,000 kronor per year in salary.

I think it is a tax penalty that it should be worth more to have simply lived in a house than to have run a company and created a welfare institution.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! Peter Ollén, I think we strayed from the subject. Now it became house taxation. That was not quite what we were talking about.

In my part of the country, a lot is happening right now. When I speak with companies, I am told that they are demanding one thing, and that is the opportunity to hire competence. The plumbers, the electricians, the hairdressers, and business owners in what other industry could it be except that, are crying out to be able to hire competent, educated labor. It is the single most important issue. And in order to educate people, we do need taxes, which we can redistribute.

I believe we are in complete agreement that small businesses are important. But we are in complete disagreement that the tax issue is the absolute most important.

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

Peter Ollén (M)

Mr. Speaker! What is so wonderful is that we come from different parts of the country that look different. In Malmö, where I come from, we have, according to SCB's statistics, 40,000 people who neither work nor study, which means that we have a very large exclusion to grapple with.

It is, therefore, two completely different issues. In my worldview, I start from how we can help and facilitate breaking this exclusion.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is a great occasion to stand here in the rostrum of the Swedish Riksdag. I want to take the opportunity to speak about welfare, equality, and the conditions for living, residing, and working in our entire country.

The municipalities in Sweden are responsible for a large part of the Swedish welfare functions. As a Social Democrat, I stand up for a jointly funded and universally accessible welfare. That is the core of the Swedish social construction. With a jointly funded school, healthcare, and elderly care for all, regardless of the size of the wallet, the welfare system can level out gaps and injustices. Unfortunately, it becomes a falsehood if the welfare itself is unequal, depending on where in the country you live. The municipalities finance their mandates primarily through the local municipal tax and through state grants.

There are large differences between municipalities' conditions to manage to finance the residents' needs for welfare. When job opportunities are moved and concentrated to a greater extent in the larger cities, the gaps between different parts of our country widen. Not infrequently, the need for welfare is greater in the municipalities where the tax base is lower, partly as a result of moving away for jobs and studies, which leads to an increasingly older population. And this leads to great challenges in terms of managing ever higher costs to deliver the residents' needs for welfare with an ever lower tax base.

Mr. Speaker! I am not only a member of the Swedish Parliament. I am also a local politician back home in Bollnäs, in Hälsingland, in Gävleborg County. In that role, I see this all too well.

It is not long-term sustainable that residents in some municipalities gradually have to pay more and more municipal tax and perhaps still do not receive the welfare they can expect, while the opposite applies in other municipalities, where the tax base is high but the need for welfare services for a relatively young population is significantly lower.

The state needs to take a greater responsibility than today for an equitable distribution of resources, in order to meet the entire country's needs for welfare, and to compensate for leveling regional differences.

This is not a question that can be brushed aside by pointing at individual municipal council members. The question is larger than that. Municipal self-government is classically likened to dancing hambo in a wardrobe. And, Mr. Speaker, as a resident of the municipality where the World Championship in hambo is held every year, I can state that the dance steps become extremely limited. For the municipalities to be able to succeed with their mandate regarding equal welfare, the prerequisites must exist, and we create them together in this chamber, among other things.

Closely linked to the municipalities' economic conditions are many other decisive measures. Not least, it concerns the need to increase state investments in roads and railways that function also outside the larger cities. It is crucial so that people and businesses can live and operate in our entire country. In the same way, the state must, through its agencies, increase its presence and service throughout the country and be a pioneer in counteracting the negative effects of urbanization.

The role of politics must be to create just equal conditions to live and work in the entire country. It is everyone's responsibility. It is crucial in a country that is increasingly characterized by polarizations and contradictions. It is fundamentally about nation-building and that the whole country must be able to feel hope for the future. Thus, we create a stronger society that holds together and is not torn apart.

(Applause)

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Kristoffer Lindberg, for the contribution! We both come from Gävleborg. We both are passionate about our county. What we possibly do not agree on is that we have eight lost years behind us. I know that I have said from this rostrum that it feels as if the previous government forgot Norrland and Gävleborg.

It is exactly as the member from Bollnäs, where the Moderaterna and Socialdemokraterna govern together, says. Important and good public services are required throughout the country. But I would like to ask the member about one thing. One can demand more state funds - absolutely. But one of Gävleborg's biggest problems is that we have a terribly large level of social exclusion. We have very many who are unemployed at the same time as companies are crying out for labor. We heard about how it was in Västerbotten. The same thing is said in Bollnäs, Ljusdal, Gävle, and everywhere. Wouldn't it be good if we got more people into jobs, and what is the Socialdemokraterna's recipe for that?

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Of course, we need more jobs throughout the country. An important part when it comes to more jobs around the country is that we have a functioning welfare system around the country. They are connected.

We Social Democrats have prioritized increasing state grants to the municipalities in recent years, not least during the pandemic. The redistribution in the equalization system, which is actually what I am talking about, has also been strengthened. What I am worried about is how it will be with this under the new right-conservative government. But perhaps Member Lars Beckman can answer that. What does it look like regarding investments in the municipalities and state grants to manage the municipal welfare?

It is about many municipalities turning over every penny to make the operations work. It is about an unequal system. But I am very happy to hear that we agree on this issue. When it comes to welfare initiatives, much falls on the new government and on the member himself, so I am interested in hearing: What are the initiatives for welfare from Lars Beckman and the Moderaterna in a government position?

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Mr. Speaker! If Kristoffer Lindberg had visited a company in Bollnäs, he would have, for example, heard about a shortage of drivers. A company there said: I can hire ten drivers, but where are they?

At the same time, Mr. Speaker, a company that trains drivers in Hudiksvall is warning its employees, because Arbetsförmedlingen does not procure training for drivers. It is completely absurd.

This is how we create revenue for the municipalities. More taxpayers, more jobs and better welfare - that is how we build a strong Sweden.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, we need a skilled workforce. We need investments in more education. Then we need to ensure that we have resources for the municipal learning centers and for the upper secondary school, but also investments in higher education all around the country.

I am in my fourth week as a member of the Riksdag. I am very happy to have the opportunity to speak about this issue, which is so incredibly important for cohesion and equality across the country. Lars Beckman can trust that I will closely follow Lars Beckman and the new government and the efforts they make in this area.

(Applause)

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

Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (M)

Mr. Speaker! With a new Moderate-led government supported, not just tolerated, by more than half of the Riksdag, there are good opportunities to give our country a new direction, and there are conditions to get Sweden in order. Society's problems and challenges must now be given highest priority by a problem-solving government that wants to give Sweden a sense of future and give people who live here empowerment.

In my county, Gotlands län, there is faith in the future. In Visby and all around the island, there are high ambitions regarding increased attractiveness, increased competitiveness and an increased standard of living. In all of this, the climate transition is also present. Let me give some examples:

Our boats to the mainland are powered by natural gas and biogas - transition fuels that take us away from the fossil and take us part of the way towards the climate goals. Our airport is the first in Sweden to be carbon-free, and during the last year, the first charging station for aircraft was inaugurated. Our broadband expansion is Sweden-leading and enables people from all over the country to work remotely from one of the country's most beautiful and pleasant places.

The population is increasing, the tax base is strengthening, and Region Gotland's operations have shown healthy surpluses in recent years despite tough periods for both the tourism industry and the green industries - the two pillars upon which our local economy rests. Gotland is growing, but there are also large dark clouds in the sky that a new Moderate-led government needs to dispel.

Firstly, the red-green government's decommissioning policy, with proposals to close functioning infrastructure such as Bromma Airport, must be scrapped. The new government has already signaled that it will do this. But we also need a policy that enables the innovations of the green business sector to reach more people. An airport for all of Sweden, such as Bromma Airport, should in the long run be converted to house domestic electric aviation.

Madam Speaker! Secondly, the anti-growth elements that have governed so much of the politics in recent years must not infiltrate and paralyze the important procurement of the Gotland traffic. The boats that traffic to Visby and the two mainland ports must not slow down. They also do not need to be owned or operated by the state. The floor in the new procurement should be that the boats shall travel at at least 28 knots and offer the same standard as today or better.

For the third time, during the red-green years of government, the plans to build a third power cable to Gotland were paused and scrapped. It is unacceptable. Our two mainland cables are old and worn and need to be replaced within a decade. With Swedish protracted permit processes, there is a risk that the construction of a third cable will take up to ten years. Therefore, it is crucial that decisions are made to build a third power cable to Gotland so that all of Sweden is connected to the national grid by 2030.

Gotland is a fantastic place to live, work, and operate in. With fast and climate-smart connections to the mainland and a new cable that delivers stable base power, regional development can continue. I see it as my primary mission to drive these issues during the upcoming mandate period, because there is a need for a member of the Swedish Parliament who stands on the side of the Gotlanders.

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

Stefan Olsson (M)

Madam Speaker! In this, my first speech in the chamber as a newly elected Member of Parliament, I would like to speak about the problems with the so-called targeted government grants and how they, contrary to what is intended, complicate and worsen things for municipalities and regions.

My perception is that the state needs to clean up among the subsidies and regulate them heavily in order to eventually abolish them completely.

It may seem strange that I, who for several years have worked as an elected official on healthcare issues, say no to state support for the regions. All regions, as is well known, have difficulty making the finances balance. But my personal experience, which I know I share with hundreds of regional councilors and municipal councilors in the country, is that the targeted state grants are more of a nuisance than a benefit.

I am not speaking here about the general state grants that are absolutely necessary to keep the municipal and regional operations running without the targeted grants, where the state intends for it to support a specific purpose. Examples of grants are "Teaching during school holidays and homework help" and "Person-centered and coherent care pathways".

It is not difficult to understand that a Minister for Education or a Minister for Social Affairs wants to distribute special grants such as these. The purposes are, in themselves, worthy. But it is still wrong. I will briefly mention some of the reasons why the grants do not work as intended.

One first reason is that the grants are time-limited. They therefore lead to a municipality or a region starting up new projects that lack funding at a later stage. In the beginning, everyone likes the grant, but at the same moment it ceases, there is no planning for how the new activities shall fit within the budget.

A second reason is the extensive bureaucracy that the grants cause. Today, there are officials who work full-time on applying for grants. It has even gone so far that there are companies that can make a living by helping municipalities apply for state grants. The targeted state grants have become an industry in themselves that is only about how to manage them.

A third reason is that the targeted government grants create inequality. Statskontoret has, in its review of the government grants, been able to show that small municipalities – which for natural reasons have few civil servants – refrain from applying for grants because it is too much work with them. The result is that these municipalities do not receive a share of the grants. Citizens who have the misfortune of living in a small municipality are thus disadvantaged.

These problems have been known for a long time within municipal and regional Sweden. The cooperation organization Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner has, under both conservative and Social Democratic leadership, criticized the targeted state grants.

Madam Speaker! I will return to this issue when it comes time for the Riksdag to consider the state budget. I know that there will be many targeted state grants in the budget that our new government will present shortly, but I hope that my speech here in the chamber at least contributes something small to the general understanding of how poorly the system of targeted state grants functions.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! Even though I was a bit surprised that this question came up under this theme, I would like to take the opportunity to comment on what Member Stefan Olsson said.

Several of us have views on the targeted government grants, and the government has during the last mandate period worked to try to reduce them and consolidate them. The problem is, however, that when the Moderaterna themselves issued a government grant during the last mandate period, during the pandemic, it was the most targeted government grant in the most detailed way that we have seen in quite a long time.

It is one thing to say something and another thing to do when it actually comes down to it. I want to ask the member how it is that the Moderaterna, who themselves have on several occasions criticized the targeted state grants, actually do exactly the same when given the opportunity to propose a state grant through a committee initiative.

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

Stefan Olsson (M)

Madam Speaker! At the beginning of my speech, I stated that I am a newly elected Member of Parliament. I therefore did not sit in the Riksdag during the previous term and have consequently had limited opportunities to influence this.

On the other hand, I have been active in Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner and there I have worked in the best way to counteract all forms of targeted state grants. Now I am finally elected to the Riksdag and will continue my work here.

General political debate Business and regional policy

That is my answer as to what I have done in that part.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! It is now up to us to prove it when one has the opportunity to lay a budget. Just as the member pointed out, it is clear that very many municipalities, especially smaller ones, have difficulty managing the targeted state grants. This is something we Social Democrats must also follow, because it is about providing good conditions for the municipalities.

But it is clear that targeted state grants are better than no state grants. I do not see that either in the agreement or in the government statement.

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

Stefan Olsson (M)

Madam Speaker! I unfortunately believe that targeted government grants are bad in general because they are inefficient. It is not at all in the sense that more money necessarily leads to more welfare, but it only leads to a waste of money in the end because one still does not know what one gets for the money.

I believe the burden of proof has shifted to those who say that targeted state subsidies contribute to welfare. I would like to see that study. There is no such study.

Labor market and economy

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

Jamal El-Haj (S)

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats believe in all people's equal value and rights. We want Sweden to make a difference in the world. We want to fight poverty, create a safer world, strengthen democracy and safeguard respect for human and trade union rights.

There is a fundamental contradiction between labor and capital but also a contradiction between employers and employees regardless of the form of operation in the enterprise. Trade union organizations are needed in both state and municipalities and also in cooperatives and popular movements.

A trade union organization represents the members collectively and is important for shaping common demands and frameworks in the employment relationship.

The individual can very rarely assert themselves effectively alone against the employer. We are then talking about individual cases where the employee has very special and unique knowledge about the work and is therefore difficult to replace.

An important part in the emergence of industrialism was that the worker, unlike the craftsman, became easy to replace and in this way lost their control, and thus power, over the work process. In our modern society, white-collar workers and academics have also had to come to terms with such a reality, and therefore they have realized the importance of organizing themselves in unions.

To deliberately try to weaken and break down trade unions is to diminish the opportunities for wage earners to assert their interests. Trade union organizing is still incredibly important and the only way in which employees can improve their economic conditions and other working conditions for everyone.

Trade unions also play an important role as popular movements and are part of what is commonly called civil society. Free trade unions are both a basis for and a school of democracy. In dictatorships, trade unions are fought against just as vigorously as opposition parties.

General political debate Labour market and economy

Few countries outside of the Nordic region have a labor union movement as strong as the Swedish one. It has been good for Sweden. It is good if the labor organizations and the employer organizations handle wage formation and a good deal of other things without political parties interfering. It is important that this order remains in place even moving forward.

Madam Speaker! Strong trade unions are good for Sweden and the Swedish model. Let us, from the side of the Riksdag, safeguard LO, TCO and Saco. Let us safeguard that the trade union organizations, together with the employers, are given continued large scope to themselves resolve various labor market and working life conditions by agreement. They have succeeded in doing so in a successful manner since the Saltsjöbaden Agreement. The Swedish model can be developed in many ways, but the foundation is sound and to the highest degree alive – and should remain so.

(Applause)

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the contribution.

It was a gloomy picture of Sweden's employers that the Social Democrat Jamal El-Haj painted.

Workers are exploited. That is not the picture I encounter when I meet Sweden's entrepreneurs. I do not know what it is like on the public side, but I perceive that the private companies consider their employees to be skilled, important, and irreplaceable. This applies to almost every company I meet. What experiences do the members have of the terrible and bad employers who look down on their staff? I do not think they exist. Then, of course, there can be exceptions.

The Swedish model, Madam Speaker, is supported by all parties. It has served Sweden well. Unions and employers agree on, among other things, employment conditions.

I would like to know a little more about why there is such a gloomy view of Sweden's job creators among the Socialdemokraterna.

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

Jamal El-Haj (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the contribution.

It seems that we have different experiences. First and foremost, it seems that you have not heard what I have said, and it also seems that you have not understood what I have said regarding how I view cooperation in the labor market. I mentioned several times in my post how one should meet the trade union organizations and the employer organizations, give them space, and show understanding for their work.

To be honest, I do not know what you have worked with previously, but I am a worker. I have worked in a factory and manufactured paint. I have a lot of experience in how employers exploit workers. I have seen bad working environments and tried to do something about them.

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! We are in complete agreement that there should be good working environments. And it is clear that there can be bad employers, not least in the public sector.

Let us look at which employers cause ill health in Gävleborg. It is the municipality and the region that cause very great ill health, and there are high sickness absence rates. Of course, the work environment must be improved at many different workplaces. What I turned against and requested a reply about was the gloomy view of Swedish entrepreneurs, which I do not share at all. They are Sweden's job engine.

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

Jamal El-Haj (S)

Madam Speaker! Once again, Lars Beckman, it seems that you have not heard what I have said. I have pleaded with the Riksdag to treat the employers' organizations as trade union organizations as well.

You have a disparaging view of the trade union organizations because you perceive the union as LO. But the union is not just LO, the union is also TCO and Saco.

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

ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN

I make a general reminder that we address each other by the member's first and last name or by the member.

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! This part of the debate is titled Labour Market and Economy. And what can be more important than the jobs in Sweden?

As everyone remembers, the Social Democrats and Stefan Löfven promised that Sweden would have the EU's lowest unemployment. It was one of the Social Democrats' absolutely most important election promises in 2014.

Eight years later, we are competing with Greece and Italy to have the EU's highest unemployment. We thus ended up having the EU's highest unemployment. What was it that went so wrong? I do not think there is one answer to the question, but rather there are many answers to that question. The fact is that we are leaving a boom behind us with the fourth highest unemployment in the EU. I think that one should call things by their right names. It is a major failure.

Madam Speaker! Every person who becomes unemployed is naturally a loss for the individual, but it is an even greater loss for society. We know, for example, that approximately 700,000 foreign-born people are not self-sufficient in Sweden. It is completely unsustainable. Every person in Sweden should, of course, have the opportunity to work based on their own ability.

We have heard earlier in the debate here today, among other things from a Social Democratic member from Västerbotten, that companies are crying out for labor. That matches the picture I have, Madam Speaker. Many business owners I visit say: Where are all the unemployed? And then we should know that the unemployment in Gävleborg is one of the highest in Sweden.

How is it possible, Madam Speaker, that thousands of berry pickers are coming to Sweden at the same time as we have so many unemployed? How was it possible that green industries were hit incredibly hard because they could not have labor immigration, including from Ukraine, this summer? There were many alarm reports in the media about that.

In Gävleborg County and in many other places in Sweden, people are crying out for drivers. At the same time, training companies are cutting back on the training of drivers. The company that trains drivers is striking. It is a fundamental failure.

Madam Speaker! Many of us in this chamber often want to improve public services or introduce new expenditures. We also heard that in another contribution here. How are we then to finance it? Well, we must finance it by having more people enter the workforce. More must leave the unemployment insurance. More must leave the social assistance. It is neither reasonable nor desirable that those who can work support themselves by long-term receiving benefits.

This is also about a perspective, Madam Speaker: that every person has a responsibility to make themselves employable. Every person has an individual responsibility to make themselves employable, and then, of course, the support of society shall be there. It is extremely important.

That we now, after a period of economic expansion, enter a probable recession with the EU's fourth highest unemployment rate is a major failure for the previous government. This government should and must prioritize getting more people into jobs. It is a crucial issue for the development of society in Sweden.

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Madam Speaker! Now that I have listened to Lars Beckman's speech, I would like to remind Lars Beckman that in the previous debate he spoke about my colleague having a gloomy picture of Sweden. When one listened to Lars Beckman's four minutes, one got a very gloomy picture of Sweden.

Looking at Eurostat's statistics, one can quite easily state that Sweden has the highest labor force participation within the EU. Sweden also has the highest employment rate.

When I listen to Lars Beckman, I want to ask what the statistics are based on. It is clear that one could say that people who do not exist in the system should not be able to apply for jobs. It also means that we see an increased unemployment. But based on the government agreement, I would like to ask Lars Beckman what concrete measures the Moderaterna propose so that we can get more people into work.

(Applause)

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! It was good that it was a sensitive issue because there were so many Social Democrats who wanted to take the floor. I am happy to debate unemployment. I hope that more people request the floor.

Which statistics do I use? I use the official statistics that exist, and there are two headings in them that are interesting.

Unemployment in Sweden is increasing more than the EU average, the statistics released in June reported.

I hope that everyone who sees this will go and Google it themselves. When it comes to international unemployment, one can see that Spain has the highest unemployment. Then comes Greece, Cyprus, Italy, France and Sweden. The lowest unemployment is Czech Republic, Poland and so on.

It is clear that it is a failure. Let us admit it. We are leaving a boom and entering a recession when we already now have very high unemployment. Then, it is not general for everyone. It is primarily among foreign-born individuals that we have very long-term unemployment. It is among people with disabilities, as Samhall has become an integration company instead of a company where those who are disabled can get jobs.

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Madam Speaker! I can only state that today we have 450,000 more people working compared to 2014. Of these, 100,000 work in the welfare sector.

I can also observe that in many of the countries that Lars Beckman compares Sweden with, many people have given up hope of finding a job, while in Sweden we can see that very many people are signing up. The labor force participation is therefore very high in Sweden, which is pleasing. It is pleasing for Sweden that many people want to work.

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! I look, for example, at SVT, which set the headline "More than one in ten foreign-born persons is unemployed - the gap between the groups is increasing." SVT also states that "despite decades of labor market initiatives, unemployment among foreign-born persons remains high. Furthermore, the gap between domestic-born and foreign-born persons is increasing."

Mr. Speaker, if one does not see a problem, one also cannot solve it. That is why the government has failed the last eight years - unfortunately.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! It is clear that unemployment is a major problem. It is something that the government has worked actively on during the last eight years. We have invested large resources in increasing the number of educational places within both vocational training and higher education and in other areas. It is, in fact, the core of tackling unemployment – to ensure that people can take high-productivity jobs with good wages and good conditions in Sweden.

The Alliance, however, cut back on all these parts during its years. They dismantled the vocational training in upper secondary school. They removed the resources for adult education places and so on. There, one can talk about eight lost years for Swedish workers!

I am now worried that this will recur. I naturally hope that one continues with that which has actually given us lower unemployment now than before the pandemic and ensures that people receive education so that they can take good jobs in Sweden.

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! It is quite interesting. The companies in Gävleborg are asking for drivers. They are asking for bus drivers, truck drivers, all possible types of driver occupations. At the same time, a company in Hudiksvall that trains drivers is laying off workers, because Arbetsförmedlingen is not purchasing the services.

We therefore have record-high unemployment in Gävleborg. We have companies asking for labor. And Arbetsförmedlingen terminated the agreement with those who train drivers. Patrik Lundqvist cannot be satisfied with that, and it has indeed occurred under your flag. It has indeed occurred under your government. It is happening in the present.

I agree with Patrik Lundqvist. We must ensure that we have good and effective vocational training. It also states in the agreement that has been signed that we must streamline so that we actually get people into jobs. But it is unsustainable that we pay people to remain unemployed instead of training them to be in-demand vocational drivers. So that cannot continue, Madam Speaker.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! It is indeed exciting that we now hear from Member Lars Beckman that Arbetsförmedlingen is to be expanded and be able to do more things. Previously, it has been precisely the opposite. One has also struck against Arbetsförmedlingen and its ability to equip people to move from benefits or a-kassa or other things to self-sufficiency.

This is a huge problem. But we have also had a conflict here where you have cut back on just these things, Lars Beckman.

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! It is the Social Democrats who have governed Sweden for the last eight years. It is Patrik Lundqvist's government's management of Arbetsförmedlingen that has caused companies to lay off the firms that train drivers, at the same time as companies are crying out for labor, including drivers.

We must change that. We cannot continue in that way. People must have the opportunity to receive an education and get into jobs.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! Labor market policy is something that seems to have fallen away from the palace agreement and the government statement that we heard here yesterday.

Demanding that one must make an effort to become employable is, of course, completely correct and reasonable; there we agree. The Social Democratic-led government commissioned an inquiry into the duty to be active, for example, which the right-wing government now taking office is welcome to carry out.

But that is not enough; instead, an active labor market policy is needed that equips and matches for the jobs that are emerging. That is not the Moderaternas strongest branch. During the last parliamentary term, the Moderaterna in opposition pushed through a stop on extra services and a slaughter of Arbetsförmedlingen's appropriations that makes local presence impossible in large parts of the country. And we all remember phase 3 from the last time it happened. I wonder therefore: Is it a new phase 3 we should expect this time as well?

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! I am glad the member brings up extra services. I met 25 Somali men in Gävle during the election campaign. They had been sitting in extra services in Gävle, in a facility called Varva. And I can tell you, Madam Speaker, that they hated Varva. They did not understand why they should be sitting in detention in Varva in Gävle instead of receiving vocational training.

I asked them: What can you do, and what do you want to work with? Among them, there was, for example, an electrician, and there was a plumber among the guys from Somalia. Common to all of them was that they wanted nothing more than to have a job. I want to validate my skills so that I can get a job, they said.

Men, Madam Speaker, they were in a completely meaningless detention measure in an extra service at the Varva premises in Gävle. We shall, of course, change that. It is completely meaningless that we detain people in extra services instead of providing them with an education.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! The extra services have been something that has contributed to the fact that not least foreign-born women to a large extent - but of course also men - have been able to get closer to an education and closer to a job on the regular labor market. The extra services have meant very much for very many.

I truly regret that the Moderates in opposition put a stop to this and much more. But I return to the question: Are we to expect new patchwork measures like phase 3 this time? Or how has Lars Beckman envisioned that people should be able to get closer to the labor market?

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

Lars Beckman (M)

Madam Speaker! I want to turn to you 25 Somali men whom I met in Gävle: We are going to release you from Varva, and I believe you are already on your way to being released.

We shall, of course, phase out completely meaningless "pysselsättning" (make-work) measures, as someone put it. We shall have an effective labor market training where each individual's knowledge and experience can be utilized so that everyone gets a place in the labor market based on their own ability. And then, of course, we shall not have "pysselsättning" measures.

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

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Madam Speaker! I am a member of the Left Party because I want to live in an equal and egalitarian society. I want to live in a society that takes decisive action against climate change and that does not let venture capitalists enrich themselves at the expense of the welfare state. I want to see a secure Sweden where everyone has a place and can live a good life – a Sweden where solidarity is more important than profit, profit-seeking, and tightened refugee reception. I want to see a Sweden where capitalists are not allowed to run wild with profit-driven healthcare and schools.

The largest school company in Sweden made a profit of 784 million kronor during the last financial year and had a dividend payout of 185 million. That is how we should not have it. That is not why we pay tax. Our tax money should go to operations and not to profits.

We must take back control of the welfare from the market. It is when politics takes responsibility that we can get functioning healthcare, school and care, full employment and secure jobs.

We can also see how the gap - the economic gap - between large cities and the countryside is growing. Growth occurs mainly in the metropolitan regions, especially in Stockholm, and it is also there that new jobs are created. The difference between wealthy municipalities in metropolitan areas and poor ones in rural areas is becoming ever larger. The investigation that is now reviewing the income and cost equalization system must come back with proposals that more forcefully redistribute the resources. But with a government without any ministers who live north of Borlänge, it is probably too much to hope that a more just system will be introduced.

The wording in the palace agreement regarding the investigation of the municipal equalization system, including measures to handle the high-tax issue in the municipalities, rather indicates that they envision KD's proposal for a tax brake. This means that municipalities that raise taxes will receive reduced state grants. KD argues that there must be a stop to the waste of tax money.

Dorotea has the highest tax in the country because it has a small and aging population over a large area, not because it wastes money. If Dorotea were to raise the tax further, it is not to waste tax money but because the money is not enough for school, healthcare, and elderly care. To punish the municipality for that with a reduced state grant is pure madness.

The gaps are not just large between municipalities; they are also large between people. The number of people seeking help from organizations such as Stadsmissionen is increasing. The government's announced funding caps and subsidy reforms will kick those who are already down.

The great inequality will increase even more. During the last decades, few groups in Sweden have been as big winners as the owners of large companies. Their incomes have increased many times faster than for the rest of the population. Those with high incomes and wealth have been particularly favored by the tax policy pursued in previous years with reduced or abolished taxes on wealth, inheritance, gifts, real estate and capital income and abolished wealth tax.

We need to reform the tax policy. We need to raise the tax on large share dividends and capital income to strengthen our welfare and security systems. We need to redistribute solidarily between the employed and the unemployed, between the healthy and the sick, and not least between those who live in abundance and those who live on the margin.

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is a welfare state. Here, one should be able to rely on the fact that society is there when you need it most and are at your weakest. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Incorrect payments from the welfare system occur, sometimes through directly criminal schemes, because someone wants to secure benefits. This undermines trust in the welfare system and drains it of resources that would otherwise help those who are in greatest need of them.

Being registered as a resident at an address in Sweden is often a prerequisite for being able to receive grants and compensations from the public sector. Therefore, population registration crimes constitute the basis for many welfare crimes. A common method is so-called fictitious registrations, where hundreds of people can be registered at the same address. Many of them may not even be in the country, but they still enter the social security system.

The number of reported population registration crimes has increased across the entire country since the law was changed a few years ago. In 2019, the police investigated slightly over 700 cases in the whole country. So far this year, the corresponding figure is over 2,000 cases.

The Swedish state pays out hundreds of billions of kronor annually in welfare payments. A non-negligible part goes to criminals and are incorrect payments. A mapping has shown that much money goes to criminal gangs. They account for 84 percent of the cases, according to an SOU from 2017.

The Christian Democrats believe that the Swedish population registration legislation has made it possible for organized crime rings with malicious intent to exploit the Swedish welfare state and access tax money. They do this, among other things, by using companies and black market labor and by exploiting people to normalize how it looks in the public registers. They show no respect for the taxpayers who have paid in the money, no sympathy for those who truly need benefits from the social insurance system. The situation is very serious and threatens the legitimacy of the Swedish welfare system as a whole.

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats have on several occasions noted the issue of population registration crimes.

We want to allow the storage of biometric data. In cases of enhanced identity control, a person shall provide a facial image and fingerprints. Storage gives Skatteverket better opportunities to link a physical person to an identity document, and Migrationsverket will be able to address the issue of multiple identities.

We want to require approval from the landlord and property owner upon population registration. The Christian Democrats believe that the person renting a residence with a sublease should have a certificate of approval from both the person who has the primary lease and the property owner.

The Swedish Tax Agency shall be given better opportunities to de-register persons. Since the population register is used by other authorities, the Swedish Tax Agency needs more powers to ensure that it is correct. The Christian Democrats propose that the Swedish Tax Agency be given the opportunity to de-register personal identity numbers from the population register if the registered information turns out to be obviously incorrect.

These reforms are important steps. Sweden and our welfare state shall manage the citizens' tax money effectively and help those who truly need it, not finance criminal networks that shamelessly and with malicious intent exploit people.

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats argue that welfare crime undermines a resource-efficient welfare system. The billions should have gone towards increasing Sweden's welfare and to those who truly need it instead.

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Cecilia Engström, for your commitment when it comes to the fight against criminal networks!

As the member knows, we have another problem today in the Swedish labor market. We have a major problem with crime in the working life, not least within the construction industry. It was a priority issue for the Social Democratic government, which appointed a delegation to increase knowledge and also took joint measures across authorities. We established two centers, one in Göteborg and one in Umeå.

My question to the member is: Why is crime in the working life not mentioned as a problem in the Swedish labor market in the Palace Agreement or in the Government Bill?

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! Naturally, the labor market, where one can use personnel and exploit people, is a large part of the crime. Everyone realizes that this is something we must address. When we target the criminal gangs and crime in our society in general, we also reach these people who live by exploiting other people.

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Madam Speaker! It feels as though I did not receive a proper answer to my question.

Let me problematize the discussion a bit more. The problem with labor-related crime stems largely from the total deregulation of labor immigration that occurred when KD sat in government last time.

Then my question is: Why do the Christian Democrats say no to the requirement for labor market testing?

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! S has had the opportunity to change these rules during the eight years that they have sat in government. Still, they have not addressed the problems that have existed. In the new agreement, there is an opportunity to review the rules that exist on the labor market and address the problems that have existed.

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

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Madam Speaker! In my speech, I took up the fact that KD proposes that municipalities that raise taxes should be punished by receiving lower state grants. I would therefore like to ask Member Cecilia Engström if she and KD really mean that municipalities that raise taxes do so in order to waste tax funds. Does the Member, for example, believe that Dorotea raises taxes to waste money, when they may in fact need to do so to manage healthcare, school, and elderly care?

I would like, now that we are discussing the economy, to hear a little bit about how KD has thought about this penalty for municipalities that are forced to raise the tax.

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! Raising taxes hits above all those who have small margins, those who already live on a low income. The new Alliance and the Christian Democrats believe that it is above all low-income earners who should get lower taxes first. That is why we start with the job tax deduction for them.

Much more needs to be done in the municipalities, I feel, before one starts raising the tax. There are often other parts of the municipality's revenue that can help.

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

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Madam Speaker! I actually heard no answer to my question. My question was whether KD and Cecilia Engström really believe that municipalities raise taxes to waste tax funds and that the right solution is to lower their state grants. Is that really the solution? Those with low incomes are the ones who are hit even harder if municipalities do not have the resources to manage the school, the healthcare, and the elderly care.

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! There is a lot to be done in the municipalities' finances. One can also look at what the money is used for and that it is used effectively. I believe that is a better way than to raise taxes for those who are most affected.

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

Niklas Karlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I shall begin by welcoming the member to the Swedish Parliament.

I note that Cecilia Engström, when delivering her maiden speech, chooses to focus on population registration crimes, at a time when Dagens industri just a week ago had a long report showing how the truly wealthy people in our country can purchase advanced tax schemes to avoid paying any form of tax to our country's welfare at all. It is quite telling when one chooses to focus on population registration crimes instead of hunting those who actually avoid paying tax to our country and our common welfare.

Therefore, I want to ask the member: What is Cecilia Engström's view on these advanced tax schemes and that the truly wealthy become zero-taxpayers in our country?

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the member for the welcome here.

It is a very important question what we do with the criminal gangs in Sweden. It is something that I choose to focus on, because 84 percent of the money from welfare crimes goes to the criminal gangs. It finances what they carry out – the shootings on our streets and that which truly is a concern for people in their everyday lives where they feel unsafe in their immediate surroundings. It is something that I think is important to focus on, and it is also the reason why I bring up welfare crime.

Then, of course, there are other people who also exploit the system. It is never right, regardless of who does it.

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

Niklas Karlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! At the end, there was a small answer as to how the problem is viewed and that it is not right. I note this.

I also note that there are currently a number of investigations underway on how this tax planning should be avoided, so that everyone contributes to the welfare in our country to the best of their ability. Does the member's answer to my question mean that we can now expect the Christian Democrats' support in the work to avoid advanced tax planning?

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

Cecilia Engström (KD)

Madam Speaker! All crime must be combated. It is natural. As long as one does not break any laws, we must naturally review what kind of crime is being committed. I think that is what it is most important to address.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Having a job to go to or being able to run a company is the backbone of society. It makes it possible for us to have a welfare system with schools, healthcare, and a safety net for us all. If we are to have a society with these values, the work principle must apply. With unemployment expected to grow from already high levels, it is crucial that we, from the political side, do what we can so that more people have a job to go to.

At the same time, a job means much more than tax revenue for society. There are several important parts to having a job or running a company. It is about feeling needed and significant, knowing that what one does counts and is important, and being part of a community. Feeling like a part of society becomes easier when one has a context. Integration is facilitated. One gets colleagues and builds a network of contacts. One ends up in a social context. One's freedom and empowerment grow.

It will be a challenge, but it is absolutely crucial that the over 150,000 long-term unemployed who want to leave exclusion will be able to get a job. Therefore, it is very exciting and important that the Liberalerna will now be part of the government and will be able to drive a policy that improves the business climate in Sweden.

Sweden is already today a knowledge nation and has been a base for several companies that have been able to grow large on the international market. We should be very proud of that.

It is important to improve the conditions for small companies, so that even more companies can emerge. Everyone is a startup at some point. Some remain small but stable and can create secure jobs. Others become new world-leading companies that reshape an entire industry.

When companies get better conditions to succeed, we all benefit. In fact, four out of five jobs are created in small companies with up to 50 employees. Those companies exist in all different industries and in different geographical locations in Sweden. In Halland, my wonderful home county, we have a rich business sector in many different industries, including within the tourism industry. Nevertheless, the potential is great. Even though much is good, there are many challenges, for example, red tape, high administrative costs, and high risks in connection with hiring. Therefore, it is with pleasure that the new government will now make improvements.

Madam Speaker! It needs to become cheaper to run businesses. The costs for administration can be reduced. Entrepreneurs should be allowed to do what they are best at, which is to realize their business idea. In a small, open economy like Sweden, we need to offer competitive conditions and taxes so that more companies choose to establish themselves here or to keep their headquarters in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! There are two major problems with the 3:12 rules. They are incredibly complicated, and they disadvantage smaller companies through heavier taxation than larger companies. It is not reasonable. The Liberals consider that the 3:12 rules are a complex regulatory framework that limits new entrepreneurship and the opportunities for smaller companies to grow. It disadvantages active ownership in small and medium-sized companies and hinders entrepreneurs' opportunities to contribute to the development of the business sector.

With this economic situation, we need to give small business owners a boost. The 3:12 framework needs to be developed and strengthened. When Swedish companies succeed and develop, Sweden does the same. Therefore, I will always raise the conditions for companies here in the chamber.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats are the champions of the welfare state. We built up the Swedish welfare model, and we will continue to defend and develop it. Our elderly deserve good care in the autumn of life. All children shall receive a good education and a start in life. And we know that a strong welfare state reduces inequalities and strengthens equality and gender equality.

Politics makes a difference. We Social Democrats have prioritized and invested in welfare while simultaneously taking responsibility for the economy. There are now 100,000 more employees in welfare. During the pandemic, the government provided three times as much to welfare as the estimated tax loss. Despite these investments, we see gaps in welfare. Tens of thousands of new employees will need to be hired within healthcare, school, and elderly care.

But the market is no recipe for solving the challenges of the welfare state. Privatizations and deregulations have proven to cost money, increase inequality within healthcare, and increase segregation within schools. The marketization in Sweden, which is extreme in an international context, has meant that companies have been able to make profits at the expense of quality and has led to welfare crime.

Our common tax money should go towards making school, healthcare, and elderly care better. Welfare is for our children, students, and the elderly, not for enriching owners. It is truly not more than reasonable that our tax money should go to what it is intended for. It should not go towards unlimited profits for a few. Taking back control over welfare will therefore continue to be one of the Social Democrats' highest priorities.

Madam Speaker! The challenges in the municipalities and regions are great and of varying character. It is toughest for many of the smallest municipalities in rural areas. Many who work within the welfare sector feel that they do not suffice or have time for the care that one wants to provide. And it seems it is going to become even more difficult.

The financing of welfare is conspicuously absent in the new right-wing conservative government's policy. I see nothing about how the future's welfare is to be strengthened, for example in the form of important state grants to municipalities and regions. We know that high interest rates and high inflation affect the municipalities' finances, and we know that the municipalities need resources. It is in municipalities and regions that the core of the welfare is carried out. For this, the new government seems to be completely deaf.

I recognize this. I myself was a municipal commissioner during the last recession. We did not get the money that was needed to strengthen welfare. Now I am very worried about the future, perhaps especially for the future care of our elderly, because it is not mentioned with a single word how the elderly care should be strengthened.

It makes me very worried when we see that welfare is not being prioritized and that the welfare model that we have proudly built up is at risk of being broken apart. What Sweden needs are investments in welfare that create a more cohesive and equal country and equal conditions for all municipalities and regions to have a good welfare. Sweden can truly do better than this.

(Applause)

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Madam Speaker! Despite the uneasy times with Russia's illegal war against Ukraine, Sweden is currently experiencing a very positive development in the labor market. Unlike Lars Beckman, who gave a gloomy picture, I would like to provide a positive picture of how the Swedish labor market looks today.

Unemployment continues to decrease on a broad front and across our entire country. The number of new job vacancies at Arbetsförmedlingen amounted to just over 160,000 in September, just over 36,000 more compared to the same month the previous year. It is a historically high level. Never before have we had so many job vacancies in Sweden.

The employment rate, which we have discussed previously, is now the highest in Sweden in 30 years. Unemployment has decreased clearly. We see the largest decrease among young people. Industries where many young people work, such as the tourism industry, the restaurant industry, and retail, have recovered strongly after the pandemic, and the demand for labor is great today in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! It is pleasing that we have a strong starting position in the Swedish labor market as unemployment is now falling while more and more people enter employment. The good recovery in the Swedish labor market is largely a result of the effective crisis policy conducted during the pandemic by the Social Democratic government. Through reforms such as short-time work and an enhanced unemployment insurance, the Social Democrat-led government during the pandemic was able to contribute to increasing security for ordinary people and keep the wheels turning in the Swedish economy. Both wage earners and companies received support to cope with the crisis. Now, as stated, the result is visible: jobs are returning, employment is increasing, and unemployment is falling.

Madam Speaker! Although unemployment has decreased to a lower level than before the pandemic, we continue to see two challenges in the Swedish labor market today. On the one hand, long-term unemployment continues to be a major challenge, and on the other hand, the demand for skilled labor is high while a growing proportion of the unemployed lack the skills that are currently in demand in the Swedish labor market.

When it comes to long-term unemployment, the Social Democratic government gave clear mandates to Arbetsförmedlingen to work on the issue. When it comes to the issue of skills supply, one can say that the Social Democratic government implemented a historic transition package that will facilitate for companies and people to transition to the jobs of the future.

Madam Speaker! When we now read the castle agreement, we can observe that it is a 63-page document that is empty of labor market policy reforms. But above all, I want to say something else that I think is important. When I now look around the chamber, I can observe that the Moderaterna are missing. I would have wished for a debate with the Moderaterna on how they intend to continue working with the challenges that I spoke about: long-term unemployment and the supply of skills. However, there is no one from the Moderaterna here.

But in particular, Madam Speaker, I miss the Sweden Democrats here in the chamber. The Sweden Democrats now hold the chairmanship in the Committee on Employment. However, there is no one from the Sweden Democrats who can answer the questions here and now on how to combat segregation, how to combat long-term unemployment, and so on. Since there is no one here from the parties I mentioned, I would like to thank you, Madam Speaker.

(Applause)

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

Sofie Eriksson (S)

Madam Speaker! To each according to their ability, to each according to their need! For the shop assistant, the nursing assistant and the teacher, for the industrial worker, the plumber and the childcare worker, for the farmer, the train conductor and the nurse, this is an important principle here. One gets up early, works weekends, shifts and Christmas Eve, and leaves the children at preschool. One does their part. Work life gives and work life takes, but everyone is involved and contributes to that which everyone gets to share in. That is how we can build a society that holds together, and that is how we finance one of the world's best welfare systems.

But unfortunately, it is not the case that everyone contributes according to their ability today. "The price to escape Swedish tax: 300,000 kronor" – so read the headline of a review in Dagens industri this week. There, it is revealed how banks, over a little wine and shrimp, sell advanced tax schemes with foreign holding companies to wealthy Swedes. Aggressive tax planning, tax evasion – call it what you want, but it is sick. In sticky lines, soft spines wind along the shores of tax havens. It is mocking and indecent how they behave.

Madam Speaker! Tax is not a punishment. Tax is the foundation of a society where even the nursing assistant receives cancer care, where the daughter with a disability has somewhere to live, and where the husband can retrain himself when he has been laid off, a society where everyone can afford to study at a university, a society where the paper worker at home in Grängesberg who leaves home at 05.15 every day knows that there is healthcare and a safety net that will catch him if he is injured at work and that he does not need to become poor if he is injured or falls ill.

One can understand that people get angry, because I do too. Why shouldn't Joppe and Poppe on Stockholm's cream shelves pay their share in tax when everyone who works at the brewery back home in Grängesberg does? How can it even be that the shop cashier at Coop in Grängesberg should be able to pay a larger share of her income in tax than the retail group's owner? I think it seems like some people cannot behave like people. It is as if democratically made decisions and the social contract did not apply to them.

Madam Speaker! A heavy responsibility now rests on the right-wing government to carry forward the proposals that the Social Democrats have prepared. Do not let them get away with it now! It must be known that we, the Social Democratic voices in this Riksdag, will not remain silent if you betray us on this issue.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Karlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! One of the most important insights I have gained during my time as an elected Social Democrat - it is 30 years despite my relative youth - is how significant welfare is for people, how it concretely and directly affects our everyday lives, how it creates security in old age, provides life chances in youth, and increases people's freedom and conditions for a good and meaningful life.

When the Riksdag calls for a general political debate, I choose to speak about equality. Equality is about everyone's equal right to rule over their own lives and influence the society they live in. Equality thus becomes something completely different than uniformity or a compulsion to be the same. Just as little is inequality, the same as poverty. Equality presupposes a distribution of the resources that are significant for people's freedom.

That is why a universal, accessible, and need-based welfare is crucial for people's life chances. Universal welfare, in fact, frees people from the shackles of economic subordination. We do not become dependent on our own economic assets to access school, healthcare, and care, and we avoid having to give up large parts of our own lives to take care of loved ones who need such services that cannot be purchased on the market. Thus, we have developed the Swedish model, which is built on the public service principles that the resources we collectively allocate to be used for common affairs shall be used for exactly that which is intended, and that we collectively contribute according to our ability so that welfare is available when it is needed, distributed according to need. It is very simple and timeless.

Madam Speaker! From the political right, it is often heard that equality is bad because it would mold everyone into the same shape. That is perhaps not so strange. It is, in fact, their mission. But they are simply wrong.

Equality is about equity and not about identical lives. It is about providing people with conditions based on personal circumstances for a meaningful and good life. Therefore, equality is also about distribution policy.

Now we must admit that for far too many years, the gaps have grown in economic, educational, and social respects. In several respects, it is a very gloomy picture we can observe has emerged in our country over far too many years in the social development.

In this context, it can be easy to become discouraged. But it is now important that politics focuses on the tasks that will be completely central for the years ahead. It is about delivering reforms that in fact and in essence make society and life better for the great majority.

Madam Speaker! That is why I believe that the economic policy moving forward must strengthen the long-term social construction and place a clear focus on precisely equality and distribution policy.

It is, among other things, about making the labor market safer. The principle of income loss shall apply. Standard security shall be maintained. The temporary improvements of the unemployment insurance must be made permanent and the sickness insurance must be reinforced so that people can rely on it.

An active labor market policy shall be pursued, and new jobs shall be created. People shall receive education and retraining so that they can take those jobs. After a long working life, one shall be able to live on one's pension. It is reasonable that at least 70 percent of the final salary is there when one ends one's working life.

On this, the policy should focus forward. How is Sweden being equipped for the future? When people are at their most vulnerable, Madam Speaker, society must be at its strongest.

(Applause)

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

Markus Kallifatides (S)

Madam Speaker, honorable members! This is my first speech in this chamber. It feels very solemn. I intend to speak about the men that I come from.

My grandfather was named Dimitris Kallifatides. It is a Greek variant of a Turkish name that implies service at the caliph's court. He was born at the Black Sea, far east in today's Turkey. After having fought in the First World War, he came as a refugee alone with a small son to Greece. There he participated in yet another world war and a civil war. He saw his little firstborn son be summarily executed not once, but twice.

Grandfather was a teacher. There is a small forest on a mountainside near Sparta that his students planted, and it bears his name. My only clear memory of him is that he checked if I, at six years old, knew my multiplication table.

My grandfather's third son, my father, left Greece in 1964, a country plagued by civil war and fascist oppression, and sought a life here in Sweden. Five years later, he worked as a teacher at Viggbyholms gymnasium in Täby municipality before he finally became a writer. I cannot remember my father having been free from work for a whole day to this day.

Honorable members! I have been a salaried academic with 27 years in the profession. Through political grassroots work, I have met miners in the ore fields. People have told me about life as a forestry worker. They have told me about life as a nursing assistant in elderly care, about life as a service technician, station master, correctional officer, and painter. I have heard about the farmer's conditions, about the field assistant's hardships, about the teacher's, the police officer's, and the social secretary's everyday life at work, and about life as a homeless person. As a researcher, I have studied life in the palaces, in the school groups' boardrooms, in the bank palaces, and on the hunting trips.

I have seen the bright and dark sides of reality with open eyes and made my political choice. I stand in solidarity with the hard-working men I come from and with the many mothers, sisters, daughters, women, men, non-binary people and children who are all fighting for a more bearable existence here on earth.

I am a democratic socialist who knows that Sweden and the world need powerful reforms for equality, welfare, and climate transition. We need to go in a completely different direction than the one that the majority in this chamber foretells.

We know it. Aching backs, calloused hands and pressured schedules testify to a reality that screams for change. The investigations exist. The research exists. The proposals exist. The only thing that does not exist is a sensible political will from the majority in this Riksdag.

Madam Speaker, honorable members! I have made my choice. I will fight every day for the reforms that the majority of the people in this country need, deserve, and have a right to.

(Applause)

Housing policy

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

Leif Nysmed (S)

Madam Speaker! I want to highlight the importance of an active housing policy for creating more housing for ordinary people.

Initially, I just want to state that there is a big difference between politics taking its responsibility or if one blindly relies on market forces.

General political debate Labor market and economy

During the last two parliamentary terms, when Sweden has been governed by Social Democratic-led governments, over 400,000 homes have been started.

From 2015 to 2021, an average of 60,000 housing units have been started per year. That is also approximately the level that Boverket has projected the need for new housing to be at until 2030.

The problem now is that housing construction is declining. Some analysts see a standstill in the housing market ahead. The reasons for the slowdown are several. It is about increased costs for building materials, delivery problems, abolished investment support, rising inflation, rising interest rates, and so on.

This leads to uncertainty on all levels. Uncertain conditions mean that one does not dare to invest, and the home is most often the largest investment one makes in one's private life.

As early as 2017, it was seen that the construction of condominiums fell sharply due to the high prices at that time. This was countered, among other things, by the investment support for rental apartments. Up until today, around 50,000 new rental apartments, which ordinary wage earners can afford to demand, have been built or started.

General political debate Housing policy

With an active housing policy, housing construction has thus been maintained at high levels. Unfortunately, however, this very support, the investment support, was abolished by the right in the autumn for purely ideological reasons.

Nor even in the government statement yesterday was the housing policy raised, and even less in the palace agreement that has been concluded; the housing policy is not mentioned a single time. This is a pattern that is recognized in moderate budgets. The only time the housing policy is allowed to cost money is when investment support is to be phased out and abolished. It is a pity that there is no moderate here who wants to discuss this important issue - it is a bit embarrassing, I can think.

During the years of the alliance government, only about 200,000 housing units were built, approximately 25,000 per year. Even then, in 2006, the investment support at that time was abolished.

The need for an active housing policy could not be clearer. More than twice as many homes have started being built during the last two S-led mandates than during the time of the Moderate-led Alliance government.

Madam Speaker! Sweden needs to build just over 60,000 homes a year until 2030. In order for us not to land on such a low housing construction as 25,000 homes per year, as when the Moderaterna last governed, the new government must take housing policy seriously and listen to the concern that many market actors are now expressing.

A reintroduced investment support could be an important step to boost housing construction again, but there are also other proposals that could enable this, for example the proposal that Hyresgästföreningen raised today regarding favorable government construction loans.

I want to once again highlight the importance of an active housing policy. But the important thing is that housing must be able to be demanded - otherwise, not a single home will be built.

(Applause)

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker and honorable members! A frightening time awaits Sweden. The right-nationalist palace agreement that has been presented by the Riksdag's blue-brown parties is built on fear, prejudice, and contempt, from beginning to end. It is a contempt for all people in Sweden who today suffer from poverty and homelessness, towards those who every day struggle to make ends meet, towards all parents who cut back on their own food portion so that the children do not have to go hungry, towards all those who eat cold food in the hope that the electricity bill will be somewhat lower if they refrain from using the stove. It is a contempt for all those who do not fit into the palace agreement's image of how Sweden should look.

The Palace Agreement takes from those who have the least and gives to those who have the most - reverse Robin Hood, as I call it. The agreement feeds fears and prejudices and screams for increased inequalities in society. It punishes those who are most vulnerable and rewards those who are already privileged. These are the most important messages from Sweden's upcoming government.

But in both the Palace Agreement and the blue-brown Government Bill, what is missing is equally interesting: record-high housing shortages and a construction rate projected to fall, homelessness that continues to increase and evictions of families with children that are also projected to continue to increase, partly due to poverty. Galloping inflation and skyrocketing food and electricity prices, together with historically high demands for rent increases from Sweden's collective landlords, will hit hardest of all those who have very little or nothing at all. If this is not in either the Palace Agreement or the Government Bill.

In the unusually long government statement, housing policy is not mentioned even once. It is a great insult to all tenants, the homeless, and poor households. Vänsterpartiet promises to be the voice of all these people. We shall be the strongest voice in opposition to everything that the Tidö Agreement stands for.

Instead of condemning from outside based on our own perceptions, our policy should clearly show that we believe in the human being. The Left Party's policy is built on a belief, not a mistrust, in the human being – even those who are not resourceful.

Our vision is to build more rental housing that people can afford, not more prisons.

Honorable members! Sweden needs a housing policy for all homeless people, for all families with children who are evicted due to poverty, for all young people who cannot move out of their parents' homes, and for all retirees who find it increasingly difficult to stay in their homes due to ever more expensive rents—a housing policy that dares to question the landlords' right to a 10 percent rent increase in the midst of a burning crisis and that dares to invest in those who have it toughest in society, instead of one that unilaterally continues to favor the richest, who own their homes.

It is time to reintroduce the investment support, introduce a temporary cap on rent increases, stop the madness of renovation bills, and invest heavily in renovating and energy-efficiently upgrading the existing rental housing stock. That is what a housing policy should look like in a time of crisis.

If there is one thing we are sure of, it is that Sweden needs a new housing policy worthy of the name. We need a sustainable and long-term housing policy that means we take responsibility for building away the housing shortage, counteracting housing segregation and housing inequality, and reducing the housing sector's climate impact.

To achieve this, a housing policy with higher ambitions than the new government has shown so far is required. Housing, comrades, shall be a human right for everyone, not just for the rich.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! The previous Social Democratic government has pursued a housing policy where, with support, they have steered the investments in Sweden's housing instead of letting the need regarding housing type determine what has been built.

The previous government had great ambitions to tackle the shoreline protection issue, and free rent setting in new production was put on the table in the Riksdag. But unfortunately, that government was too weak to be able to find the support needed to make the changes that were needed for Sweden.

I mean that there is now a new chance for housing policy to move away from the one-sided support policy that the previous government pursued for eight years. Housing policy has the opportunity to move into reality and create conditions to both build where people want to live and build what people actually demand.

We also have the opportunity to reduce the time it takes to go from an idea to a finished house, that is, to direct a greater focus towards small house construction and owner-occupancy than before because that is the need that exists among people.

It is time that we get a housing policy and a minister who looks at the problems in the housing market. That is what we got yesterday: a housing minister who looks at the problems in the housing market and wants to address these problems.

What problems are we talking about then?

We have too low a construction rate when it comes to new housing, which results in a shortage in the vast majority of municipalities in our elongated country.

We have too few homes as a result of people living in the wrong type of housing. Many young people live at home, and many older people live in large homes. Had we built homes in the form that people want, we would have had less housing shortage.

We have 33,000 people who are homeless. I want to assert that this is shameful for a welfare country like Sweden.

We have credit restrictions that prevent people from buying their own owned home, which is socially, economically and ecologically best for the individual.

We have residential areas in the marginalized areas that none of us can be proud of. They need to be managed from a safety perspective and a standard perspective.

The number of investigations required to obtain a building permit has become increasingly large on a general level. We need to review the long processing times and more expensive processes that result from this.

Construction prices have increased at an ever-faster pace. One might think it applies to the last year, but with a perspective of ten years, construction prices have actually increased quite radically. We must increase efficiency to bring down the costs.

What do I, as a member of Parliament, believe can be done? Well, I would like the existing credit restrictions to be reviewed, so that ordinary people can actually buy their own owned home. One can investigate and introduce a housing deposit, as we have discussed. I believe that the vast majority of parties in Parliament are actually in agreement on that.

I want to introduce a planning bonus, so that it is ensured that the municipalities plan and build more housing overall. The state can help with this. One can introduce a larger deduction possibility for renting out part of a home. If one is now living in the wrong type of housing, one should be able to rent out to a greater extent, so that one can use the square meters one has in a better way.

I believe that one can do much more than that, but if one starts with some of these things, we will get a housing policy that is actually worth the name and creates housing according to the need that exists.

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! Exactly zero times did the government statement highlight the need to build away the housing shortage. The new housing minister from Kristdemokraterna has not had time to say very much, except that the thresholds to the housing market shall be lowered and that more people shall be able to realize their housing dreams. I wonder who it is that the housing minister is talking about and how it is to be done. What is the policy behind these words?

Changed amortization requirements and start-up loans for young people are often what is highlighted from the right. It will not help all poor pensioners and families with children who are on the verge of eviction from their rental apartments, or young people who want to move out from home whose parents can barely buy food and cannot afford to help them take favorable loans.

How does KD intend, with its housing minister post, to lower the thresholds for all those people who today need a home and do not have one? In the government statement, it is not even mentioned.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! Malcolm Momodou Jallow and I agree on one thing: We need a new housing policy. The problem is that Malcolm Momodou Jallow, over eight years, has supported a housing policy that he is not satisfied with. He now has an opportunity to help get a housing policy worthy of the name.

It is about us creating housing based on the need that exists. That means we need both rental apartments and owner-occupied homes so that people can be able to make the housing career that is needed. In the current situation, I believe we are all quite worried about the rent increase that can be the consequence of the increased inflation. I would say that much of these problems are those that the previous government has seen to us having. Too little efficient energy means that the cost for it has increased. At the same time, food prices have increased because of this.

Many of the problems that Malcolm Momodou Jallow raises are due to the previous government, which he himself has supported.

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! I agree with Larry Söder, but I want to remind him that it is you who are in power now. Perhaps you should let go of the opposition role. You are no longer in opposition. You are in power.

Vänsterpartiet was never in the previous government. We have been critical of very many things.

My question is: Now that you are in a government position, what do you intend to do to ensure that the housing shortage disappears? I have not received any answer to that. The Minister has not mentioned it, and it was not raised in the government statement. What do you intend to do?

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! I think it is important to tell the voters what labels exist for parties. Vänsterpartiet has supported a government for eight years. Now, suddenly, one thinks that one is in opposition and can expect all answers to be available on the first day. I do not think that is reasonable.

I believe that a housing minister who took office on Tuesday cannot provide all the answers on Wednesday. But I am fully convinced that the housing minister will speak about how he will prioritize, and I will stand behind that.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! I must first say that it is with very great joy and with even greater pride that I stand here today. I did not quite see this coming, so to speak. This is something that has grown over the recent years, to end up here at a relatively adult age.

In the Green Party, we work for the fact that having a home, having a roof over one's head, is something everyone should have a right to. We are not alone in this in any way: By 2030, all people should be able to have access to a housing that is safe, affordable in price, and with basic social services. The UN's member countries adopted this as goal 11.1 among the global goals in Agenda 2030 in 2015.

We also have a societal segregation to work with, where housing is a crucial piece of the puzzle. A housing policy without that dimension is not complete.

Furthermore, our homes account for a significant portion of our collective climate impact, and it is necessary to consider how extensive housing construction with an urgent integration can be carried out with the greatest possible climate benefit.

Madam Speaker! As far as my four minutes allow, I will say something about our view on housing for the homeless and students, something about segregation, and then something about climate adaptation and energy efficiency, and perhaps something about wood at the end.

Not having or being unable to get a home is a very poor quality of life with significant risks for upcoming social and health problems. Antarctic penguins can stand close together to keep warm. We cannot do that, and no one should be forced to sleep outdoors at night.

Housing first is an approach based on the idea that housing is a decisive factor in being able to manage other changes in lifestyle. Through Housing first, homeless people are offered housing with support to manage the living situation and to be able to change what they otherwise need to manage in order to be able to have a better life. The model has been tested in Sweden, among others by Stadsmissionen and some municipalities, and in other countries it has shown very good results. We are happy to continue that development.

Being able to offer students housing in the university towns is part of a whole. To say that we shall build more and cheaper housing is perhaps to make it a bit easy for oneself. It is admittedly an important part of the answer, but at the same time there may be reasons to review whether other changes also need to be made, so that the measures truly reach those they are intended for.

Segregation is harmful. It is not just about suburbs and neglected areas, but also about a functioning labor market, where the lack of suitable housing becomes an obstacle for people to seek new jobs or an obstacle for companies to recruit, as we have heard mentioned on several occasions here today. It can mean that one cannot leave a bad relationship because there is nowhere to go. It is absolutely necessary to have a housing supply that reflects society's intentions.

We in Miljöpartiet want to break housing segregation. We want to build more affordable rental apartments in villa areas and more condominiums and small houses in areas where most people live in rental apartments today. In order to achieve this, we must have requirements for social sustainability in the municipalities' comprehensive plans. Then we can get a more mixed development.

We want to build more in wood. Wooden houses are more climate-smart than concrete houses. Wood binds carbon dioxide, while the production of concrete creates emissions. When the raw materials are right nearby, we also contribute to more jobs outside the large cities.

Unfortunately, the support for energy efficiency was removed in the budget that was voted through last autumn. In places with rapid growth, for example in northern Sweden, that type of support is of great importance for the production of apartments with lower costs, which can be affordable to rent for those who want to move there where the new jobs are. We have heard those types of reports today, for example from Skellefteå.

(Applause)

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

AMALIA RUD PEDERSEN (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is a divided country, where the dividing line runs between those who own their home and those who find it increasingly difficult to pay the rent - between those who have inherited a place in Villa Sweden and those who have inherited their parents' poverty in the million programs. It runs between those who have grown up with expensive habits, academic confidence, and a self-image that everything is possible, and those who are crowded into overcrowded apartments, understaffed classrooms, and dilapidated youth centers.

How and where one lives determines children's opportunities to complete primary school with grades that allow them to enter upper secondary school and create a future for themselves. The housing shortage forces women to stay with their husbands who are perpetrators - they do not have the means and therefore also no possibility to move to a safe place. Increased housing costs cause students at universities to drop out, because it has become too expensive to study.

Madam Speaker! One could imagine that the newly appointed government's primary focus should be to solve this – to break the housing segregation that fuels both differences in living conditions and the feeling of us and them. But instead, the new government's policy will drive the differences in Sweden.

The right-conservative parties have been clear. They build their politics on issues where they agree. And what they agree on is highlighting people's differences. They agree that those who work and those who are forced to be unemployed should be treated more differently. They agree that those who are born in Sweden and those who have come here should be treated more differently. They agree that children from different parts of the city should go to different good schools, should live in different safe neighborhoods, and should receive different conditions in working life.

Madam Speaker! This is a debate on housing policy. Despite the fact that the conservative parties have presented a document over 60 pages long about their common priorities, there is no housing policy to discuss. Ulf Kristersson also did not mention anything about housing policy in his government statement. There were no proposals on how young people should be given the opportunity to move out from home, no proposals on how to build more cheaply and more mixed, and no proposals on how we break the housing segregation that we see in our country today.

Madam Speaker! A lack of political proposals is also a political choice. And through this very lack, the conservatives clearly show that they do not care about breaking the segregation. It cannot be interpreted in any other way.

As a social democrat, I do not believe that structural problems can be solved by blaming individual people. Therefore, I also do not believe that populist measures such as visitation zones in specific areas would make more young people feel more secure and feel like a part of society, or for that matter, that it would create new housing to live in.

Lowering taxes for those who earn the most will also not contribute to more housing being built.

General political debate Housing policy

Housing segregation is not a law of nature. It is a condition that can be changed with political power and will. That the conservative bloc actually does not want to break housing segregation has never been clearer than now, when they have presented a common policy.

(Applause)

(cont. prot. 12)

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