General political debate (cont. from prot. 11)

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! In the Swedish Riksdag, there is a broad consensus on much in foreign policy. It is good for Sweden that there is a broad majority on the Nato issue, that we agree that the EU is our most important foreign policy arena, and that we view equally the importance of providing support in all ways to Ukraine so that they can win the war against Russia.

What worries me, Madam Speaker, is something else. It is that Sweden now seems to be withdrawing on the international arena. The signal from the new government is that Sweden shall focus on the immediate area and the EU and ensure Swedish interests - as if the previous government had not done that?

It is clear that Magdalena Andersson's government had Swedish interests in mind in all foreign and security policy. The question is rather what one designates as Swedish interests. Do the Swedish interests end outside the EU's borders? We shall, of course, show solidarity with the people in Ukraine. But does it mean that the Swedish solidarity ends when we have done so? Is the measure full?

Is it not also a Swedish interest that war and conflict cease in Yemen, Iran, Myanmar and Ethiopia or in other places where millions are forced to flee, famine spreads and democracy, international law and human rights are pushed back?

Of course, it is a Swedish interest to work globally and broadly. Not least, the EU itself has come to the realization that the EU must be a more active actor and more present on the global stage, take more initiatives and build stronger relations in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. But the Swedish government is sending the signal that Sweden is withdrawing, concentrating on other things than global challenges and becoming a more provincial actor. I believe that is bad for Sweden and for Swedish interests.

Another concern, of course, is that the one percent goal for aid is being scrapped. You are cutting by several billion and pretending with a sleight of hand that it is possible to achieve more and better results with less money. You are also making a pivot in direction: from having a focus on poverty reduction, human rights, and sustainable development, aid instead becomes a side task for the Minister for Trade.

Aid shall now also be a tool to stop migration, stimulate return migration, and be used as a means of pressure to get countries to accept those deported from Sweden. This patchwork and this sleight of hand, we believe, is bad for Sweden.

Finally, I am concerned that Sweden is now scrapping the feminist foreign policy. When countries like Canada, France and Norway follow Sweden's example, the new Swedish government is scrapping the feminist foreign policy. I wonder then in what way the government thinks feminism in the world has gone too far.

Feminist foreign policy is based on three Rs: representation, resources and rights. Is it too much representation of women in the world? Is it too extensive rights for girls and women in the world? Is it too large resources that go towards strengthening the conditions of girls and women in the world?

This Riksdag, the voters, and the viewers can rely on the fact that we Social Democrats will continue to fight for Swedish interests, not least through the aid policy and by pushing for a continued feminist foreign policy.

(Applause)

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! We are undeniably living in worrying times right now. The security situation in our part of the world is, as is known, the worst since the Second World War.

Every day we are reminded of Russia's ruthless war of aggression against Ukraine. During the nearly eight months that have passed since the Putin regime's full-scale invasion began, we have been forced to read about or even hear stories from friends and acquaintances in Ukraine. We hear about the indescribable cruelty that the Russian perpetrators are guilty of.

I have said it many times before, but it is worth repeating again and again: Ukraine and our Ukrainian sisters and brothers deserve our full support, ranging from food and clothes to medicines or weapons and defense materiel.

Madam Speaker! We must also never accept the occupation, which clearly violates international law. We must remember that the invasion actually began over eight years ago. Every centimeter of Ukraine that is now occupied must be liberated, from Crimea in the south to Donetsk in the north.

Against this background, I truly look forward to working closely with the new government. I see now that there is great potential to act quickly and united on current issues.

Madam Speaker! Something that particularly pleased me during the long-awaited government statement was the clear support that our new Prime Minister directed towards Taiwan, which, to put it mildly, is to be considered a global model in almost every area of society. I am convinced that it also pleased the Taipei Mission in Sweden, or, as I would call it, the Taiwanese Representative Office.

In Sweden, we should do what we can to take the lead and work to, together with like-minded [countries], strengthen our ties to Taiwan through close trade connections, a clear recognition of their sovereignty, and the promotion of other collaborations. They should, like any other country, be able to participate in major international organizations, not least within the UN. Naturally, we must also strengthen the Swedish representation on the ground in Taiwan.

Madam Speaker! The words zan, zendegi, azadi - "woman, life, freedom" in Farsi - have come to echo in the streets from north to south in and outside Iran. We see a long-awaited peaceful revolution in Iran. We see how people sacrifice everything because they are tired of the state-sanctioned oppression and thirsty for freedom.

The primary symbol of oppression in Iran is the hijab requirement, which was the spark that started this revolution after young Mahsa Amini was beaten to death by the so-called morality police because she had not put on her mandatory hijab correctly—how one can even have a morality police in a country whose rule completely lacks morality.

Madam Speaker! One must be straightforward toward this type of regime. Unfortunately, that has not been the case under the Social Democratic government. We were reminded of this by the well-known Iranian civil society heroine Masih Alinejad, who has bravely fought against the veil obligation and the state-sanctioned oppression in Iran. She has used her voice directly against the Swedish Social Democrats. She argues that they have acted directly counterproductively in the fight against oppression and even legitimized it. I understand her.

Now the Social Democrats have finally been forced to leave Rosenbad. Therefore, once and for all, there must be a final reckoning with the Iranian villain regime. The revolution in Iran gives us hope. Let this be the end for Ayatollah Khamenei.

(Applause)

In this speech, Rashid Farivar (SD) agreed.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! That Member Wiechel takes up and gives strong support to Taiwan, I do not think surprises anyone who has worked with foreign policy before. Fundamentally, I also agree with Wiechel that we need to give strong support to Taiwan and Taiwan's people in the threat from China.

But what do the members think will happen if Sweden withdraws from international organizations and removes core support from the UN and UN agencies? Yes, there is an actor out there who is prepared to put their wallet on the table and take the place that Sweden is now backing away from. That actor is called China and Xi Jinping.

The UN will be populated by Chinese top diplomats if the Western world does not step up and maintain aid at high levels, maintain strong nuclear support for the multilateral organizations and show that the UN is an organization for peace across the whole world. If we back down, China and Xi Jinping will take our place.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Håkan Svenneling, for this pressing question! I am particularly pleased that Svenneling raises exactly China and the concern that exists as they take more and more.

I mean that there is great potential to redirect aid and various initiatives so that it becomes effective. I therefore think it is positive that the government, as has now been signaled, shall merge the trade area with the aid to in that way be able to streamline the work. In combination with a significantly more effective security thinking, I believe that in this way one can counter the type of threats that Svenneling expresses can exist.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! Sweden has for a long time had an incredibly large influence in the UN. We have had Secretaries-General and important positions for a long time. This has been linked to the fact that we have also provided clear financial and political support.

Now we have a government that instead smears international organizations and says that these are ineffective, when we actually see that they save lives and give people hope for the future. This will lead to China instead taking power over many multilateral organizations that are important for us today. I am deeply concerned about that development.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am not in the least worried that this government – at least if one is attentive, which I expect one to be – will not act against the potential threats that arise and take this problem seriously.

As the member Svenneling is well aware of, the undersigned has for a long time been very deeply involved in just aid issues. There, it is required that one also involves security thinking in a much clearer way. I believe that is what will be done.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! I have a very concrete question for Markus Wiechel: In what way has feminism gone too far in the world?

We cannot hold any Sweden Democrat ministers to account, but it is still the Sweden Democrats who hold the reins and pull in the direction that the tripartite government is to run. I assume, therefore, that the Sweden Democrats are cheering at the news that the feminist foreign policy is now scrapped.

I therefore repeat my question from the speech: In what way is it a problem that Sweden has had a feminist foreign policy, and in what area has feminism gone too far in the world?

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! I firmly believe that the government shows decisiveness when it abolishes placard politics that mean nothing. This is a label that even the Social Democratic government itself hardly knew what it meant.

What we have seen is quite the opposite, that people have ignored important and fundamental values. One only has to look at Masih Alinejad from Iran, who stood eye to eye with the former Foreign Minister Ann Linde here in the Swedish Riksdag and who argued that this legitimized the oppression that existed in Iran - just as one concrete example of very many.

That is the problem. One has only used the label feminist foreign policy. In reality, it has not meant very much at all.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! There are numerous examples of how feminist foreign policy has contributed to stopping female genital mutilation of girls in local communities. An international network of female mediators has been formed. We have changed legislation in a number of countries to strengthen the rights of women and girls.

But I ask again: Where has feminism gone too far, according to the Sweden Democrats and Markus Wiechel?

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! Again: Labels are one thing, but what one actually does in politics is quite another.

I do not see why Olle Thorell would need to believe - at least I do not - that the incoming government would in any way reduce the work of countering female genital mutilation. As Olle Thorell very well knows, this is an issue that the Sverigedemokraterna have pushed very hard in foreign policy and in politics in general. We can never accept that type of oppression.

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! Much is happening in our world today. Much is good and positive. We rarely speak about that. I do not intend to do so either. I intend to bring up the war in our neighboring country, the war in Ukraine. It did not come as a bolt from the blue. In 2014, Crimea was annexed. In 2008, the same country, Russia, entered Georgia. What have the consequences been? What has followed from this? In Georgia, two regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, are annexed. And in Ukraine, a full-scale, illegal war is ongoing.

This shows how important it is that the rest of the world continues with its unity and that we support Ukraine, so that the territories in Ukraine can return to Ukraine and not belong to Russia. But it is also important to support other countries, such as Georgia and also Moldova.

Madam Speaker! I want to bring up a few things in my speech. We are talking about Russia. But there is another large and strong authoritarian regime. I am thinking of China, which is acting. Taiwan has been mentioned in this debate. But I want to bring up Tibet.

Previously, there was a lot of talk about Tibet. Today, it is relatively quiet. That is very unfortunate. What is happening in Tibet today has been ongoing since the 1950s. Children are taken from their parents and placed in so-called boarding schools where language use and traditions belonging to Tibet are washed away. Families are afraid. Because those who stand up against the Chinese regime know that the family will receive a visit from the Chinese regime. And the unemployment is high.

The Dalai Lama is an active leader. He has seen to it that the political and the religious leadership are shared. That is good. There is a political exile government in India.

It is important that the free democratic world - we who live with democracy, respect for human rights, a market economy and respect for the principles of the rule of law - follows and supports the countries where there are not the same rights and opportunities. I see it as important for us to do that.

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg (M) concurred.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! I have great respect for Margareta Cederfelt's work as chair of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and her work for Tibet over many years. I remember vividly a meeting with a Chinese representative where Margareta Cederfelt spoke about having been in Tibet's largest city, Lhasa. In a very elegant way, she questioned the information that came from the Chinese side.

According to the government statement that Ulf Kristersson submitted earlier this week, it is "primarily a Swedish and European foreign policy" that is to be pursued. I wonder what Cederfelt thinks about the risk that we will now see increased influence from Russia and China in Central Asia and many other countries where OSCE exists and where Swedish aid and, above all, UN aid has existed for a long time. What are the risks if Sweden now backs away and does not provide the same support to the UN as we have historically? Is there not a great risk that China and Russia will take over?

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Håkan Svenneling for the question.

I would like to add one thing that Ulf Kristersson mentioned in the government statement. It concerns authoritarian states and the threat from China. It is also included in the government statement. I want to emphasize that.

I also want to mention that several great powers, such as China and Russia, are extremely active north of Sweden, where Svalbard is located, in the Arctic region. This shows, when it comes to authoritarian regimes, how important it is that we also look at our immediate vicinity.

Let me also mention Belarus, another country in our vicinity. It is not many miles, about 45 miles, between Minsk and Sweden. It is not far. There is Russia, and there is China, not because they are peaceful countries but for completely different reasons.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! A classic way in foreign policy to not answer a question is to take a trip somewhere else on our globe. I would like Margareta Cederfelt to return to Central Asia and to the risk that exists now as we scale back core support and aid to UN organizations and which is currently given to people in Central Asia living under incredibly difficult circumstances. They have historically lived under oppression from both Russia and the Soviet Union but now also see the Chinese interest increasing.

What is their chance if we withdraw? What is their chance of escaping living under an authoritarian rule, which they actually do in many countries today?

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! In Central Asia, several poor countries are indeed situated through agreements in continued cooperation with Russia. How can this be addressed? I say: trade and a developed economy. I see the EU as an immensely important actor here. I see the transatlantic link as important.

A problem in several of the Central Asian countries has been labor immigration.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! I will ask the same question to Margareta Cederfelt that I asked Markus Wiechel. In what way is it a problem that Sweden has had a feminist foreign policy? In what way has feminism gone too far in the world? In what way has it counteracted Swedish interests? The new government is now signaling very clearly that one should safeguard Swedish interests. One is withdrawing. One safeguards Swedish interests more. Is it not a Swedish interest to pursue a feminist foreign policy that strengthens the rights of girls and women globally?

Much of this government formation has taken time. And reforms that have been promised seem to be delayed for most of the mandate period. But it went very fast to scrap the feminist foreign policy. If you Google it now, you can no longer find it on the government's website. It was important to get out that signal to the rest of the world as quickly as can be snapped with the fingers.

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! I would like to thank Olle Thorell for the question.

If Olle Thorell had listened carefully to the government's statement, he would have heard that, among other things, education for girls was mentioned. It is an extremely important issue.

Another question that was mentioned was women's rights and, among other things, the assault of women and rape. Those are also extremely important issues. In several countries in the world, it is not a crime today to assault or rape a woman. In several countries around the world, women have no independent economy. They do not even have inheritance rights after their husbands if these have passed away. What kind of security is that?

These are issues that rank high on Ulf Kristersson's government's agenda.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! I do not doubt Margareta Cederfelt's or Ulf Kristersson's commitment to increased equality in Sweden and in the world. It was nicely said about men's violence against women and so on.

I just wonder how it counteracts Swedish interests to pursue a feminist foreign policy? In what way has it been a problem that Sweden has pursued a feminist foreign policy to strengthen the rights of women and girls?

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! I want first to comment on one thing that I did not have time to say in the first speech. Olle Thorell said that the formation of the government has taken a long time. Yes, but Olle Thorell perhaps should recall what happened in 2018. For Olle Thorell's own government took 120 days, three and a half months. And it did not last. I only say that as an example.

Women's rights are extremely important. I know that Olle Thorell believes this. What I see as an advantage with Ulf Kristersson's government is that we will also act.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! The first issue that the new Foreign Minister Tobias Billström should address is to immediately summon Iran's ambassador to Sweden to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. The Iranian regime has for decades violated human rights and has been one of the world's most authoritarian regimes. In recent months, the violence has been even more brutal, especially against young women. During the latest wave of protests, which was sparked by the murder of Jina Amini, hundreds, perhaps thousands, have been killed. Recently, one of the high-ranking military chiefs admitted that the average age among those who have been arrested is 15 years.

On Monday, the EU decided on extended targeted sanctions against the regime's elite, and that is good. But it is not enough, because so few people and entities were listed. The Iranian people deserve more from us. Their struggle is literally a struggle for life and death. They must hear our voices every day in support of their struggle and uprising. We shall not let the regime get away with it. Impunity shall not prevail. In July this year, a Swedish court sentenced an Iranian man to life imprisonment for murder and crimes against international law. Like those who in the 80s tortured people in Iranian prisons, today's murderers shall one day be brought before the chambers of justice and sentenced for their crimes. One day, all murderers shall be sentenced.

Madam Speaker! In recent times, we have come much closer to a nuclear war than in a very long time. It is deeply alarming and a warning bell for how easily despots take the human life environment and existence for granted. The indifference towards climate change is a similar issue.

We must forever condemn Russia's unforgivable attack on Ukraine. Putin has shown how he has transformed the Kremlin into a kleptocracy that sucks out and kills its own people for the sake of his own imperialist power ambitions. But the Ukrainian people stood in the way. The last eight months have shown that it refuses to be subdued. With support from the rest of the world, it has heroically stood up to defend its country against a ruthless and brutal aggressor that does not hesitate to commit war crimes daily, which can now be counted in the thousands.

The extensive sanctions against Russia, together with our military support, have been important for the Ukrainian military's successes, but now the long-term nature of our support is being decided. That requires more than military resources. Winter is coming soon. In a country in an ongoing war, the fragile welfare state risks collapsing. How are we to save everyone in the event of a nuclear attack? Ukraine's economy has already shrunk by a third. If Ukraine is to have long-term resilience, our promises of long-term support, both humanitarian and military as well as for reconstruction, must be realized. Some bourgeois politicians are now trying to sow division by attacking political opponents instead of emphasizing the unity we have in Sweden. It is one thing to conduct a political debate on how we provide support and be unwavering in our support for the Ukrainian people. The opposite is to be an authoritarian state where free speech is just not free.

Madam Speaker! The new Foreign Minister Billström has started very weakly, with a Eurocentric foreign policy without feminist analysis, with cuts in aid, with the removal of the one percent goal, and with a contempt for international organizations. To also believe that a country has democracy just because there is a parliament you can call is both weak and remarkable. Let me tell you the truth: Turkey is not a democracy under Erdogan's regime. All of this will make Sweden a very small country in international contexts, I believe.

(Applause)

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! Håkan Svenneling highlighted an extremely important issue regarding Iran and what is taking place there. I would like to raise one further issue regarding Iran. I am thinking of the Kurds, who are subjected to persecution. The Kurds have been a persecuted group for a long period throughout history, but it is only now that a general and more extensive discussion is taking place regarding the Kurds' situation in Iran. I have read reports about 1,540 injured Kurds in the western parts of Iran. I have read about 30, 40, 50, 60, or even more murdered Kurds. It was the murder of the 22-year-old Kurdish woman Jina Mahsa Amini that opened the world's eyes to what is happening in Iran. This is something that we must discuss a lot in Sweden's Riksdag.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! I share Margareta Cederfelt's analysis and her urge to discuss this further. But above all, we must move from words to action. The new Moderate-led government can ensure that we do. The Iranian people need more than just beautiful words here in this chamber. One actually needs to see concretely that Sweden's new government summons Iran's ambassador. It is not even difficult, and the demands in the protests extend even further than that.

One can also introduce more extensive sanctions, just as against Russian oligarchs. The children of the leaders and the rulers are very often around and partying in Europe and the USA and in other places and living luxury lives. We could tighten up and ensure that they receive travel bans and sanctions targeted at them instead. So far, the EU and Sweden have been far too weak in their response.

Vänsterpartiet has long supported the Kurdish struggle for human rights and freedom. Already in 1979, we submitted our first motion on this here in the Swedish Riksdag.

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! I want to remind Håkan Svenneling that Ulf Kristersson has been Prime Minister for two days. It sounds like from Svenneling as if Ulf Kristersson would have managed to accomplish enormous activities. But turn your gaze backward instead, towards the previous majority and what was done during a period of eight years! I find that to be remarkable.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! Margareta Cederfelt is right that I have also turned my gaze toward the previous government. Foreign Minister Linde was not fond of Håkan Svenneling. I wrote a debate article as recently as last week about how she should have called the Iranian ambassador. But now she is not the Foreign Minister. Now, instead, it is an M-marked minister who sits in Rosenbad and in the Duke's Palace. Then it is time for a Moderate-led government to immediately call the ambassador. If one manages to say that Turkey is a democracy, one should be able to say that Iran is a dictatorship.

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! We have a restless world. We have China with over 1 billion inhabitants and great power dreams of bringing even more people under the oppressive surveillance society that the communist regime has built up. We have a loathsome regime in Iran that murdered a woman because she wanted to be able to have her hair out and enjoy the most basic human rights. To these women we say: Jin, jiyan, azadî! All of Europe must act against the leaders and their children, who live luxurious lives here in Europe. We have Russia, which for the war of aggression against Ukraine, deliberately bombs civilians and murders dissidents. That is the world we have.

These countries - China, Iran and above all Russia - are also the countries that, according to Must, FRA and Säpo, most often attack Sweden. As the Royal Swedish Defence Academy says: Sweden is at war, and the war is digital.

This is the threat we are talking about. It is not the future, but it is active attacks that are happening now.

We do not have Russian troops that have landed on Gotland, we do not, but we have Russian troops that attack our welfare, our business sector and our critical infrastructure. There are actually more attacks against Sweden than against the USA from the Russian side as the world looks at the current situation. The reason is Sweden's geopolitical position, our defense sector and of course that we are completely crucial for Europe's energy sector as it looks right now.

What does the new government say about this threat? It says that cybersecurity must be improved. That is all that the Tidö government has managed to include in its agreement and government statement regarding this completely crucial issue for our security policy. It is substandard. It is our surrounding world we are talking about, and we get no proper answer.

Naturvårdsverket was recently hacked, and data on all Swedish weapons owners has likely been compromised. In the name of honesty, it feels a bit like that the government has clear plans on how they are going to shut down the Ministry of the Environment but no clear plan for how they are going to shut out the Russians.

Madam Speaker! Let me quote what some have said.

IVA says that Sweden is worse than many countries when it comes to protecting us against cyber threats. And we are attacked every day. We do not take cyber threats seriously enough.

Håkan Buskhe, former Saab CEO, says that poor cybersecurity is a threat to our competitiveness.

Truesec says that cyberattacks cost Swedish companies around 30 billion kronor every year.

The energy sector says that it is insane how large the gap is between our threat and our capability.

SKR says that the society's leadership does not see the needs that exist.

The total defense bill states that cyberattacks can have consequences for our country as great as an armed attack.

When the Tidö group has sat together and looked at Sweden's challenges, they have come up with about 40 proposals to prevent people on the run from entering Sweden. But there is not more than half a sentence about preventing the Russians from entering our welfare, our energy sector, and our business life. It is not good enough!

As a country, we lack governance. We lack competence. We lack cooperation between the public sector and the business community. As a country, we have no ideas on how we should handle ongoing, serious breaches at companies, deliberate breaches from other states that want to exploit our geopolitical situation. As a country, we do not know what to do when a municipality, region, or authority is hacked.

Madam Speaker! The weakest link is, in practice, what determines our defense capability, and if the government does not understand the threat from authoritarian regimes against Sweden and does not understand what a security-politically vulnerable situation Sweden is in right now, yes, then the government is the weakest link in Sweden's security. A half sentence is not enough anywhere.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! During the years 1915-1922, horrific sexual assaults and violence against women and children, especially Christian groups, occur in Turkey.

During the years 1936-1945, horrific atrocities and sexual violence occur against Roma, Jews, as well as women and children in the German-occupied areas.

During the years 1937-1945, abuses and sexual violence occur against Korean and Chinese women during the Japanese occupation.

In the years 1945, abuses and sexual violence occur against German women and children fleeing from Eastern Europe who end up under the Soviet occupation.

During the years 1955-1975, abuses and sexual violence against women and children occur in Vietnam.

During the years 1991-1999, abuses and sexual violence occur against primarily Muslim groups in the former Yugoslavia.

In 1994, abuses and sexual violence against women and children occur in Rwanda.

In 1998, abuses and sexual violence against women and children occur in Congo.

During the years 2014-2019, abuses and sexual violence against Christians and Yazidis were committed by IS in the Middle East.

In 2014, abuses and sexual violence against women and children occur in Ukraine.

In 2020, abuses and sexual violence against women and children occur in Tigray.

In 2022, abuses and sexual violence against women and children occur in Iran.

I believe, unfortunately, that this list can be made much longer.

Regardless of ideology, faith or continent, horrific atrocities have been and are being committed, where violence is used against women and children as part of warfare. I believe that we all, especially in this chamber with our tradition, agree that this is an outrage that we must do everything we can to stop. I am personally very pleased that sexual violence in war is defined in the Rome Statute as a war crime, a crime against humanity and, in some cases, genocide.

This is good, but we must do more. We must do more together within the EU, the UN and other international bodies and work to ensure that women and children are not subjected to violence in war.

Madam Speaker! The abuses in Kosovo must be recognized in a clearer way than today within the UN, and we must prepare ourselves to help with rebuilding Ukraine when Russia is defeated. In that case, it is important that we also assist by supporting those who have suffered abuses.

Madam Speaker! I am very grateful that we in our Riksdag can most often be very united when we raise these issues in the important work that the previous government has done and which I am convinced that the new government will do to counter sexual violence against women and children in war.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! I believe none of us are unmoved by the list that Magnus Jacobsson is reading out. It is a hideous part of human history. Sexual violence against women and children must come to an end, but we see it repeating itself in conflict after conflict around the world.

That is why it hurts our hearts when we learn that Sweden's aid is being reduced by approximately 15 percent, if we are to believe the media reports. It is because we know that aid globally goes towards work against sexual violence against women. Sweden's former Foreign Minister Wallström established, before she became Foreign Minister, a special initiative within the UN against sexualized violence.

Therefore, one wonders both why the Christian Democrats have agreed to lower the aid, and whether you are prepared to increase the appropriations for the work with SRHR globally in the Swedish aid.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! The aid issue is probably one of the issues that many of us Christian Democrats feel has been the absolutely most painful when we have sat and negotiated. It is no secret that we as a party have fought and stood up for the one percent goal. And we probably went further than very many actually thought, if one looks at how the debate has been before the election and, above all, if one looks at the balance of power between the parties.

Am I satisfied? No, I am absolutely not satisfied. I believe that we should keep the one percent goal, and I also hope that we together in this chamber in different ways will be able to push to specifically raise these issues.

I and Håkan Svenneling have different ideological starting points. We had the privilege of making a joint journey in the UN. It pleased me, because we saw things together that I believe we need to safeguard. This coming weekend, I will participate in a conference in Kosovo and speak about precisely these issues.

I hope that we can work together to stop violence against women and children in war.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! There is a certain joy in the fact that there are still Christian Democrats who have hope for a one percent goal. Unfortunately, it makes no difference when one is then going to vote for a budget that does not contain a one percent goal. It also doesn't matter that one promised this to one's voters before the election when one actually fails to deliver it.

Those who will pay the price for this are the women around the world who will not receive support from the UN to the same extent. I am deeply concerned about how this cut will hit globally against the world's poor, especially against the women who are subjected to sexual violence.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I believe that everyone here in the chamber, and in fact also most people outside the chamber, know that politics is about being clear about what one wishes to do. So one seeks the voters' support to be allowed to do it, and then one does everything one can to try to live up to it. That is what we Kristdemokrater will continue to do.

Regarding the reduction that is now taking place, we also know that there are different reports pointing out that the aid that is already received is not being used effectively. I am very pleased that we have agreed that more should now be invested through the non-profit organizations. I believe that is a good solution.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! Magnus Jacobsson speaks well about the aid, but talk is cheap. Another thing is to live up to the sharp promises one has made. It is easy to say that one is for things, that one will drive things, and that one stands up for things.

Magnus Jacobsson is one of 18 members from KD and L who have signed the following pledge: I promise to only vote for a state budget that entails that 1 percent of GDP is allocated to aid during the mandate period. This is not a general ambition but a sharp pledge: I will only vote yes to a budget that contains this, says member Magnus Jacobsson.

How will it be now then? Should we hope that he fulfills his promise, or will it be broken?

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is with great respect that I listen to a Social Democratic Member of Parliament describing how one pushes forward in a government position. I suspect that the Member has done so for eight years, and that is pleasing.

It is completely correct that I signed this. I believe we all received a large number of surveys from very many different organizations. It is not very easy for us as members to tell the survey writers that a certain question is strangely phrased. Of the different surveys that arrived, one, among others, dealt with aid. In that case, I chose the answer option that was absolutely best. Since I believe that we should have a one percent goal, I have answered that I am in favor of it.

Your question is how I will act now that we are in a government position. I want to be open and honest. I will vote for the budget that comes to the chamber, and then I will continue to fight for the one percent goal. It is my firm conviction that Sweden can afford to have a one percent goal and that we shall fight together so that women do not suffer in war.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! Then it is only to note that in any case Magnus Jacobsson - he of course cannot speak for the others; they may stand by their promises - will not do as he said: I promise to only vote for a state budget that contains the one percent goal for aid. Then we know that.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! That is entirely correct. Magnus Jacobsson will always, in all situations, strive to try to do what he has promised. I think as a politician that it is an important principle to go out before an election and state what one wants and then, in the chamber, try to implement it as well as one can. Now, Magnus Jacobsson has not sat in these negotiations and has not been able to influence this as much as others. But Jacobsson maintains, just as I believe many Social Democratic members previously maintained, the Christian Democratic policy on the one-percent goal, and I hope that together we will be able to fight for women and children in war.

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

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! As a newly appointed member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, an important issue for me is how we manage Sweden's voice in the world. Sweden should continue to pursue a feminist foreign policy that focuses on women's rights, political participation, economic empowerment, influence in peace work, freedom from violence, as well as the right to reproductive health. Respect for the rights and opportunities of women and girls must increase in the world.

I am concerned about the democratic regression we see in the world, where fundamental human rights are increasingly challenged. Journalists are imprisoned, media and universities are controlled, and the principles of the rule of law are questioned. Miljöpartiet has a vision of a Sweden that continues to be an independent voice for peace and human rights in the world, something that the new government seems to be letting go of entirely as they argue that foreign policy should be driven and shaped by the EU.

Madam Speaker! The Government says it wants to fundamentally reform the aid policy, which in practice means that instead of contributing to sustainable development in the world, it hollows out the aid and accepts that millions of people remain stuck in poverty and oppression. They want to abolish the core support, which has functioned as the infrastructure for international aid and has helped, among other things, the UN to be quick-footed in escalating acute conflicts, such as in Ukraine.

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet warned that Sweden's independence and flexibility in foreign affairs would be negatively affected by a NATO membership. As recently as 2019, all parliamentary parties agreed that arms exports to Turkey are not compatible with Swedish foreign policy. In May this year, President Erdogan threatened a new invasion of Syria, and the country has also been accused of attacks on civilians in Iraq. Today, Sweden is a nation that is prepared to export weapons to a country that persecutes its own population, persecutes Kurds, and acts aggressively in its region. It is morally reprehensible.

Madam Speaker! A world with nuclear weapons will never be a safe world. But a membership in Nato means that Sweden signs on to using nuclear weapons as a threat and as part of its defense strategy. Miljöpartiet has pushed for Sweden to sign the UN convention on nuclear weapons prohibition. It is a requirement we stand by. We also believe that Sweden should legislate that nuclear weapons shall not be allowed in our country, on our territory, neither in peacetime nor in wartime.

Madam Speaker! The new government will implement measures that will lead to the largest increase in emissions in Swedish climate policy history. The leadership role that Sweden previously held in international climate issues will go up in smoke as quickly as the government abolishes the Ministry of the Environment. We can only be leaders if we live up to our own climate promises and reach net-zero emissions by 2035 at the latest, but we must also help other countries manage the climate transition. Miljöpartiet wants to work for a global ban on subsidies for fossil fuels.

We also know that the dependence on fossil fuels is also a security policy risk. Therefore, the government's proposal regarding, among other things, a lowered reduction obligation is very worrying. We will continue to be dependent on authoritarian states and will continue to pump money into Putin's war chest. Therefore, the political opposition to renewable energy, in Sweden and in Europe, is also a threat to our security.

Madam Speaker! Peaceful and inclusive societies are one of the global goals in Agenda 2030. For a lasting peace, peace agreements are required where human rights are respected, which give people hope for the future. Sweden has had an important role in international peace work, but I fear that the Sweden that I have been proud of in international contexts will become a mere memory during this mandate period.

We in Miljöpartiet promise that we will watch like hawks when the government begins its dismantling work. It is our democratic duty as elected representatives in this assembly.

(Applause)

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

Gustaf Göthberg (M)

Madam Speaker! A single night can change an entire world. That is what happened when Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24 this year. Putin's invasion could mean the end of the European security order as we know it. Russia is waging an illegal and unjust war of aggression against a peaceful neighboring country, in the middle of our part of the world. The Russian president's true face has been revealed in the atrocities and crimes his soldiers have committed in Ukraine.

But the truth is also that the invasion has shown another and at times a better face in the form of the broad European unity after Putin's war of aggression. It has shown how powerful the world's support can be when it is needed, that we do not turn the other cheek and above all that we are deeply moved by what is happening. Russia must not win, and with persistence in the European response, Russia also cannot win.

Madam Speaker! Sweden will now assume a European leadership, among other things by sending advanced weapons systems to Ukraine. This is what Ukraine wants and what Ukraine needs.

The economic support, which appears to have gotten stuck in some corridor in Brussels, must be paid out immediately. Ukraine needs to be given support by Sweden in order to be able to become a full member of both the European Union and Nato, provided that the country meets the established criteria that exist.

Madam Speaker! Moving forward, the work for a united European response linked to the war in Ukraine must be prominent in Swedish foreign policy. The Austrian Nobel Prize winner in literature Elfriede Jelinek once said: One cannot stop time, and one cannot hold onto time, for it is no handle. But what Ukraine has shown now is how best to use time, on the battlefield, in the negotiating room, and in other places, to work persistently for the country's freedom and independence.

Madam Speaker! In her government statement, the Prime Minister stated that Swedish foreign policy shall once again be directed towards protecting and safeguarding Swedish interests and values. This is best achieved with our allies and neighbors in the Nordic countries and the Baltics.

This does not mean that Sweden in any way closes itself off from the rest of the world and that our approach to foreign policy is reduced to a geopolitical concentration on our immediate vicinity, on the contrary. Sweden's international and global engagement is still needed. It benefits our interests and values.

In China, the authoritarian and totalitarian regime continues with ethnic cleansing against minorities and aggressions in the Taiwan Strait. The EU therefore needs to develop an updated China strategy that gathers broad support for a common response to these Chinese ambitions.

Even in India, we see immense challenges with patriarchal structures, both in practice and in theory, as part of the Indian legal system. There, Sweden also needs to help through the European Union.

Swedish foreign policy and European policy cannot stop at merely accepting the current situation and hoping for the best. Europe needs more cooperation, not less cooperation. Geography made us neighbors. Peace has made us friends. Trade has made us partners, and necessity has made us allies. This is what we need to continue to hold onto.

It is therefore absolutely necessary that the EU during the coming period produces reforms that enable continued investments in industry, innovations and IT, which transition for the sake of the climate, in some cases keep their fingers off for the sake of sovereignty and support Ukraine, for the sake of peace.

This, Madam Speaker, was the first time I had the opportunity to stand in this speaker's chair, but not the last. I look forward to good cooperation in this Riksdag with the members of parliament. We have a responsibility for Sweden. Let us take it, for Sweden's best.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to welcome Gustaf Göthberg to the chamber and congratulate him on a very well-formulated speech. Nice!

In the speech, there was an awareness of a feminist analysis when the member mentioned patriarchal structures as an obstacle to girls' and women's rights and opportunities in life in India. But I wonder how far the feminist analysis actually goes.

I ask Gustaf Göthberg the same thing that I have asked others in this debate: In what way has the feminist foreign policy that the previous government pursued been a problem for Sweden? In what way is feminism a force that counteracts Swedish interests? It is this signal that is being sent out from the newly appointed government, that the feminist foreign policy is now scrapped.

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

Gustaf Göthberg (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Olle Thorell, for the question! It has been asked by Olle Thorell several times during this debate, and it has also been answered by not least Margareta Cederfelt. But I shall make an attempt here as well.

It is not Swedish feminism that has gone too far in any way. It is the feminist foreign policy that over the last eight years has been fragmented and at times tended to raise more questions than it provides answers.

As I pointed out in my speech, we also believe that it is extremely important to focus on women's and girls' rights and on equality. The Foreign Minister has also gone out and said this in the media both yesterday and today. The Prime Minister said this at the EU Committee's consultation yesterday ahead of the European Council meeting.

In principle and in concrete action, no major change will likely occur. It is the etiquette we are removing, and we focus on the substance of the matter.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! So the veil of silence is not a problem? Feminism has therefore not gone too far in Sweden and in the world, and it is important to continue developing equality in the world and in Sweden. Thank you for that announcement!

But what then is the problem with feminism? It would be interesting to hear that. The label "feminist foreign policy" – what exactly in the concept of feminism is it that is problematic for the SD-led, Moderate-led government?

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

Gustaf Göthberg (M)

Madam Speaker! I note that Olle Thorell maintains his focus on precisely the etiquette but himself does not contribute any analysis regarding the content of the feminist foreign policy. It simply hasn't been there.

Let us look at the challenges that exist. We can look at India, for example. The labor force participation for women in India has, over ten years, gone from 42 to 26 percent. This has repercussions for the Swedish economy and for investments in the country, as well as for security policy. Let us focus on that content instead of asking what label one should put on a failed Social Democratic foreign policy.

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! In the government statement from last Tuesday, it can be read: "Sweden will never accept that aggressive states violate the freedom and self-determination of democratic countries. Power does not precede right."

I believe we can all stand behind those very words, but unfortunately, there are many places on our earth where people in power take the right over other people's lives, even when it concerns their own population. Let me give some examples.

The list of systematic violations of human rights in Iran can be long: women are forced to wear veils, dissidents are imprisoned without trial, minorities are persecuted, and apostasy from Islam is punished by hanging. The Islamist oppressive regime shuts down the internet so that the world cannot see when the security forces shoot at protesters. But we see you who are protesting, and we stand on your side.

In Cuba, there is a large number of prisoners of conscience who are punished for something as modest as demanding that people democratically choose their own leaders. I particularly want to point out Movimiento Cristiano Liberación, MCL, which continues, in the spirit of Oswaldo Payas, to point out that there is another possible future for Cuba's people than that under a communist yoke.

In our immediate vicinity, I naturally think particularly of Russia's unjust and illegal war of aggression against Ukraine. It is an attack on the international legal order but also daily on Ukrainian civilians who desired nothing more than to shape their own lives in peace and freedom. Ukraine is therefore fighting today for all of Europe's freedom and needs our support and Europe's unity.

The inhabitants of Belarus do not support the war, yet the country still participates in it. Russian military constantly carries out missile attacks against civilian targets in Ukraine from Belarusian territory. But if Belarus's rightful leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya were allowed to govern, as the people wanted and voted for, Belarus would not take part in the war. That is why it is so important to both support the democratic movement in Belarus and strengthen Ukraine's defense.

The list of China's threatening and unacceptable actions can be made very long. It concerns the aggression in the Taiwan Strait right now. And the situation in Tibet, the treatment of Uyghurs and of students in Hong Kong, as well as the imprisonment of Gui Minhai, are just some of these. Also here, we in Sweden and the EU must be clear, even if it affects our trade.

In addition to this, I also want to highlight homophobia, antisemitism and persecution of Christians as further examples of violations that affect many people repeatedly in many countries.

Madam Speaker! All people deserve to live in freedom, security and democracy. The least we can do is to give our attention and our recognition to those who stand up against authoritarian leaders who believe that power takes precedence over justice.

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg (M) concurred.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! Welcome, Magnus Berntsson, to the foreign policy debates in the Riksdag! I will ask the same question that I have asked Magnus Jacobsson. One can read the answers on Diakonia's survey. It concerns the aid pledge, where it says: I promise to only vote for a state budget that contains a one percent goal for aid. There, one finds not only Gudrun Brunegård, Camilla Brodin and Acko Ankarberg. Magnus Berntsson is also there - see there!

This is a firm promise - it does not leave much room for interpretation. One promises to only vote for a state budget that contains the one percent goal for aid. Then I wonder if all those people who hope that the one percent goal can be maintained can trust whether Magnus Berntsson will keep that promise or not.

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the question, Olle Thorell! I was not entirely surprised by it. As Magnus Jacobsson answered, many of us Christian Democrats feel that this is a very difficult position to take. We have had to weigh it back and forth.

We still see that we have pushed through quite a lot in the aid area which weighs heavily in the overall assessment that will be made when the state budget is presented - it is at another occasion that we will debate and decide on it. A great deal is about redirecting the aid to the parts where it can have the most significance, above all civil society. It can then have a great significance in rural areas instead of risking ending up in the total budget of corrupt states.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! Then we know that. Magnus Jacobsson and Magnus Berntsson will not fulfill their promise. For all of us who hope for a one percent goal for aid, the hope now lies with the Liberals Gulan Avci, Anna Starbrink, Lina Nordquist, Jakob Olofsgård, Louise Eklund and Cecilia Rönn, as well as the Christian Democrats Roland Utbult, Ingemar Kihlström, KjellArne Ottosson, Hans Eklind and Lili André. We must hope for them, we who want a one percent goal for aid.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! We are not alone in this government basis. Olle Thorell knows very well that this is an agreement and that it is a negotiation that has taken place. Sometimes one does not get everything as one wishes. I believe that the previous Minister for Defence was very clear when he said that he could not at all imagine bringing Sweden into Nato. I believe that very many of us are grateful that he actually changed his mind on that issue. In this case, I am not as happy.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! I also would like to welcome Magnus Berntsson to foreign policy and the Swedish Parliament and to the important assignment as foreign policy spokesperson for the Christian Democrats.

I thought there was a lot of interesting in Berntsson's speech. He spoke about how we must be prepared to take consequences, even if it affects us ourselves, when it comes to trade, if it concerns dictatorships.

I do not demand that one, as a new member, has a grasp of all the scandals and events that we have worked on previously. But there have been problems regarding EKN, the Export Credit Board. They granted loans to Swedish companies so that they could then export to Belarus. During the election campaign, there was an incident regarding Turkey, where the same thing has occurred. One wonders if it is connected to the shameful agreement that the previous government signed with Turkey.

This is why we on the left side are concerned when the Minister for Development Cooperation is removed and this is placed under the Minister for Trade, and talk about how trade and development cooperation are linked. Does it mean that we are to abandon our democratic ambitions and instead have trade as the goal?

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Absolutely not, Håkan Svenneling. I noted that in our enumeration of states where human rights are extensively violated, we mentioned the same. We therefore see a good deal in the same way.

The agreement written with Turkey by the previous government is something that the current government also stands behind. The government will therefore, both before and after a NATO accession, deliberately fulfill the tripartite agreement between Sweden, Turkey, and Finland. I want to be clear about that, but we must also be very clear that there are many other agreements that Sweden has entered into and that one needs to live up to.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! That is what concerns one, that one is prepared to compromise on human rights when one wants to favor Swedish interests in foreign policy, as is written in the government statement.

General political debate International affairs and foreign policy

I hope that Magnus Berntsson can join in and call the Export Credit Board to the committee to discuss the shameful Turkey deal, which is not included in the agreement but is clearly connected to it. Turkey needs loans for its infrastructure project, and it is we Swedish taxpayers who are now also paying for it.

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the follow-up question. I am convinced that we will have a very good debate climate in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and I hope that we will be able to reach many common positions during the coming years. Furthermore, I hope that we will work together for a better world for our inhabitants and our fellow human beings around the world.

Defense policy

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! It is, as quite many today have pointed out regarding several different aspects, anxious times. Our country has in recent years experienced crises that we probably have not been used to handling for a very long time. Perhaps the most serious is the deteriorated security situation in Europe. Therefore, I want in my first speech in this chamber to focus on our total defense and more specifically on the part that my home county of Västernorrland can contribute.

Madam Speaker! Before the defense decision 2020, the Defense Committee submitted its final report in May 2019. It was stated there that the security policy situation in Europe had deteriorated and that it was a consequence of Russian actions over a longer period.

It was against this background, among other things, that the decision was made in this chamber to strengthen the Armed Forces both organizationally and financially. In the long run, a result of this was that Västernorrlands regemente with Jämtlands fältjägarkår, I 21, was re-established and commenced. It is hardly possible to describe the joy that prevailed in our county when this was finalized. It was naturally a joy that we had received an important state establishment in our county, a real state core task. But it was also a pride over the fact that the assessment was that Västernorrland had a role to play in the defense of our country.

Madam Speaker! Now that we have a broad consensus, as I perceive it, in the Swedish Riksdag that we shall invest in the total defense, it is important that we do not forget the civil duty. The activation of the civil duty and the forms for this have been discussed for a fairly long time, both in the Defence Preparedness Board and in the political parties. After 2008, no more long-term basic training is carried out within the framework of civil duty, as it is practically abolished. But a modern civil duty could constitute an important part of our total defense.

Therefore, I naturally hope that the newly appointed government works hard to implement such one. I believe, in fact, that it is crucial for our defense capability that we can maintain common society-critical functions in times of crisis.

General political debate Defense policy

In a situation where civil duty is activated and the state clarifies the mission, my home county of Västernorrland stands ready to contribute. Our entire county, with its seven municipalities and our region, has jointly stated that it is prepared to offer extensive training and exercise activities in Kramfors, Sollefteå, and Härnösand. There is broad competence, good inter-agency cooperation, and the strength to steer a modern civil duty training into port.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion, I want to say that we Social Democrats have long maintained that it is important to have state activity throughout the entire country. Fundamentally, it is about the state's legitimacy.

I cannot help but view with some concern the fact that there is not a single cabinet minister in the new government who comes from northern Sweden. I am concerned about what consequences this may have. But I take note of what the Prime Minister expressed in his government statement: that he wants us to continue the good cooperation regarding defense.

I hope that this means continued investments in the total defense also in northern Sweden and that the government is now working expeditiously to get a modern civil service in place.

(Applause)

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

Alexandra Anstrell (M)

Madam Speaker, honorable members and listeners! Sweden's total defense must be strengthened. It was with pleasure that I heard member Peter Hedberg speak about it in his speech.

It was with even greater joy that we heard that we now received a new government that finally has a total defense department in place and also a responsible minister for those issues who will work on it fully.

If the military defense is to function fully, the civil defense must keep pace with it. It has not really done that. It has been investigated, investigated, and investigated, but never really gotten down to business regarding the civil defense.

Now the member has only raised the question of civil duty. But will S stand behind the additional investments that are needed for civil defense so that they can be coordinated?

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! First, I would like to say that we were pleased by the fact that a minister was appointed in the government with responsibility for civil defense. Many of us saw that as something positive.

When it comes to whether we are prepared to stand behind other investments in the total defense, it was a rather diffuse question. I do not know exactly which investments the member means.

I experience that we are very much in agreement that we should have large investments both in the expansion itself and also in financing it. The question is really: What does the newly appointed government intend to do regarding this?

We have to return to exactly how we view financing and construction. But fundamentally, well, all parties are actually in agreement on the need for the total defense to be built up.

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

Alexandra Anstrell (M)

Madam Speaker and Member Peter Hedberg! We need to ensure that our emergency preparedness authorities are granted regulatory power. We need to clarify MSB's role, and we need to develop the cooperation with the business sector.

It is a question that I have pushed for throughout the entire previous term, that we should have a consultation in the Total Defence Business Council. It has taken place, but without the business community.

Is it a question that Social Democrats can imagine supporting that we should have that business council?

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I can state that there are many important aspects of total defense. I see no contradiction between Social Democrats and Moderates in such a matter. It could be discussed so that we find an agreement.

Then I can also say, if we return to the civil service that I spoke about, that MSB has pointed out that it has been investigated for a long time, as the member said. But it has not been entirely easy to define exactly which activities constitute the most important societal functions. I hope that it is something that the government now takes action on.

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker, honored members and citizens! A lesson from history is often that we learn nothing from history. Just over 80 years ago, on September 1, 1939, Poland was attacked by Germany. The Blitzkrieg was a fact.

Sweden managed that time, but we were caught off guard. It was a sudden awakening after 20 years of disarmament process. Our readiness is good, said Per Albin Hansson. It was not because it was particularly good, but it concealed that it was not. The Second World War and the subsequent Cold War resulted in a buildup of our total defense. But it took 40 years before we were fully equipped.

Madam Speaker! It takes more than twice as long to build something up compared to tearing it down and decommissioning it. The ancient Romans said: Si vis pacem, para bellum. That means: He who wants peace, prepares for war.

On February 24 this year, Russia attacked Ukraine. The question today in Sweden is, just as in 1939: Can we recover and develop our capabilities quickly enough to defend the country? Is our defense capability sufficiently resilient?

For even though the signs were there already in 2004, we did not get that ten-year warning that was a mantra among politicians in the early 2000s.

Even as late as last autumn, few truly believed that a Russian attack on Ukraine was possible. The voices that warned of it were largely met with deaf ears. People simply did not want to see or hear it. They could not believe that it would happen in our time. But despite all the doubts, it happened.

Madam Speaker! Now we are to build up a new modern defense in a short time. But there are many obstacles in the way. Curiously, we have created most of them ourselves.

In order to be able to withstand the type of attacks that Ukraine has been subjected to, we must urgently improve our resilience. For that, it is required that we significantly speed up our procurement and decision-making processes.

Madam Speaker! I would like to conclude this rather short contribution by pointing out some priority areas that we should consider when we discuss the country's security in the coming year's budget.

Point number 1: It is a matter of ensuring that there is clarity in the organization where the authority tasked with coordination also has a clear mandate to decide and to allocate necessary funds. The responsibility must be clearly apparent. Shared responsibility is an unclear responsibility.

Point number 2: It concerns ensuring that the Swedish Armed Forces' and the Civil Defence's internal ordering and budget processes are significantly simplified and that necessary permit processes within other public administration are simplified in a corresponding manner. There are good examples from the new establishment of A 9 in Kristinehamn that show how little creative innovation can shorten these processes. Let us develop that even further.

Point number 3: It is a matter of adapting the legislation so that it meets the threats of the future.

Point number 4: It is extremely important that we recreate the defense force and the emergency police so that we can monitor and protect our critical infrastructure.

These proposals, Madam Speaker, I believe are of particular importance for us to be able to rebuild a strong total defense.

In this speech, Rashid Farivar and Markus Wiechel (both SD) concurred.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! Even within defense policy, security policy is a part. International politics touches upon this. Now, the SD-led but Moderate-led government has declared that it is rolling back the feminist foreign policy. In that, a vital instrument is UN resolution 1325 on women's role in armed conflicts and for international peace and security. It has been a high-priority area for Swedish governments ever since 2000, when the resolution was introduced.

In what way will the scrapped feminist foreign policy affect Sweden's work in the future with resolution 1325?

I will return with another question in the next turn.

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! Regarding the Armed Forces and women's participation, it has been clear that work has been carried out for a long time so that they shall participate on equal terms. I have myself served both in Sweden and abroad together with both men and women, and it has not been any problem at all. It has been clear, and there is a clear policy within not least the Armed Forces and also other parts of the total defense. I see no contradiction to that which the member raises here.

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

Olle Thorell (S)

Madam Speaker! I ask again: What is the problem with feminist foreign policy? Why is it so important for the SD-led, Moderate-led government to roll back this policy that focuses on the rights of girls and women, not least in armed conflicts and in post-conflict countries?

There is a Swedish centre of excellence in Kungsängen. Nordic Centre for Gender in Military Operations?, has been a Swedish flagship. Should they worry about their future now?

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! There is nothing today that speaks for them to be phased out. I see this more as painting a special figure on the wall - to put it nicely.

In other respects, I want to speak with a straight face from my representatives. We do not see the problems that the member sees. We see the effect as primary, not the label.

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

Hanna Gunnarsson (V)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin my speech by congratulating our new ministers Pål Jonson and Carl-Oskar Bohlin. That we get a continuity in defense policy feels good, and I hope for continued good cooperation. It is also good of the government that civil defense is moved to the Ministry of Defence and that there is now a minister who will work with civil defense.

I would like to present here my small wish list to the new ministers in the area of defense policy, that is to say, what I wish for them to work on during the coming mandate period.

First and foremost: Build the entire total defense. We must invest in healthcare. It is the core of a good total defense. If the welfare system goes to its knees already in peacetime and in normal mode, we will never manage a crisis or, in the worst case, a war.

Point number 2: Listen to the authorities. Do not engage in micro-management. Do not run your own races. Do not engage in regional politics. Listen to the authorities, the trade unions, and the Duty Council and adopt the ideas and thoughts that exist.

Point number 3: Invest in the staff. The staff is, of course, the most important resource in our entire total defense. We must solve the problems and many grievances that exist in personnel policy. I hope that during the mandate period we can address a good deal of the issues that, above all, the trade unions highlight.

Point number 4: Take equality a few steps further. There is quite a lot we need to do. We are good, but we must become better. Solve the problems with clothing and equipment. Ensure that decisive action is taken against all forms of harassment and discrimination.

Point number 5: See climate change and environmental problems as an important part of security policy. We see all around the world today how climate change leads to major disasters. We see how countries become uninhabitable, and we see how people need to flee from famine and disasters. This must be seen as a part of security policy for real. It is also about drinking water, and it concerns, for example, the exercises in and around Vättern. It is an important drinking water source. It is about building wind power, so that the Armed Forces do not step in and stop those projects. It is about solving the problems with PFAS in our drinking water. It is something for which both the Armed Forces and the rescue services have a great responsibility.

My final point that I want to send to the new ministers is the following: It is incredibly important to ensure that voluntary organizations throughout the entire defense area are given the best possible conditions to operate, recruit new volunteers, and perform their parts in a strong and secure society.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! It has been a while since things have been restless in our global environment. What is happening means that Sweden needs to equip and strengthen its defense throughout the country.

Madam Speaker! Swedish defense capability shall be developed so that the entire country can be defended through increased availability and improved operational capability. The war units shall increase their combat readiness individually and together with others, nationally and internationally.

The ability to simultaneously be able to mobilize the entire war organization in the event of high alert is of fundamental importance. It is also necessary that decided organizational changes in the war and basic organization and decided large investments are implemented to, among other things, ensure basic functions such as command and logistics, maintain and develop existing materiel, procure ammunition and consumables, as well as make new investments. To continue to invest in all parts of the total defense, the army, the air force, the navy, the home guard and, of course, also the cyber part is of the utmost importance.

Madam Speaker! As has been said, it is important with continued investments in the Swedish defense, both money and equipment. But if we are to do this, one thing is equally important in the defense, namely to invest in the personnel and the conscripts. We must constantly work to ensure that the conditions are so good that many choose to stay within the Armed Forces. This applies to investments in personnel supply in general within the total defense and, of course, within the Armed Forces. The personnel are part of the foundation in equipping and strengthening our defense throughout the country.

Madam Speaker! The Centre Party safeguards the strength of the Swedish voluntary movement, not least the voluntary defense organizations. They have, and will always have, an important task in the Swedish total defense, including as a manning function. But their role is broader than that. Their task to engage citizens in the defense of Sweden is fundamental for the will to defend, the defense capability, and the resilience out in the local communities. It is important to maintain a dialogue both between the Armed Forces and the voluntary defense organizations and between other total defense authorities and the voluntary defense organizations, based on the insight of a mutuality and a dependence on each other in the different roles.

The voluntary defense organizations need to be further developed based on their own added values, prerequisites, and the needs of other authorities. Volunteering is a way for people all over the country to contribute their skills and experiences to the defense of Sweden, even if they are not a soldier, sailor, or employed for periodic service within the Armed Forces.

Madam Speaker! For the Center Party, it is important with a total defense and a civil defense that is visible and active throughout the country. It is in that way we build Sweden. It is when the public sector, the business community, and civil society work together on the issues that the total defense and civil defense are strengthened throughout the country.

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for a very good speech, and I can say that the Sweden Democrats agree with much of what the member has raised here. I have only two questions.

With regard to what I said earlier about the added funds, how are we going to get an effect from these added funds? It is a bit like a bottleneck. We are pushing in money, but the Armed Forces cannot utilize them due to administrative twists, regulations and other problems - long lead times and difficult processes regarding decisions, procurements and so on. What can we do to make it more efficient?

Question two: Does the Centre Party support the re-establishment of operational units and readiness police?

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

Mikael Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the questions! I think they are two good and very important questions that the Member raises.

When it comes to getting as much effect as possible, I believe it is important to look at parts in order to perhaps shorten some decision-making paths and, as the member pointed out, review how to get as much effect as possible.

Then it is a matter of us trusting the Armed Forces and that the Armed Forces, to a large extent – obviously with political oversight – are given as much freedom as possible to ensure that investments are made in these areas and so to speak get value for money. I believe that is very important. We can inject as much money as we want, but if we don't get any effect from them and they are just piled up, then there is no point in us injecting so much money.

Absolutely, one needs to review certain routines - and trust the underlying data we receive from the Armed Forces.

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

Lars Wistedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is good that we have the same ambition there.

Then the question remains regarding the operational defense and the readiness police, which I would like to elaborate on a little. I believe we agree on the importance of the voluntary defense organizations.

Today, the funds are not being fully utilized. We have approximately 180 million that the defense is allowed to utilize, but only 120 million are being utilized. How do you see we can encourage the Armed Forces to utilize this fully to achieve an effect?

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

Mikael Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! I believe it is very important when we are now going to rearm. It feels as though we are in complete agreement there, all eight parties. We need to address all issues in order to truly rearm on all levels. This requires a dialogue with the Armed Forces, which possess the knowledge and the expertise.

It is completely correct that we also need to include the civil parts. When it comes to the riot police, it is something that I believe we will have to return to and look at.

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

Emma Berginger (MP)

Madam Speaker! The climate issue is humanity's great question of destiny. In the shadow of the war in Ukraine, more have awakened to the realization that energy policy is also security policy and that we must have a holistic view when we talk about security and defense.

The decisions we make now are crucial for the lives of today and future generations. Breaking the dependence on fossil fuels is not only necessary to avoid a climate catastrophe. It is also very important from a defense policy perspective. By breaking our dependence on oil and gas from Putin's Russia and other authoritarian states and regimes, we also cut off the flow of money that finances wars and conflicts.

Madam Speaker! Climate change is happening here and now, and the extreme weather events are not just the new normal but can be just the beginning of the future that awaits.

This year's prolonged heatwaves and the floods in Germany and Belgium are examples of events that have very serious consequences and that we need to prepare society to cope with. Even if we reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the climate will change. The question is only how much and which tipping points we will manage to pass along the way.

Heatwaves and floods have a major impact on the electricity supply, for example through emergency shutdowns of overheated nuclear power plants, as well as on the food supply and also threaten the robustness of the infrastructure. The effects of climate change require far-reaching adaptation measures in order for human security to be maintained. Therefore, our crisis preparedness needs to be robust, well-thought-out, and adapted to our current and future needs.

That is why Miljöpartiet wants us to invest a larger share of the defense funds in civil defense and increase the appropriations for crisis preparedness. When we strengthen civil defense, we also strengthen crisis preparedness and vice versa. We also welcome that we now have a Minister for Civil Defence.

Madam Speaker! There is nothing as crucial for the possibility of survival as clean water. But the threats to the water supply are many: droughts and floods combined with, in many places, aging water and sewage networks and contamination from chemicals and environmental toxins. Furthermore, a very small proportion of Sweden's municipalities have a plan for emergency water.

Miljöpartiet wants to protect the water sources and ensure that functioning reserve water sources exist.

Madam Speaker! The crisis in Ukraine has affected the global food supply and, in combination with prolonged drought, has deepened and worsened the food crisis which has hit the Horn of Africa in particular. Even in Sweden, we feel the rising prices of food.

Food supply must be able to withstand external pressures in connection with climate change, natural disasters, or societal crises. To increase supply capacity even during serious disruptions, it is crucial that Swedish agriculture can function without imports of fuels and other inputs, for example, artificial fertilizer. The best food preparedness policy is therefore to introduce political steering measures and implement initiatives to accelerate a transition to a fossil-free and more ecological agriculture.

The protection of ecosystems needs to be significantly strengthened. Both seas, forests, and agricultural land need increased protection so that ecosystem services do not collapse and the capacity for supply is not eroded.

The serious security policy situation in Europe, with Russia's unjust war of aggression in Ukraine, takes up a large amount of space in the defense policy debate for understandable reasons. I nevertheless want to emphasize that we need to continue to pay attention to the security threat that climate change poses and adapt society to be able to withstand the pressures, as well as strengthen civil defense and crisis preparedness.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Vladimir Putin's Russia has set Europe on fire. People in Ukraine have seen their homes but also entire hometowns destroyed in the terror bombings that have become part of the Russian war of aggression. We have seen how elderly people have been carried out of buildings that have been turned into ruins, and we see how women and children flee from Russian missiles and Iranian kamikaze drones. Many thousands have lost their lives in the war, and even more have been forced to see their family members torn from them.

Just over ten years ago, I visited Ukraine for the first time and was met by hopeful young people with a longing for freedom and democracy. One of them was Alisa.

Alisa comes from Izium in eastern Ukraine, specifically the Kharkiv region. Six months ago, her city was, according to her own words, a city that no longer existed. The city was completely destroyed, and it came to be occupied.

Recently, a mass grave was found near the city. Human Rights Watch has been able to confirm that the Russian forces in the city have systematically used torture against those imprisoned.

Madam Speaker! Human dignity is trampled every day as Russia's war continues. The atrocities and war crimes that the Russian forces commit show that the contempt for other people's dignity is total. Vladimir Putin has chosen the path of evil. We need to understand that his war is a war of annihilation aimed at destroying the Ukrainian nation and at breaking off parts of Europe bit by bit.

Despite this, Alisa has remained optimistic about Ukraine's future after the victory, as she says, and last month Izium was liberated as part of Ukraine's heroic and victorious counter-offensive.

At the front, the soldiers continue to fight and toil. It is a struggle between freedom and oppression and between security and terror. Ukraine needs our full support in that struggle.

Nothing is more important right now than to continue supporting Ukraine. We shall do so in solidarity with Ukraine and the Ukrainian people but also because the Russian threat is a threat to Sweden and the rest of Europe. Ukraine's cause is our cause.

That is why we also need to continue to strengthen our own defense. All branches of the defense forces need to be reinforced. We need to reach 2 percent of GDP as soon as possible and, naturally, become members of Nato.

I belong to those who have consistently asserted that Sweden should always have a strong defense, but now the buildup is particularly urgent. Let us therefore take collective responsibility for this, let us work for more qualified weapons for Ukraine, let us work for increased support for Ukraine's distressed, and let this be the parliamentary term where every member of the Riksdag, regardless of committee, asks themselves what he or she can do to support Ukraine and to strengthen Swedish resilience.

Freedom, democracy and justice shall prevail, Ukraine shall prevail and respect for human dignity shall be restored.

In this speech, Rashid Farivar (SD) and Gustaf Göthberg (M) concurred.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank Member Carlsson for a good speech.

I agree with the clear picture presented of the war of aggression that is currently taking place in Ukraine, and I am glad that we agree on the importance of acting on that front. What I would also wish is that the government that Christian Carlsson represents actually starts acting also on the front where Russia attacks Sweden, because Sweden is under attack from Russia. They are attacking our energy sector, our welfare, our financial sector, and very much more.

I note that the party which today holds the two ministerial posts within the defense area is not here today, so it is difficult to ask them questions. But I wonder if Christian Carlsson, as a representative of the government, can tell us a bit about how the government intends to act on the cyber front. There is nothing in either the Tidö Agreement or the government statement that at all indicates that the government understands the seriousness of the ongoing threat or how it intends to act.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! There is no doubt whatsoever that the new government's ambition is to strengthen both the military and the civil defense. We will take measures to strengthen Sweden's defense capability. That also includes everything from energy security to resilience when it comes to cyberattacks and the like as the member mentioned.

From the Kristdemokraterna side, we have for a long time been pushing for the Swedish preparedness to be strengthened in these areas. We have been pushing for a specific agency responsible for cybersecurity as well as for the Board for Psychological Defence to be reintroduced, so we have our eyes on these issues and look forward to good cooperation to arm Sweden strongly.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! The member says that there are no doubts. I must say that there are some doubts because nothing at all appears in either the government statement or the Tidö Agreement regarding how it should be done.

One can also observe that the time to reach the two percent goal has been pushed forward by one year in a week compared to what the government said before the election. There are, therefore, still uncertainties, I would say. Can the member mention anything concrete that the government will do?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I must ask the member to have a little patience. The Tidö Agreement and the government's statement of intent are just a first step and not at all some kind of exhaustive list of everything this government intends to do in any area. Foreign and security policy is not even touched upon in the Tidö Agreement, so it is not strange that one does not find so much about this there.

We will return.

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! The horrific war of aggression that Russia is waging against Ukraine must come to an end. Human lives seem to lack any value in the eyes of the Russian regime. Massive violence is directed against people - against children in a playground in Kyiv, against homes, and against the everyday lives and safety of mothers and fathers.

Images of the atrocious murder are spreading on social media. The horrors of war are shown in real time. No one will be able to say that one did not see and did not know. We see, we know, and we must act.

Today, it is the hard-hit people of Ukraine who are fighting against the aggressive Russian regime for their own freedom, but the war against Ukraine is in the long run also a threat to freedom in all of Europe - also to our freedom. No task can be more urgent than helping Ukraine to defend its country, its freedom and its sovereignty. At the same time, we must secure our own country's freedom.

Ukraine must be given opportunities to defend itself, because we see that Ukraine needs more weapons. We know that it is necessary for them to be able to meet the attackers, and we must act so that more advanced weapons systems are sent to Ukraine.

Eight months of war must come to an end. Freedom must be defended with weapons. Sweden must do more. Our support shall be political and humanitarian but also military.

Madam Speaker! The Liberals have for a long time argued that Sweden must become a member of Nato for the sake of security. Now that the security situation in Sweden's immediate surroundings has become so serious, a broad majority in the Riksdag has joined the Liberals' line for a swift entry into Nato. The high and rapid ambitions that now unite many of us demonstrate the strength of cooperating across party lines when the seriousness of the situation demands collective strength and collective political will.

Perhaps this also shows a bit of the importance of individual parties working persistently and long-term for what they believe in. It is inspiring for a new Member of Parliament like me to already be able to discern the goal in one of politics' many and long marathons.

We in the Liberals believe that, here at the beginning of the new mandate period, it is the support for Ukraine and Sweden's entry into Nato that are the most prioritized issues. We will work hard for these issues during this mandate period - hopefully in broad political agreement.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! I congratulate the new member.

The Liberals are also part of the new government. We can state, as Anna Starbrink's party colleague said, that one has to wait a little before getting answers and potentially an explanation as to why the Tidö Agreement and the government proposals are not exhaustive.

I can understand that what has been presented so far is not exhaustive on, for example, the cyber area, where we here in Sweden are attacked every day. The problem is not that it is not exhaustive. The problem is that it does not exist. There is nothing there beyond a half-sentence about it being to be done a bit better.

At the same time, you have 40 proposals on keeping refugees out of a safe harbor, but you have no proposal on keeping the Russian out of our welfare, our economy, and our ports. It is telling regarding the government's priorities, so I want to ask Member Starbrink: When can we expect something that explains how the government intends to handle the defense of our country against the attacks that are ongoing every day?

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the questions! It would naturally be presumptuous of me to speak for the government, as I, like the Member, am not part of it, but I am one of the Liberals' representatives here in the Riksdag.

As many know, I had some comments of a serious nature regarding the agreement that exists. But it does not include foreign policy and defense and security policy. That is the explanation for why the agreement does not specify these parts.

Naturally, the government, with its newly appointed ministers, will jointly return with sharp and long-term proposals regarding defense and security policy in the budget. I nevertheless want to emphasize that it is an urgent task that must be carried out by the government and by us here in the Riksdag.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! I noted that the question of how Sweden should defend itself was not prioritized by the parties that signed the Tidö Agreement. One can wonder why it was not a prioritized issue for those who signed it. It was also not prioritized in the Government Statement. Then one can wonder why it was not also prioritized there.

It has so far been a political priority. But the government parties, including SD, do not prioritize this issue. It is a choice.

Therefore, I ask once again: Will there be anything concrete in the near future in this area, given that Sweden is under attack every day?

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! The agreement signed by four parties does not contain politics in all areas. This should not be interpreted as a lack of prioritization, but rather as an insight that a different cooperation and a different dialogue across block and party boundaries is needed here. There, I hope that we can continue to have a constructive dialogue. But I can assure the members that the government will, of course, return with concrete proposals in the security policy area, which is indeed highly prioritized.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! I also want to say congratulations to Anna Starbrink and warmly welcome her here. It will be interesting to follow her journey here in the Swedish Riksdag.

The Speaker raised the Swedish NATO membership and the application that the previous government submitted. She also indirectly highlighted that the new government intends to fulfill the shameful agreement that the previous government signed in connection with the Madrid summit last summer.

We are now entering into a military alliance with Turkey, and for me, Turkey is a dictatorship, regardless of what our new Foreign Minister says. For the Liberals, this signifies a rather clear shift. You have wanted to have a NATO membership but have also been clear advocates for the rights of the Kurds. Previously, you wanted Turkey to be thrown out. Now you have watered it down and instead call it some kind of democracy review.

The question is: How can we fight for the Kurds' rights while simultaneously entering into an alliance with Erdogan's dictatorship?

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question. This is one of the major and important issues that Sweden must address in order for us to be able to become members of Nato. We must do this in such a way that we can, with pride, bear and take responsibility for the situation of people not only in our own country but also in other countries, including those who today are oppressed in Turkey.

Sweden's NATO membership is on its way to happening. It is very positive. It gives us as a country significantly greater security and the opportunity to defend freedom in all of Europe. But it must not be taken as a reason for us not to see other needs and values and, above all, other people's needs and values. It is an incredibly central task. It is also a question not just for the parties that are part of the government and its coalition partners, but for all parties who jointly want to work for a NATO membership.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! Anna Starbrink says that NATO membership is on its way. But there are two authoritarian leaders in the way, Orbán and Erdogan.

When one says that one shall fulfill the shameful agreement with Turkey, it implies a turnaround from the Liberals' side from having previously pushed to stop the arms exports to Turkey to now saying yes to it. It will mean that more Kurds are deported from Sweden. Above all, it will mean that our voice for democracy and human rights is silenced, and that is what I am deeply concerned about.

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

Anna Starbrink (L)

Madam Speaker! I did not perceive it as a question but rather as a reasoning, which I would gladly participate in.

I also naturally feel a great concern for how the population in various oppressive countries is subjected to their regimes' harsh oppression. This naturally also applies in, for example, Turkey.

We need to find ways and a solution together with other good forces and other democracies, so that Sweden can become a full member and a part of Nato and at the same time safeguard humanism in our country and in the world.

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! The headings and the topics are democracy and human rights. I personally think that they could have been worth their own headings, but now it is what it is.

General political debate Democracy and human rights

We have just concluded the centenary celebration of Swedish democracy, and universal and equal suffrage is perhaps the greatest equality reform.

We Social Democrats have since then pushed equality forward with reform after reform: taxes, preschool, welfare, the labor market, the right to abortion, the consent law. The examples are many and much has been done, but much remains to be done.

What we have achieved, we have achieved despite the right's opposition, Mr. Speaker, and thanks to a strong women's movement and many times together with the Liberals. Much remains to be done, as said, but we must be prepared to defend what has been achieved.

The right's opposition to equality, Mr. Speaker, finds new modes of expression but is fundamentally the same. Fighting against reactionary structures is something we can do. We know that they find their forms in authoritarian and sometimes religious guises.

We have today a global backlash, stronger than in a long time. We see it in countries such as Hungary, Poland, USA, Russia, Brazil with several countries. The Ayatollahs' Iran is perhaps the worst example right now. It is different countries and different severity, but it is the same phenomenon.

Mr. Speaker! In Sweden, we have just received the most reactionary government since democracy was introduced. This represents a great challenge for those of us who fight for equality. The Moderates, Christian Democrats, and Sweden Democrats have always been clear about their reluctance toward equality. The newly appointed Foreign Minister Tobias Billström gave voice to this reluctance in his first statement of intent.

Mr. Speaker! Something new has happened in Swedish politics, and that is that the Liberals have been drawn into this right-wing constellation. A former ally in the work for equality now seems to hesitate regarding its ideological home. It is a party that is questioned on good grounds by liberals in Europe who have experienced reactionary governments push back democracy, human rights, and equality. I hope that the Swedish liberals take their European party comrades' concern seriously.

But we do not only have to fight against the old right's reflexive opposition to equality. It is also about new and neoliberal relativistic currents that want to legalize prostitution, human trafficking, and surrogacy. In an Orwellian spirit, they turn the word slavery into freedom and the word prostitution into sex work.

Mr. Speaker! There is also another phenomenon where, behind a feigned progressive facade, one tries to question the definition of gender. It is a dangerous development that partly interacts with the traditional, reactionary forces that have always opposed equality, and partly goes its own way.

Mr. Speaker! Finally: In the agreement that has been concluded between the parties that make up the government base, in the agreement that the Liberals have also signed, one wants to punish women who are victims of crime. Women subjected to sexual abuse are considered by the Moderates, the Christian Democrats, the Sweden Democrats, and also the Liberals to lack in their conduct. It is a language and an attitude for which one has to go back a hundred years to find the equivalent. This is an agreement signed by four Swedish parliamentary parties in 2022.

Now it is more important than ever that we who want to live in an equal society raise our voices to be heard.

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I have a short question for Patrik Björck.

What have the Social Democrats and their governments done over the last eight years for women's rights and human rights in Iran?

Member of the Board Patrik Björck described the mullahs' state as the worst. But did the women in the Social Democratic government delegation not wear veils when they were in Iran and signed multi-billion agreements with the Iranian mullahs?

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats, unlike the newly appointed government, have a feminist foreign policy, which we stand behind. This is the first thing the newly appointed government has distanced itself from, precisely because one does not have equality as a guiding principle.

We Social Democrats have, in our entire foreign policy and in all our international obligations and contexts, worked extremely hard for equality. This also applies in our contacts with Iran.

Mr. Speaker! Those who are somewhat more familiar with foreign policy know that we have relations with a number of countries that we are very far from politically and in how they relate to democracy and equality. We have relations with a number of rogue states. That is how the world looks.

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Patrik for an answer that was not an answer. Therefore, I ask the question once more.

What has the social democratic government done practically for Iranian men and women seeking freedom?

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! By pursuing an active feminist foreign policy, we move equality forward in all our foreign policy relations. This also applies to our relations with Iran. We support democracy work and equality work worldwide, including in Iran, and there is no doubt whatsoever that that work continues. But I am deeply concerned about the newly appointed government's commitment to equality issues.

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! What does hijab mean in Sharia law?

Awrah is an Islamic term in Sharia law that defines which parts of the body are private and must be covered by clothing in the public sphere. According to the Quran, fiqh and the hadiths, as well as many imams and theologians, the woman's entire body and even her voice are considered awrah and must be covered by hijab.

But hijab is fundamentally about the sexualization of women and girls, nothing else. In Sharia law, women and girls are regarded as sex objects to be displayed and silenced so that Muslim men are not provoked and feel lust. It is a horrific view of humanity in my opinion.

Mr. Speaker! When my wife and I talk about childhood, she says with sadness that she does not have a single picture from her childhood and teenage years without a hijab. Even long after she migrated to Sweden, she became traumatized when she saw women with hijabs in the public space because it reminded her of the oppression she had freed herself from. With that traumatic feeling, her hands unintentionally moved upwards to adjust the hijab that was no longer there.

Hijab is a symbol of terror for the majority of women who have freed themselves from it. It is a tool to capture and oppress women's bodies and souls and for their existence in society to be limited and cease. Hijab is a sign that the woman is less worthy and that it is she who must waive her rights and freedoms so that Muslim men can exercise their power.

Mr. Speaker! What makes me extremely sad is to see how naively left-liberal and feminist forces in the Western world relate to the hijab by diminishing it to an ordinary garment. Sometimes the hijab is hailed as a symbol against oppression and for women's freedom when it is in fact a symbol of oppression against women's and girls' freedom and dignity. A clear example of this is how Sweden's first feminist government joyfully accepted wearing the hijab on their foreign travels in order to keep Islamists satisfied.

During the demonstration organized in support of Iranian women's struggle against hijab and Islamism, I met Parisa. The day after the Swedish delegation visited Iran in 2017, she was arrested by the hijab police. On the way to the police station, she and another woman were struck in the back and head with fists by a shariapolice. He said: You horrors, who do you think you are, refusing to wear hijab? We also force blue-eyed, blonde European women to wear hijab. Do you really think you can escape hijab?

In this way, today's left-liberals and so-called feminists are paving the way for Islamists to exercise oppression on even more women and girls. They normalize and downplay the hijab instead of saying what it really is.

Parisa wants an official apology from the Swedish delegation. The fight against the hijab is not just a fight against a garment but a fight against oppression and Islamism and a fight for human and in particular women's freedom.

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! Rashid Farivar and I shared in the previous exchange of remarks the criticism of the policy in Iran, and we share the criticism of the regime in Iran and the horrific oppression of women that takes place there. On that, we agree.

But what does Rashid Farivar think of the Sweden Democrats' view on equality in Sweden? What does Rashid Farivar think about how female members are treated? How many members in the Sweden Democrats' parliamentary group are appointed as group leaders? How many women get prominent assignments within the Sweden Democrats at all?

Even though Rashid Farivar and I agree that the abuses committed by the regime in Iran are appalling, Rashid Farivar and I do not quite agree on how equality work should be conducted in Sweden. Could Rashid Farivar comment on this, please?

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Patrik Björck, for your question! I do not know how the member feels about the hijab or what his opinion is on it, but to demand hijab on girls and women is a horrific view of humanity. As I mentioned, my wife sometimes says: Why are women forced to wear hijab? What do the Islamists want to take from us women that they have not already taken from us?

As I said, hijab is not just about demanding that women have a specific dress, but it is a sign that the woman's identity is equal to her father's, her husband's, or her brother's identity.

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now we were in agreement that one should not force women to wear hijab, so I have already answered that.

I want answers from Rashid Farivar on how he views the Sweden Democrats' view on equality in Sweden, how he views how the Sweden Democrats handle their female party comrades, how one appoints group leaders, how one views equality and equality policy in general in Sweden and how one views the feminist foreign policy.

What does equality really mean for Rashid Farivar, Mr. Speaker?

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! As I have written before, the Sweden Democrats have done more for women's freedom and equality in Iran than the Social Democrats, the Centre Party and other left-liberals have ever done.

Paris' words to the Social Democrats' former Foreign Minister Ann Linde were: We Iranian women do not need your help to get back our freedom. Do not now destroy the one that we have regained!

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! It was probably the first time there has been religious instruction here in the chamber - our democratic hall. I may have missed that Member Rashid Farivar is a religious studies scholar at heart.

I have a question. Great confusion arose during the member's review here. Is it the case that the member is strongly opposed to the patriarchal regime in Iran and the violence against women that it stands for? This also applies to Afghanistan. Or is Rashid Farivar opposed to Muslims and Islam? Great confusion arose there, and I would like the member to clarify this.

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Nadja Awad, for the question!

As I mentioned, hijab is not a dress code or a headpiece, equivalent to a hat. As I described, awrah or aurat is an Islamic designation in Sharia law that defines which parts of the body are private and should be covered by clothing. For men, it corresponds to the genitals, and for women, it corresponds, according to the Quran, fiqh, and the hadiths, to the entire body, including the face, hands, feet, and even the woman's voice. This is completely deplorable in a religion or in an ideology in Sweden's democracy.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! I still did not receive an answer to my question regarding what the member meant by that Islam and Muslims in some way would be responsible for the sexualization of women out in society.

As I have understood it, when women fight for their freedoms and rights - regardless of whether it is in the West or in the East - it is difficult to take it in when a man, in this case, acts as a moral police and in some way wants to control what women should dress in.

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! According to Islamic imams and theologians, it is the woman's fault if a Muslim man sees a woman's awrah and wants to sin. Women and girls are viewed as sex objects and should be displayed and silenced so that Muslim men are not provoked and do not feel lust. This is sharia law.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Mr. Speaker! I wish that we could stop the hobby religion studies that Rashid Farivar is engaging in right now here in the chamber. I think that very many of the arguments are reminiscent of the men who violate women today in Iran, because it is always the case that it is men who should have a lot of opinions about what women wear.

How is it that the Sweden Democrats and Rashid Farivar have so many opinions about what specifically Muslim women wear in Sweden? Sweden is a country where women are allowed to wear what they want and where they are allowed to choose not to wear what they do not want to wear.

Then I would like to have a clarification. Exactly what have the Sweden Democrats done for Iran's women?

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro, for your question!

On repeated occasions in the European Parliament and also in the Riksdag, we have taken a stand on how women's freedom is drastically restricted in Sharia law, especially when it comes to the hijab and veil. I do not believe there is anyone who can convince me that hijab or veil on children is not coercion. As I said, hijab means sexualizing women and girls in order to silence them in society.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Mr. Speaker! I will keep it brief. In Sweden, children are allowed to wear exactly what they want, and women are allowed to wear exactly what they want.

The Sweden Democrats always say that they have done very much for women in Iran and so on. But when it comes down to it, they want to limit women's opportunities to wear what they want in Sweden.

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! When I see a four-year-old girl who attends the same preschool as my boy and who is wearing a full-face veil, I think it is very bold of Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro to claim that children themselves choose freely to wear a veil. It is very bold.

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Rashid Farivar for his speech.

In the Tidö Agreement, which the Sverigedemokraterna stand behind, one can read a point under the chapter on migration that has been very much debated in the last few days and which concerns the grounds for deportation. It says something along the lines that an investigation shall investigate whether one can deport people due to lack of conduct, which is an archaic word in itself. Examples of that can be non-compliance with rules, criminal association, substance abuse and - listen now - prostitution.

My question is: Does this mean that the Sweden Democrats mean that one should deport prostitutes, that is to say, vulnerable women who in Sweden are protected by laws such as the sex purchase act? It is not criminal to sell sex. It is criminal to buy sex. They are protected during the reflection period when they have the right to protection and support when they leave prostitution.

Do the Sweden Democrats mean that prostitution should be grounds for deportation?

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Helena Vilhelmsson for her question.

My speech was about the hijab, what it means within Sharia law, and how it is a tool to oppress women and girls, and sometimes very young girls. For me, it is very sad to see this happening in Sweden. It is what I have seen in my home country, Iran. My wife and my sister do not have a single picture of themselves from childhood and their teenage years without a veil. That is the problem, and that is what we must counteract. That is what I, as a Sverigedemokrat, will counteract in Sweden.

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Mr. Speaker! I respect that the member may not have been part of the Tidö discussions and perhaps also does not know what is stated in the agreement. The question will likely return because this is a significant departure from current Swedish legislation.

But I would still like to ask the question generally what Member Rashid Farivar thinks. Does the Member think that prostitution is grounds for deportation?

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

Rashid Farivar (SD)

Mr. Speaker! What I think is that the struggle against the hijab that is ongoing in, for example, Iran is not just a struggle against a garment or a headscarf. It is a struggle against oppression and Islamism and a struggle for people's and in particular women's freedom. And I would not want to see any woman here in Sweden go down that path where she is forced to wear a veil.

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

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! A main task for our new government is to strengthen our liberal and free democracy. During the recent decades, social democracy has unfortunately had to be dragged along to accept improvements and reinforcements that have been made in this area, whether it has been about strengthening civil rights, increasing our courts' independence, or strengthening the democratic control of the government's decisions during the pandemic.

Now, thank goodness, practically everyone says that the independence of the courts needs to be protected. That is, of course, very welcome. But it also requires that one is prepared to translate solemn speeches into concrete action and into reforms.

Since election day, unfortunately, the bottom of how low the Social Democrats can imagine sinking has been lowered from low to seemingly bottomless when it comes to smearing our democracy, scaring people, creating unrest, and lowering trust in our fundamentally stable and democratic social systems. It fuels the forces that wish us ill.

There are very real threats to our democratic and liberal democracy. Those who speak about these threats are right to also present solutions. That is exactly what I now intend to do. Because we need to increase the distance between the government and the courts. We need to introduce a new judicial council, completely independent from politics, which is given a broad responsibility for judicial recruitment, supervision, and accountability.

We need to review the oversight of the judges and the appointing authority, who can be subject to various disciplinary measures, as well as educational issues and how they are financed within our justice system so that these are protected and become more independent of politics.

We need to increase the protection of individual civil and civil rights in our constitution. The legal protection we have today exists for certain rights, but it needs to cover more. It needs to cover the right of ownership and the freedom of enterprise.

We need to introduce an obligation for the state to protect individuals against infringements of their civil and political rights when these are restricted by other individuals, for example, by trade unions or employers who do not respect the freedom of association of employees or entrepreneurs. In such cases, the state needs to act and have an obligation to do so. We also need to lower the practical thresholds for people to have their cases reviewed against the state.

We need to re-establish clear accountability regarding everything from separate election days for the Riksdag and municipalities to lowering the personal vote threshold and reintroducing a proper civil servant responsibility.

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg (M) agreed.

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is an interesting discussion that Ida Drougge is having here regarding constitutional issues. It is absolutely exciting. One could delve deeper into it.

Unfortunately, history and examples from around the world now show that it is not quite enough. If illiberal and undemocratic parties enter into government power, it becomes difficult to protect even constitutions and courts.

I am wondering how Ida Drougge thinks about that threat to Swedish democracy, because it is actually this we see in countries like Hungary and Poland - countries that, for example, the Sverigedemokraterna see as role models.

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

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank you for the question. There is much we need to do to raise the thresholds for a government, even in the case that it is democratically elected, to restrict our civil and political rights.

Some of such steps were taken in full agreement during the previous parliamentary term. A completely unanimous Committee on the Constitution has on a number of occasions made announcements to the government regarding measures such as reviewing which age rules exist for judges, so that they cannot be early-retired. That is one example. We Moderates have, however, wanted to see significantly more reforms in the area. One such concerns increasing the distance between the government and the courts when appointing judges.

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

Patrik Björck (S)

Mr. Speaker! I didn't actually ask Ida Drougge about that part. The constitutional aspect is interesting, and it required more than 30 seconds to discuss it. But how does Ida Drougge view the moral and political responsibility of letting the Sverigedemokraterna into the Government Offices?

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

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think one should be careful not to downplay the undemocratic forces that exist in Hungary and Poland by comparing them with parties that exist here in Sweden. That is my answer.

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Ida Drougge, for an initiated speech on liberal democracy and liberal values, not least in the judicial process! I fully share that view. I may, however, think that it stands somewhat in contrast to parts of the Tidö Agreement, especially regarding the area of migration and justice policy where integrity is actually undermined, but that was not what I was going to ask about.

I actually want to ask Ida Drougge the same question I asked the Sverigedemokraterna. In Sweden, there is full political consensus on the Swedish sex purchase law, and that has actually been the case since it was introduced. But given what is now stated in the Tidö Agreement, the law will need to be changed, or at least its application. It will come into conflict with legislation where prostitution - which concerns a woman in the most vulnerable situation - constitutes grounds for deportation. How do the Moderaterna view the fact that they have stood behind such a formulation?

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

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! I actually hoped that I would get this question. It is incredibly frustrating to sit in one's seat here in the chamber and be met with these accusations without any opportunity to respond, so I thank you for that.

I think that Maria Malmer Stenergard answered this question excellently on P1 this morning and can recommend everyone to listen to it. Then one hears it directly from a more initiated person from within the government rather than from me as a Moderate Member of Parliament. But in short, the examples that exist in the Tidö Agreement are an account of how the legislation looked in this area before 2005, when such legislation existed. The situations we Moderates see that this could be relevant for concern interaction with serious criminal activity and organized gangs.

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, there is a significant difference if the Tidö Agreement provides examples of how the law looked and not on something that the government is actually going to base its policy on. I thank you for the clarification.

Again: For the situations the member describes, we have legislation regarding something called a reflection period. The purpose is that the vulnerable person should receive protection and support in order to be able to participate in a legal process against the criminal networks and against the pimps. What is wrong with that legislation?

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

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! I recommend that the member direct that question to a representative of the government, as I am not among them. But as I have understood these writings, we are talking about two completely different things here. The description of misconduct - and an investigation, it should be added, entirely in accordance with EU law, Sweden's constitution, and other international law obligations - does not concern the question that the member is asking me here.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! A more racist and nationalist social development awaits us. Recently, we have had an election where the parties have engaged in a kind of race over which party can drive the hardest politics to deal with what is their explanation for unemployment, housing shortages, poor school results, and crime. Immigrants, suburb dwellers, Muslims, and refugees have been portrayed as the cause of these social problems.

It has, among other things, been about introducing DNA tests during checks, introducing visitation zones and camera surveillance in the suburbs, about undermining the safety of those fleeing war and persecution, and about deporting people who do not live up to so-called basic Swedish values. The so-called "slottsavtalet" will become a repulsive reality that affects the already marginalized groups in society and increases inequality.

This is occurring against the background of a bourgeois policy of tax cuts that has been pursued since the 90s and which has resulted in welfare receiving 350 billion kronor less per year. It has resulted in increased privatizations and deregulation which have led to the market, not the politicians, having to take the baton.

Instead of a fair economic policy, we will be left with four years of this right-wing nationalist rule, which will erode the welfare state even further - while they "whitewash" the concept of citizenship in Sweden and act as moral police to judge who should have the right to stay here and who should be allowed to keep their basic freedoms and rights. Insecurity will become a given under this government.

The Equality Ombudsman is already warning of the increased discrimination and hate crimes against different groups. During 2021, the number of received reports was the clearly highest in seven years, and the reports are often linked to ethnicity - something that will increase drastically as a consequence of the government's "slottsavtal" (palace agreement). DNA tests, visitation zones, camera surveillance, and deportation are directed at non-white people and condition basic freedoms and rights. Furthermore, the Discrimination Act is under attack, which we cannot accept.

That is why we in Vänsterpartiet want a crisis commission against discrimination to be appointed immediately to address the discrimination. This simply cannot wait. It is vital during this government, which will create a more insecure, more authoritarian and human-rights-depriving society.

Vänsterpartiet always chooses to prioritize a strong welfare state where discrimination shall not be allowed and where hate shall have consequences. We do not build a society with the help of divisive politics where the rich will get more and the poor will get less. That, if anything, is a lack of integrity.

(Applause)

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is said that Sweden is one of the world's most equal countries. How can it then be that men's lifetime earnings are several million kronor higher than women's, and how can it be that men murder women they have lived with? That was my message in the election campaign. I consistently made equality an election issue and will continue to do so.

Economic freedom does not exist for women, or for very few. More women than men graduate from university, but that is not reflected in salary or position. How can that be?

Women have lower pensions even if they have worked as many years as the man in a relationship. We know what it is due to. The reason is spelled parental leave and part-time work.

Mr. Speaker! Women own less, whether it concerns cars, shares, real estate or companies - much less. It has a major economic effect, not least when it comes to taxation. We know that the taxation of income from service is higher than the taxation of capital.

A quarter of the companies are run by women, and even fewer women own their companies. Of the total venture capital in Sweden, about 1 percent goes to women's entrepreneurship - 1 percent! It is like a joke.

Sweden could have a training course called: How to earn more than the women in the workplace - for life! The headings in the training would be: One - do not take parental leave. Two - do not do "vabba" (childcare sharing). Three - do not do unpaid work at home. Four - use dominance techniques at work. Done!

Mr. Speaker! We must achieve real economic equality through better public statistics, mandates for agencies, and investments in networks for women's entrepreneurship. None, or very little of that, is included in the Tidö Agreement or in the Government Bill. We will return to that issue.

Mr. Speaker! During the month of October, six men have been remanded in custody suspected of murder. Am I talking about gang crime? No. I am talking about the eternal pandemic of men's violence against women, because all the victims are women.

This question gets infinitely less space in the media than gang violence and criminal gangs, and incredibly much less space in the Tidö Agreement. There, they talk about double sentences for gang criminals. Then one might perhaps somewhat carelessly conclude that when a man kills a man and it concerns gang criminal circles, the murder is worth twice as much as if a man kills a woman he has had a relationship with. Where is the logic in this?

We must shift the focus when it comes to combating violence against women. The crime victim must always be at the center. That is not the case today. It is the perpetrator who should have their freedom restricted, not the crime victim, as it works today. This applies to restraining orders. It applies to women who have their entire lives changed and are forced to live in hiding.

We have a high level of legal certainty in Sweden today, but the security of the legal system is under all criticism. We can observe this when we look at the statistics regarding violent rapes. Five out of a hundred violent rapes lead to a conviction. That is not due to the women lying, but because the men go free. We need to shift the focus in Swedish justice policy.

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to speak about human civil and political rights and democracy in my first contribution here in the chamber.

The unique, inviolable and universal human value is the core point of the Christian Democratic ideology. We Christian Democrats believe that there are a number of rights that belong to all people solely because we are human beings. This concerns, for example, the right to realize values such as the right to life, freedom, ownership, and freedom of religion and expression.

It is the task of politics to respect and promote human natural rights. States that deny their fellow human beings or citizens access to fundamental freedoms and rights also violate human dignity. A state that encroaches on freedom of expression, which denies its citizens education, which does not allow journalists to write critically or which forbids people from organizing themselves politically violates human freedoms and rights.

A definition of democracy cannot be based solely on the degree of voting rights, the number of political parties, free elections, and so on. It must equally consider the degree of freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and freedom of movement, as well as the access to these freedoms and rights regardless of gender, ethnicity, religious belief, sexual orientation, or disability. These values cannot be taken for granted but must be defended and upheld at all times.

Mr. Speaker! Therefore, the situation in Iran is an example of circumstances where Sweden and the EU must jointly resort to stricter sanctions against the Iranian regime – all to strengthen and facilitate the work of girls and women for their freedoms and rights. We must clearly show that human rights also apply in Iran. It is simply a matter of humanity.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Mr. Speaker! Today I am going to speak about something that many Swedes thought we were in agreement on in this assembly. It is something that has entailed liberation from the structures that locked people in a separation from the rest of society because of things they cannot control. I am going to speak about the Discrimination Act.

During Pride 2007, then Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said: "The Discrimination Act should be designed more generally so that it can function as a tool for everyone. . I belong to that generation in the Moderates who have often taken a stand in conflicts. My wish is that people should be able to live openly and show their love. But we are not there yet."

I never thought I would stand in this speaker's chair and quote a moderate Prime Minister. But we live in a time where much unthinkable is happening.

But, Mr. Speaker, where are the Moderates today? Where are those who dared to take on the conflict over the structures that put people in a vulnerable position? Where are those who were part of the work for a world and a country where everyone can live free and open lives? Instead, we meet Moderates who have just signed a palace agreement with the Sweden Democrats, who want to abolish the Discrimination Act. It is that law that in the autumn of 2020 ruled Upplands Väsby municipality guilty of discriminating against a student with autism due to insufficient accessibility. It cannot be that we in Sweden in 2022 are to accept something as reprehensible as discrimination.

Mr. Speaker! I belong to a generation that has enjoyed the gains of previous generations. In 1979, the National Board of Health and Welfare ceased to classify homosexuality as a disease. In 1987, homosexual orientation was added to the grounds for discrimination in the penal provision on illegal discrimination. In 2009, the current Discrimination Act was enacted, and the authority the Equality Ombudsman was formed.

The law should stand guard over the strong society and be the guarantee that children and young people grow up with the security that society stands behind them when they encounter violations, harassment, and discrimination. But the question of the Discrimination Act should now be posed to the newly appointed government, whose representatives have been active in, among other things, the foreign policy debate and have championed hbtq persons in the world and who, in their government statement, spoke about unity, democracy, and redress for crime victims. Words about protection for hbtq persons and redress for crime victims risk, in fact, becoming words without effect in a society without legislation that can provide this redress when they are discriminated against.

The state can be an enabler and contribute to people's liberation. Let us therefore unite for all people's right to free lives and provide redress for people who are subjected to any of the seven grounds for discrimination!

Mr. Speaker! The Liberals waved pride flags at their campaign rally. Four weeks later, the non-discrimination act is being threatened, and the pride flags have been replaced by the Tidö Agreement.

Reinfeldt spoke about conflicts that were worth taking. Are there any Moderates left who want to take the conflict against those who want to limit people's right to free lives? Or are people covered by the grounds of discrimination not included in Ulf Kristersson's Sweden?

(Applause)

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

Per-Arne Håkansson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Democracy is, as is often emphasized, not a self-evident fact. Even though we in Sweden have noted 100 years of universal and equal suffrage in recent years, there is reason to promote and strengthen everyone's participation in various ways based on the challenges that arise. The work for human rights, equality, and education for all must never cease.

From a global perspective, democracy unfortunately seems to be in decline. The global democracy index, which the internationally renowned British magazine The Economist measures and publishes annually, demonstrates this. In the focus of the measurement are voter turnout, diversity, political participation, human rights such as freedom of speech, free press, and the principles of the rule of law.

Even though Sweden is one of the countries in the world where the population has a strong trust in the social system and democracy, this is a warning to take seriously. What is happening in the rest of the world also affects our country. The work to safeguard and strengthen our democracy must therefore take place both here at home and in cooperation with other countries.

General political debate Democracy and human rights

Mr. Speaker! The outgoing government handed over a number of initiatives and proposals for measures that can further strengthen democratic development and people's participation in society. Some are in the final report that the Democracy 100 Years committee presented this summer. Here are proposals to establish a national democracy function, to include democracy in the Agency Ordinance, and to have democracy inscribed in the instructions of more agencies. It is my hope that these issues will also be picked up by the new government.

In the European Union, issues of democracy, the principles of the rule of law, and human freedoms and rights are prioritized. Criticism has been collectively voiced against some countries, not least Hungary, for obvious deficiencies and deteriorations in recent years. This is a task that needs continued attention, not least when Sweden takes on the presidency of the union next year. The work includes, as I can see, initiatives on integration, respect for differences and minorities, that equality issues are followed up, and that exclusion is countered.

Mr. Speaker! For me and thousands of other candidates in municipalities, regions, and the Riksdag, the summer was characterized by engaged and direct meetings with people on streets and squares, in stairwells and in residential areas during door-knocking during the election campaign. In such contexts, questions about democracy and participation are brought to the forefront. Now that the result is available, some analyses and follow-ups follow.

A warning bell to take with us is that voter turnout this year fell. It decreased by up to 6 percentage points. From having increased for four consecutive elections and having reached over 87 percent in the 2018 election, the turnout this year, from what I understand from SCB's statistics, landed at just over 81 percent. It is, of course, a regrettable decline that needs to be analyzed. There were several hundred thousand fewer people who sought out the polling stations this time than four years ago.

What is palpable when looking at the figures on an overall level is increased differences between city and countryside, but perhaps above all socioeconomic factors. It may seem to be a paradox that where it is perhaps most pressing regarding democracy, the functions of society, and everyday services, the interest in participating in the election is lowest. It is therefore of great importance for the whole society to work on eliminating this inequality between different parts of the country and areas for a continued good democratic development.

(Applause)

Culture and sport

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is an honor to open the first cultural policy debate for this parliamentary term. But it is actually not possible to do so without a reflection on the ideas that are currently characterizing our contemporary time.

In the heart of our continent, a full-scale war of invasion is underway. Yesterday, the tyrant Vladimir Putin issued war laws in Ukrainian territories, which he claims to have annexed through illegal and rigged referendums. His ethnonationalist empire shall expand to unite historical generations living in today's Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, and Moldova - that is what emerges from his ideology. That the so-called unification is carried out through war, atrocities, violence, and oppression beyond all international frameworks that constitute conditions between states and peoples shows that inspiration has been drawn from the worst of times in human history.

General political debate Culture and sport

Even though the Russian regime shuts down the internet and imprisons people who speak about the war, even though the public in Russia receives its information from Russian state TV which is controlled and owned by the regime or is regime-friendly, one can ultimately not prevent the truth. The young soldiers' bodies will return to Russia in coffins, and the mothers' protests have begun.

Mr. Speaker! In another place, nationwide protests are currently taking place. Although the Iranian regime shuts down the internet, although the regime imprisons people who manifest against the dictatorship, the air and the lie are beginning to escape from the ayatollahs' era in Iran. The body of a battered young woman, Jina Mahsa Amini, was sent back on a stretcher to Kurdish-dominated western Iran. 43 years of dictatorship are being challenged by freedom-fighting schoolgirls and grandmothers. The truth about the dictatorship's deeds has caused the cup to overflow.

Mr. Speaker! Progressive democratic cultural policy fights for the truth. It is truth and accountability that the authoritarian regimes, ideological currents, and social constructions prevent. Why are authors, journalists, musicians, researchers, actors, and directors in Iranian and Russian prisons? Yes, because they are the ones who are needed so that the truth, the questioning, the scrutiny, and the alternative to the authoritarian ideas and regimes shall prevail.

It is the Iranian regime's drones that Putin uses in the war against Ukraine. Cooperation between the dictatorships and their ideas is on the march. But they also unite all of us who strive for peace, democracy, and freedom.

Mr. Speaker! Democracy requires freedom of expression. It requires education, in-depth reading skills, and resilience against disinformation. It presupposes that there is artistic freedom, independent journalism, a vibrant civil society, freedom of association and popular education, questioning and scrutiny, freedom of demonstration and agitation, respect for the diversity of citizens and minorities, free research and humanities, and an open debate.

It is on these foundations that Sweden has developed into one of the world's strongest democracies. Precisely because of that, we who represent the Social Democrats never compromise with authoritarian currents of thought. Therefore, this mandate period also becomes a struggle over ideas in the world, in Europe, and in Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Angelika Bengtsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Culture and sports issues are a broad area. Today we only have four minutes each. I will therefore focus on sports.

Before I became a member of Parliament, I worked as a dancer. But before I decided during my childhood to exchange skates for pointe shoes, I spent all my time on figure skating. Even then, there was a shortage of ice time. We shared the facility primarily with the hockey team, but also the curling and skating teams. This was 20 years ago - 20 years.

The municipalities have not managed to build more sports facilities in pace with the fact that we have become more in our country. Today, we also have a situation where many of our facilities are in such poor condition that it is cheapest and easiest to demolish them and build new.

The municipalities no longer have the capacity, ability or knowledge to build new, modern and innovative sports facilities. The state needs to take a larger grip and take action on this front. That is why we in Sverigedemokraterna have pushed for the issue of, among other things, introducing a local and facility fund.

We have also pushed for the introduction of a national competence center specifically to gather all knowledge regarding sports facilities under one roof. Today, the municipalities have to reinvent the wheel every time a new facility is to be designed. It would be more reasonable to gather all knowledge under one roof. It is a proposal that the Swedish Sports Confederation also stands behind. We must solve the shortage of facilities as soon as possible. I look forward to that work during this parliamentary term.

Mr. Speaker! Sports reach nearly half of our population. We probably all have a relationship with it, either as participants or as spectators.

There are many pieces to address when it comes to sports. In that case, we need a minister who has the commitment and the knowledge but, above all, the time for it. I am convinced that the current minister will have that. It is also pleasing that issues regarding public health and sports are placed in the same portfolio, not least when we see that sedentary behavior is increasing and when we see the effects of the pandemic even today.

Over the next four years, we will push to get the following points through, above all:

Take hold of and prioritize, but above all, remedy the shortage of facilities.

Investigate the consequences of the pandemic and initiate measures.

Review how the split between the Swedish Sports Confederation and the member federations that has arisen over the past year can be resolved.

We also need to sign the Macolin Convention on match-fixing. Last but not least - perhaps the most important thing - we need to ensure that fewer people become sedentary and that they instead have a sport to turn to. More can be done here between school and sports.

In this speech, Mats Arkhem and Leonid Yurkovskiy (both SD) concurred.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Angelika Bengtsson, for this speech!

There is one thing that unites us. It is the ambition to try to strengthen the facilities in our country. But for that, resources are required. The sports facilities need to become more numerous in the country. And potentially, the existing facilities that are in the municipalities need to be renovated.

I have before me the agreement that the Sverigedemokraterna have signed together with the Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna, and Liberalerna. In this, there is not a single sports initiative, apart from the approach they want to take to strengthen the competitiveness of the top leagues.

Despite the right-wing nationalist party that the Sverigedemokraterna are, I see nothing in the agreement that concerns the people's movement sports, the meeting between people, or the ambition to include those groups who do not have access to the wonderful activities of sports today and, above all, those groups who do not have access to facilities. Is it what Angelika Bengtsson speaks about from the rostrum today that is politics outside the agreement? What is it actually that is to be realized?

Your party is now Sweden's largest right-wing party, and you bear responsibility for the development of the policy that is to take place. Is it as is said here, that new facilities are to be built in our country, truly true?

(Applause)

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

Angelika Bengtsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It must be remembered that there is much that is not included in the agreement but where we will and hopefully can exert pressure during this mandate period. What is stated in the Tidö Agreement is a good start. But I am, of course, not satisfied there. I would have wanted to see our policy and sports policy implemented fully. Anything else would be strange.

I agree that more needs to be done when it comes to sports facilities. A budget will be coming very soon. I know that negotiations are underway regarding it. I ask to be able to return specifically regarding the budget and the financial part.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! I can state that the times the Sweden Democrats' budget has passed in the Swedish Riksdag, no investment support has been allocated for the new construction of housing or more construction sites in our country. Neither has any investment been made for municipalities and regions, which bear the resources for local sports activities.

I find this speech noteworthy. I would like to see the results of this policy. Let us resume this debate when a budget has been presented.

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

Angelika Bengtsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It sounds like the Social Democrats have missed the sports policy motion that we debated for throughout the entire last parliamentary term. We have many proposals on how to build new, innovative, and fresh multi-arenas. That is how we are to build sports arenas, precisely to achieve the popular movement that sports is.

More should exercise, not fewer.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! I believe everyone here agrees that culture is an important part of our lives. We use culture in many different ways, when we want to celebrate, to find joy, as comfort, or when we want to be calmed. Culture can also be used to convey messages, to create community, or to motivate us on a jog.

But we are probably not quite in agreement on what constitutes good culture or what is culture. For one person, it could be Verdi's La traviata. For someone else, it could be Håkan Hellström's music. A third could say it is Astrid Lindgren's books, and a fourth could say it is Unga Klara's performance Brinn.

Mr. Speaker! Culture is not just our individual or society's perception of culture. It is also an industry and a business. More than 190,000 people work in the cultural and creative industry in Sweden. Approximately every tenth company in Sweden is operated in the cultural and creative industry. In 2017, they turned over 400 billion kronor and put Sweden on the world map.

Mr. Speaker! This is an industry that deserves greater attention and better conditions than what has been achieved in this house over the last eight years. I look forward to finally, with a moderate Minister for Culture and our coalition parties, providing the industry and the cultural workers in Sweden with better conditions for a flourishing culture and a better structure.

Mr. Speaker! The Culture Committee has 23 authorities and over 30 foundations and companies under its area of responsibility. This entails political directives, administration, and an unmanaged operation that is completely unreasonable when it comes to providing the best conditions for culture. I look forward to being involved in ensuring that there are fewer authorities and fewer political directives and that we create conditions for the industry to flourish even more, so that more than 190,000 can make a living in the future and so that we have reason to be happy and can enjoy even more culture.

Mr. Speaker! We all need culture, and the culture industry needs us.

(Applause)

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! In her speech, Kristina Axén Olin pointed out that it is important to have a flourishing cultural life and good conditions for art and culture creators. If this is the case, we are in complete agreement. Therefore, we commissioned an inquiry into creating good conditions for art and culture creators so that they can, through scholarships and other means, gain access to SGI. It is an inquiry that is ongoing.

I am a bit curious about whether this is included in the idea of safer conditions for art and culture creators. Will it be the continued policy now that we are to have a Moderate culture minister? Is it also about extending the grants in accordance with what was stated in the Restart Inquiry? Is it also about secure and permanent employment at the art and culture institutions in our country? I would like to hear how the Moderates reflect on the issue of strengthening the country's art and culture practitioners' prerequisites for safer and better conditions in working life.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! Socialdemokraten Lawen Redar is asking me a number of questions about health insurance and other matters that have been raised in various investigations as evidence of how messy it is to be a cultural worker today. What I described in my speech is an industry that employs more than 190,000 people here in Sweden. One has completely unreasonable conditions. One has 23 authorities to turn to. One is dependent on grants. One does not have any proper health insurance. Scholarships are not included in the health insurance. There are different directives for different authorities that one must apply for grants from. There are, Mr. Speaker, a number of problems that the Socialdemokratern have done nothing about.

Now we have had a Moderate Culture Minister, a Moderate-led Culture Department and a government consisting of the Moderates and a number of coalition parties for a few days. I hope to be able to please the Riksdag by returning as soon as possible with solutions to the problems that the Social Democrats have known about but have done nothing about during the last eight years.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is not the authorities that are the great challenge in the cultural area regarding secure conditions for art and culture creators. The challenges are the lack of permanent employment, the difficulty of being accepted into a performing arts alliance, and the difficulty of obtaining SGI and pension-qualifying income when one has a scholarship or equivalent as part of their livelihood.

The investigation we commissioned is very important. I hope that Kristina Axén Olin's party monitors and promotes it moving forward. But I also want to point out that it is largely thanks to us that most art and culture creators were saved during the pandemic through direct art and culture crisis support and now get the chance to participate in a performing arts alliance.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! There are a number of fantastic alliances within the cultural sector, but they have been formed based on their own desire to cooperate.

I want to repeat to Mr. Speaker and the members of the Riksdag that the Social Democrats have been aware of the problems within the cultural sector: that the working conditions are as they are, that it is messy with authorities, and that people complain about the erratic nature even in the government inquiries. Nothing has been done about this in the last ten years. The Social Democrats have done nothing about it.

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

Catarina Deremar (C)

Mr. Speaker! We have just had an election. Unfortunately, it was not culture that gave the biggest headlines at this election either, which we might have wished for. We can reflect on what that is due to. Art and culture have a great significance for each of us and for our society as a whole. It is an enormous force that comes in an infinite number of forms, colors, and expressions. It is a force that takes people, regions, and Sweden as a country forward and upward.

The strength of a free and independent culture is precisely that it gives us energy. It is capable of creating security and at the same time provoking and challenging. It manages to build community and cohesion, but it tests our boundaries. It builds identity, while at the same time it can make us re-examine old truths or see things from someone else's perspective. It allows us to show emotions or open the door to another world.

Culture must continue to be a self-evident part of an open and democratic society. 902335647446000902335889508000From a political standpoint, we need to build the frameworks for culture stronger while simultaneously maintaining an arm's length distance from the content of culture. Politics should never govern culture or dictate what is right or wrong. On the other hand, we politicians have an important task in ensuring that all people, regardless of where they live, what background they have, and whether they have disabilities, are able to participate in culture and be involved in creating it on equal terms.

Culture is still unfortunately working in the shadow of the pandemic, Mr. Speaker. The pandemic forced people away from culture, from community and safety, from routines and conversation. In different ways, we must now provide stimulation to fully bring the audience back to culture. By that, I am thinking not only of the publicly driven culture and the open museums but also of the commercial culture.

One way could be, as the Center Party wants, to introduce a national cultural capital. Appointing a national cultural capital would give smaller towns with surrounding areas a cultural boost. Our idea is that a national cultural capital is appointed every second year. I can already feel how it is bustling out there in our rich cultural life all around the country.

We must continue to stand guard over freedom of speech, over open conversation, and over all arenas of culture that provide people with breathing room. We must stand firmly against those who want to restrict freedom of expression or act as arbiters of taste with political motives.

(Applause)

In this speech, Ulrika Heie (C) agreed.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! There is something special about campfires. They are a part of our human history, a part of us and our culture. The fire gave us warmth. It kept predators and insects away. It pushed back the darkness and extended the evenings. People used to gather around the campfire, socialize and tell stories, and everyone was included. Perhaps it was the campfires that made it possible for us to settle here in our harsh climate in the Nordic region and that created closeness and cohesion for people. It was there that important decisions were made that gave us the rock-solid welfare that we live in today.

Most of us have at some point sat around a campfire and experienced the warmth and the community and sung together.

About the beggar from Luossa, all the people sat in a circle, and by the campfire they heard his song. And of beggars and travelers and of wonderful things, and of his longing, he sang all night long:

"It is something beyond the mountains, beyond the flowers and the song, it is something behind the stars, behind the hot heart of mine. Hearing - something goes and whispers, goes and lures me and begs: Come to us, for this earth it is not your kingdom!"

We have enormous challenges ahead of us: cyberspace with its increased control over people's lives, energy issues, supply, loneliness and poverty. The EU is investing in a number of challenges for the future in 2023, including skills in healthcare, school, care and digitalization. What does the welfare of the future look like? Are we traveling well - that is, welfare?

There are 290 municipalities in Sweden, or 290 campfires to reconnect with history. "Municipality" comes from the Latin *communis*, which means common. We need to sit around the campfire again, listen to each other's stories, see each other and meet at eye level with closeness and context with all generations.

Here we are, you and I, in the middle of it all. Together we need to embrace challenges and opportunities of all kinds from different sides - together!

By a shell-strewn seashore stands a gate of heavy roses, there in rest rot the wrecks and the weary men find rest. Never heard high songs like violins' echoes sing under vaults where eternally young children of bliss dwell.

(Applause)

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Cultural life is to a country what the canary is to the miners. How cultural life is doing is a sign of a larger state of health. A free, strong and dynamic cultural life is a hallmark of a living democracy and a prosperous society.

Mr. Speaker! The cultural sector still faces major challenges after the years of the pandemic. Ticket sales have still not picked up as they did previously. The audience has not yet found its way back to cultural activities, even though there are, of course, positive exceptions and we know that the restart grants have made a big difference.

In the restart investigation presented last year, it was established that there is now a great need for long-term perspective and perseverance from politics and that multi-year restart support and other active measures are needed so that cultural life can recover and stand strong moving forward.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it makes me deeply concerned that the new right-wing government's government statement is so thin on cultural policy. Nowhere is the recovery after the pandemic mentioned. Nowhere does one speak of actual investments. Rather, the risks of cuts look large. Public education seems to be in a particularly bad position. And what happens to the successful and appreciated state supports for the public libraries and the cultural school? Where, Mr. Speaker, are the reforms that would make a real difference for children and young people's access to and opportunity to practice culture throughout the country?

Nowhere in the government's declaration or in the right's agreement with the Sweden Democrats is the long-awaited reform regarding staffed school libraries mentioned, a proposal that we know would make a real difference for all children's opportunity to take part in the wealth and the freedom that the world of literacy and literature can provide.

The cultural canon that has been made a big deal in the debate is a proposal that, at best, will be a shot in the air. If one seriously wants children, young people, and adults in our entire country to be able to partake in the rich cultural treasure that exists in Sweden, it is not top lists that are required, but concrete reforms that increase children's and young people's access to culture and creativity and that strengthen our broad cultural life in all of Sweden.

Nowhere, Mr. Speaker, do I see that the new right-wing government has any such ambition. It is worrying for Sweden's cultural life and also for Sweden's population.

Mr. Speaker! During my and the Miljöpartiets time in government, major reinforcements and reforms were made within both cultural and media policy. Additionally, we pushed for the freedom of art with a new museum act and the mandate to Myndigheten för kulturanalys which resulted in the report Så fri är konsten. It is a task that needs to continue, and I am concerned that the new government will negotiate that point with Sverigedemokraterna, a party that we know has a completely different view on free art than the other parties.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it makes me very concerned that the new government in its government statement does not mention, not with a single word, the policy for our national minorities and the rights, language, and culture of the indigenous people, the Sámi. The work to strengthen the language and culture of the Sámi, Roma, Jews, Tornedalians, and Swedish-Finns is a priority issue for Miljöpartiet. We pushed through a clear increase in ambition during previous mandates, and if the right now lets go of that work, it is nothing other than a shame for Sweden's commitments towards our national minorities and our indigenous people.

Mr. Speaker! I fear that we are facing four lost years in cultural policy. I hope, of course, that we are wrong, because it is when the wind blows hardest that we need culture the most.

(Applause)

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! As often as I can, I take the opportunity to speak about what sports and association life mean for people and for society, for physical and mental health, for community, and for cities, suburbs, and rural areas across our entire country.

In sports, association life, and civil society, there is often talk about role models. However, it is rarely the great athletes and superstars who inspire. Many times, it is teachers, sports coaches, and leaders who make people dare to think bigger and further.

This is something that also affects me in my work. Adults and present role models are, in my opinion, the solution to so many questions and problems. And role models can be so incredibly much. It can be everything from the parent who goes to work every day to teachers and adults in the school, as well as the officers who patrol our streets. It can be the youth leader at the youth center and our leaders and coaches within the voluntary sector.

Role models are adults who inspire and motivate, who see, who listen and who show understanding, compassion and dare to set boundaries. Society needs these adults. They create a sense of security that neither police officers nor security guards can solve.

Mr. Speaker! After seven years in the Culture Committee, where I was responsible for sports issues, I was moved to the Justice Committee in the autumn of 2021. It was, of course, a major change, but it is also close to what I have been working with.

The experience I carry with me as a teacher and association advocate is something I will take with me in my continued work in the Committee on Justice, and in today's debate, it is primarily sports that I will focus on.

Where society and politics falter, there we find sports. When businesses, companies, and organizations withdraw from the suburbs and rural areas, sports is often one of the few activities that remain. We find the sports movement throughout all of Sweden. It exists in our large cities, and it exists in almost every small village.

In many debates and posts on social media, I have said that in a society where children and young people have a meaningful leisure time, a sense of community is created that has the strength to break down exclusion and be a strong counterforce to a criminal path.

But we must never, Mr. Speaker, use sports merely as a means against crime. Our task as politicians is to provide sports with the conditions it needs to continue developing its strengths - as a popular movement, a democratic school, a meeting place, and something that provides an opportunity for physical movement - as well as to support and push its ongoing work on equality.

As politicians, we do not need to point fingers and tell the sports sector what power it possesses; within the sports sector, this is already known. What is needed is to provide the sports sector with the conditions it needs to continue to develop - that we build our cities and communities with arenas and green spaces where people can move, and that we provide compensation and support when prices rise so that the low thresholds and the low membership fees can remain.

Mr. Speaker! More tools for the police, harsher punishments, a lowered age of criminal responsibility, and so on are not crime prevention - it is crime fighting. Crime prevention requires more role models, meeting places, community, and hope for the future. Crime prevention requires an equal school, a secure labor market, a broad voluntary life, and a strong sports movement. That is how we build Sweden safer and stronger.

(Applause)

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Anna Wallentheim, for your contribution! I actually quote you from time to time. You once said that we fight for culture both within the party and in politics in general - roughly that. I think that is very well expressed. We do it; we fight for culture. It is about budgets and other things where we have to fight a bit for the culture funds. I believe that applies to everyone in this area.

I also have a question. I would like to ask you, Member Wallentheim, about the leisure card. It is actually going to be introduced. My question is what your position is on it. I have raised this a number of times, so I perhaps do not need to describe it in detail right now.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! If only the Speaker knew how glad I am that Roland Utbult requested this exchange of remarks with me! I was actually going to request a reply to Roland Utbult and say that a culture and sports debate is not complete if I have not had an exchange of remarks with Member Utbult regarding the leisure card. We have had such exchanges many times before.

I shall give you an acknowledgment, Roland Utbult, because I am reading the proposals being put forward. The leisure card has developed over time, and it is a development that I can see as quite positive. It should reach out more broadly, and it should vary based on what socioeconomic background one has; it should hit differently.

But we also face the fact that prices are skyrocketing within the sports movement. Even with a leisure card, we see that membership fees are rising. There are too few arenas; one is forced to say no. And when prices rise, there is a risk that membership fees will also increase. How does Roland Utbult see us being able to meet that cost increase? It will not be able to be solved with the leisure card.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It is, however, a partial solution, because it concerns a card loaded with 500 kronor for each student in grades 5-9. We can, therefore, truly speak of a contribution towards membership fees and such. If the family has a very weak economy, one can get up to approximately 2,500 kronor.

Previously, we had something called fritidspeng, and I didn't get any real response to that. But I am glad that we have moved forward a bit here.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! Just as Roland Utbult says, the leisure allowance has now become a leisure pass that is intended to hit significantly more generally than in the first proposal, which also did not achieve the effect I believe you wanted.

I do, however, see it as worrying that prices are increasing, that we have too few facilities, and that one does not receive a share of the electricity support. I hope that is what we will get to see. It is easy to stand here and say that we are submitting motions and say this in black and white, but the fact is that it is in the budget that it will be visible. I hope that money will not be taken from the sports movement and go to a leisure card without finding other money. Sport needs the money now more than ever.

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

Ewa Pihl Krabbe (S)

Mr. Speaker! People with deaf-blindness are a relatively small group in Sweden, and the differences within the group are large. It is estimated that there are approximately 2,000 people under 65 years of age in Sweden. The number over 65 years of age is significantly larger. Approximately ten children with deaf-blindness are born each year.

Deaf-blindness is, according to a common Nordic definition, a collective term for a combined visual and hearing impairment. The term congenital deaf-blindness is used when the impairments have occurred before the development of concept formation, language, and communication. Acquired deaf-blindness means that the deaf-blindness occurred later in life.

Deaf-blindness entails very specific barriers that in many different ways affect the possibility of being active and participating in various contexts. Few people with deaf-blindness lack sight and hearing completely. Many have remaining functions, and for them, the right strategies, assistive devices, and adequate interventions can make a big difference.

Learning strategies to be able to communicate with others and to be able to move independently in different environments, and getting access to adapted aids and deaf-blind interpreters are examples of necessary measures. The measures often need to be based on methods that focus on touch and other sensory impressions other than sight and hearing.

I want to emphasize that it is society that bears the responsibility for making activities and environments accessible. A cross-border cooperation between those who, in their work, encounter people with deaf-blindness makes a big difference.

Mr. Speaker! Is society a guarantor of a good life for those affected by deaf-blindness? I want to point out three questions of a political nature that are important for achieving improvements for those people who have been affected by deaf-blindness.

Access to deaf-blind interpreters is not sufficient. It is important that the proposals from the ongoing interpreter investigation are actually implemented.

Access to guidance and assistance needs to be improved.

A reformed view on technology, assistive devices, and digital services that can be made available to these people is also needed. We have seen this, not least during the pandemic, when this group had very great difficulty in accessing information and service to the extent they needed.

General political debate Culture and sport

I can also inform that only a few regions in the country provide special services to the deaf-blind; this is done, among other places, in Skåne, where I come from. These people need an incredible amount of support because we know that the rates of ill health are much higher than for the rest of the population. Suicide and suicide attempts are also more common than among the population at large. The inequality across the country is therefore great.

Culture, Mr. Speaker, is an important factor for human well-being.

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has applied in Sweden since 2009. It states as follows: "States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have the opportunity to develop and use their creative, artistic and intellectual abilities, not only for their own interest but also for the enrichment of society."

Culture is a human right, even for those who do not see or hear. Artistic creation and cultural activities are of very great value for these persons. Unfortunately, society's cultural offerings are not adapted for deaf-blind persons' needs. It is required that premises are adapted and accessible, and access to a deaf-blind interpreter and a guide is absolutely necessary.

I want to use these words to draw attention to a small group of people who are severely affected by their disability. I therefore hope that the measures I have described will be realized and thus contribute to ensuring that people with deaf-blindness are given the opportunity for a good life and for cultural experiences.

(Applause)

Education and research

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! Children have different lives. Some grow up in great abundance, others under adverse circumstances. Some grow up with literate role models and great access to many books, newspapers and conversations, others in a more language-poor environment. Some have parents with long education, others have parents with short education.

The Swedish school, with rights and duties for all, funded according to ability and allocated according to need, is constructed to reduce the difference that these life conditions provide and so to speak level the starting line. It has been world-best at that. It is no longer.

In recent decades, the difference between schools has become increasingly large, and family background has had an ever-increasing impact on children's school results. For many years, the Swedish knowledge results declined, and inequality increased.

We Social Democrats have turned the trend by investing heavily in the school. Now the Swedish knowledge results are increasing in measurement after measurement. At the same time, inequality persists and increases as a result of the school being managed as if it were a market.

Therefore, some things need to change in the Swedish school system, so that society regains control.

First and foremost, schools must be financed according to the responsibility they have and according to the needs of the student groups. In that case, the school funding needs to be differentiated between independent and municipal schools, so that we stop paying independent schools a bonus for a task they do not have. A structural amount is needed in the school funding so that schools that have students with greater needs for teacher density and other support also have resources to meet those needs. The state needs to increase its commitment to the financing of the school.

General political debate Education and research

The unjust free school queues must be banned. When there are more applicants than places at a school, a selection must be made. Free schools are allowed today to use queue time to make that selection. And they do, because it is an excellent way to sort out a profitable student base. It leads to students from different social backgrounds being provided with their education in the same classroom to a decreasing extent.

School selection must become collective. All schools today have the responsibility to manage their own admissions. When Skolinspektionen checked earlier this year how the independent schools are doing in managing this, the result can be summarized as: It is not going well. Of 30 inspected independent schools, 24 do not follow the rules. Students and their guardians are not told why they were admitted to a school or why they were not. Schools collect information about students that they are not allowed to use for selection, for example, regarding students' support needs or mother tongue, and sort students based on that. School selection must be managed in a coherent and collective system.

The principle of public access must be introduced for all schools in Sweden. Independent schools are entirely tax-financed and exercise authority in place of authorities. Naturally, all information regarding their activities must be public for everyone to access and scrutinize. Society's need for transparency outweighs the companies' need to protect their trade secrets every single day.

The most important thing of all to create a more equal school that can compensate for students' different circumstances and needs is to get rid of the profit motive. The one who runs a school to make money puts the shareholders' interests before the students'. This leads to segregation, grade inflation, lower teacher density, poorer qualifications and so on. To re-establish the school as society's smallest common denominator - as the place where people from different backgrounds meet - we must reclaim democratic control over the school.

(Applause)

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Mr. Speaker! It feels very nice to be back here in the speaker's chair. This time we are in government, unlike when I was here last, in the spring.

Last night we had a seminar with the Society for Members of Parliament and Researchers, Rifo. It was about clean water. One could say that clean water is something we all take for granted. But thanks to Swedish research, we also have access to clean water. Our water belongs to the cleanest in the world. Unfortunately, we are surpassed by Finland, but otherwise, we are in a very good position when it comes to clean water. Research is needed in very many areas.

Mr. Speaker! We Moderates prioritize research in very many areas. It is immensely important for us to achieve success in Sweden. Within healthcare, there has never been as much talk about research as there has been during the last few years. Above all, it has been about covid research and vaccine research. It is still prioritized, and many have probably understood that it is a matter of life and death and that one must also cooperate within research to achieve successes. Basic research is very important, and then applied research is added so that one can obtain fast and precise results.

From the Moderates' side, there are also many other research areas that we prioritize. It concerns women's research, for example regarding endometriosis and migraine and a coherent maternity care. We see this as very prioritized. We also invest in cancer research and childhood cancer research. Here, in addition to research, aftercare and rehabilitation are also included.

We must also be able to retain our key competence within many research areas. We shall attract researchers who come here and also want to stay, and for that, we must have a cooperation between municipalities, the business sector, and educational institutions. This we see as extremely important, and it must be developed even further.

We are currently making major investments in, for example, electrification. A lot is being invested in, among other places, in Gothenburg, where I come from. I am very happy that we are getting a battery factory and also a lot of research there. But then it is a matter of getting staff for this. It is therefore extremely important that we cooperate with several areas to retain key competence.

Furthermore, research on climate and energy transition is important. There, we prioritize that it should be done in a sustainable way and that we can simultaneously increase Sweden's attractiveness and competitiveness. Here, it is about excellent research, i.e., very highly prioritized research.

Mr. Speaker! Something that is also very important right now is research on defense and cybersecurity as well as space research, which is useful in many areas within both peace and environmental work.

Then there are many areas where we must do even more when it comes to research.

The Moderates safeguard academic freedom. There should be no threats or hate within research. We also do not want too many political finger-wagging - not even from the Moderates. Although I am a Moderate and like research, I know that we can sometimes be a bit too meddlesome, even though the Moderates are, of course, the least meddlesome. We must not interfere too much in research.

When we appoint boards at educational institutions, expertise should be the important factor, not that one is a politician, but that one has competence in what is to be protected.

I looked up "research" and saw that it is an active, planned and methodical investigation conducted by researchers to obtain new knowledge and increase understanding. As a Moderate, I see it as important to obtain new knowledge and increase awareness. Therefore, I am a politician and want to speak about research as a very important area.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! On questions regarding profit extraction, the Moderaterna write on their website that they want to tighten the controls linked to how good the schools are. The Slottsavtalet, which the new government recently presented, landed in a similar conclusion. The market elements in Swedish schools shall not be removed, but just as the Moderaterna write on their website, control and inspection shall instead increase. The right to profit extraction during the first years shall therefore be granted to schools if they have good results.

My question to the Moderate Party member is: How much control, inspection, and bureaucracy is it reasonable to impose on our already pressured teachers - all for the purpose of maintaining the right to profit extraction?

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! What is important is actually that there are good results and high quality in independent schools but also in municipal schools. We unfortunately see that it is not always high quality. Therefore, we want to invest more in ensuring that the School Inspectorate can conduct both announced and unannounced visits. It is just as important in municipal schools as in independent schools. We think that is very important. It is about the quality for the students. It is about their work environment but actually also about the educators' work environment. On that, we will not yield.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Madam Speaker! But today our teachers are already so enormously overburdened that they are fleeing the school. The teachers cannot tolerate more inspection, control, administration and bureaucracy - all because one does not want to settle the market elements.

The question to Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström remains: Is it reasonable to choose not to fundamentally address the commercial elements but instead just place more burden on our teachers?

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! For us, it is still important that we have quality within the school. We believe that students have a right to that. We also want it to be a good study environment and a good learning environment for the educators.

I understand that it is a large administrative burden, and we do not think it is something that should be prioritized either. But people are actually fleeing because it is a bad working environment – that is what many teachers say. It is not about the salary, but it is the working environment that is too burdensome. Unfortunately, it is often very chaotic in the school. There is a lot that needs to be done.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is an extreme country today, extreme in the sense that our school system is built on a kind of skewed market logic, a market school. No other country in the world applies our school system. All other countries look at us in Sweden in amazement and wonder what we are actually doing. The fact is that the majority of the Swedish people also wonder, as a majority of the population is against profits in welfare.

The market school is based on the principle that we should have a tax-funded school, and that is good. But anyone can in practice start a school and begin to make money from it, and that is bad. It is bad from several perspectives. But primarily it is bad – to use an old moderate-wing expression – so that one should not waste the taxpayers' money.

Tax is society's method of financing what we are to have in common. Private profits for individual companies cannot in any way be said to be what the people expected when the free school system was introduced just over 30 years ago. On the contrary, the main argument then was that the school would become cheaper and, above all, better. We can state that it became neither one nor the other. On the contrary, it has become free access to tax funds, which has enabled the large school corporations that are now roaming freely to spend large sums on lobbying to influence the politics conducted to their own advantage. At the same time, the school—everyone would probably agree—has become worse.

Mr. Speaker! The Slottsavtalet has no solutions to the problems that we see the school has or faces, something that has been highlighted today by the chairpersons of Lärarförbundet and Lärarnas Riksförbund. I do, however, find it interesting how quickly it was for a company like Academedia to say that they were completely satisfied with the changes proposed in the Slottsavtalet. What is being communicated is: "Many of the proposals AcadeMedia has developed over the years are included here." Shortly thereafter, a new school minister takes office, who, in addition to being a Liberal, sits on the board of and furthermore owns shares in a school company. These are shares that she chooses to sell after she has taken office, so that she would not happen to miss out on the value increase that her own appointment as responsible minister would entail. To top it all off, the company she sat on the board of is notorious for only serving the children crispbread and water for breakfast. One still wonders what connections there actually are between the Liberals and the private school companies?

Madam Speaker! What is corruption, really? According to the World Bank's definition, it is the abuse of public power for private gain. I am neither a prosecutor nor a police officer, but in the case of the Liberals and the writings in the palace agreement and with the ministerial appointments in mind, I would at least begin to wonder. Is it appropriate? Are the formulations in the palace agreement a commissioned job from the business sector concerned? Has the line for corruption been crossed?

Madam Speaker! We will most likely have reason to return to the agreement and its formulations, but this government formation has, if nothing else, possibly shown us a completely different dimension of what the concept of the market school actually means. Sweden's students and teachers - yes, the entire Swedish school system - deserve better. We in Vänsterpartiet will do everything we can so that the Swedish school will once again become the best in the world.

(Applause)

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Madam Speaker! It is, of course, not possible to demand everything from the 60-page Tidö Agreement, which spans everything from healthcare to climate. But I still had high expectations for clear answers on the serious problems that must be solved in order to have a school where every child in the entire country gets the opportunity to succeed.

But, unfortunately, once again the holistic perspective is missing. Once again, we have a government that is going to devote itself to patching and repairing a system that is broken instead of creating a new one. The system I am talking about is, of course, the resource allocation system, a system that today favors large schools and preschools and consistently disadvantages both municipal schools and small actors.

Often I receive calls from parents who have struggled year after year. They have children who have been home-sitters but who, when they finally received a place at a resource school, returned to school. But then the rug is pulled out from under their existence. The supplementary amount, which the municipality has granted, is withdrawn, and the school's finances are threatened.

In Stockholm County, my county, there is chaos regarding how resources are distributed to the children who have the greatest needs. Children and parents have become stuck in a cruel carousel where municipalities, school actors, the Riksdag and the government only blame each other. Here, the government and the Riksdag need to make decisions that clearly show where the responsibility lies and how the resources should be distributed.

Half of the country's schools have fewer than 200 students. Many are located in rural areas. These need to be protected, and the regulations must be simplified so that schools with different principals can cooperate and share resources, for example, subject teachers. The possibilities of digitalization also need to be developed and utilized.

In schools in vulnerable areas, the best and most experienced educators are needed. In that case, the schools must be able to offer a working environment that allows the educators to actually do their jobs and have the strength to stay - because the will is there.

And don't forget preschool! It is here that the foundation is laid. The staff density and the educators' competence are crucial for the children to receive the foundation that allows them to then proceed safely to school.

The allocation of resources is the key, and it must work. It is far more important than rules of order, queuing systems, and profits. Such things are also important, but they will not lead to an equal school as long as the foundation is missing. Instead, we must unite around a new resource allocation system that seriously starts from education and students' needs and simultaneously stimulates increased cooperation between municipal actors and independent actors.

I am a person who sees the glass as half full, and there is actually a short passage in the agreement of the government cooperation that I place great hope in. I look forward curiously to seeing what actually lies behind it.

It reads as follows: New equivalent school fee. Steps are being taken to introduce a nationally binding school fee norm in order to increase the equivalence in the Swedish school across the entire country through state steering of the funding.

Even though I am reflecting on what state governance means here and what consequences it entails, I still hope that this small passage includes all the points I have highlighted and many more. I hope that the government invites all the parties in the Riksdag to that work so that we get a stable foundation for the Swedish preschool and school to stand on.

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

Nike Örbrink (KD)

Madam Speaker! This is my first speech as a new Member of Parliament. It warms me a little extra to be able to hold this maiden speech dedicated to perhaps the most important investment for the future. It is about the school and the school's role in combating the mental ill-health of children and young people and about investments in student health.

When the school functions at its best, the child goes there in the morning with hope in their heart and receives the support to be able to understand, the environment to be able to learn, and the friends to be able to develop with.

After the bell rings, they should be able to go home to their parents hopefully and, around the dinner table, tell about all the dreams they have for the future. They might want to become a police officer, engineer, doctor, or perhaps even a teacher themselves.

Unfortunately, it is a reality that is far from what all children out there who spend the majority of their days in school corridors can relate to. Many, instead of having hope in their hearts, have a lump in their stomachs and help that is all too far away. In that case, we as politicians have failed. Swedish student health truly needs a fresh start.

All too often when I am out at schools and talk to children and young people, they tell me that when they have turned to the school health services and sought an adult's helping hand, they have been met by a closed door with a post-it note where it says something along the lines of: Please come back another day, away at a conference.

In April last year, it was established that a school doctor looked after an average of 9,400 students. For every school psychologist, there were 1,200 students even though the target was at most 500. This is the case despite the fact that we know that mental illness among children and young people cannot wait.

I am convinced that it will not be easier to focus on this afternoon's Swedish lesson if one felt unwell during the morning's math lesson and had no one to talk to about it.

In 2017, every third primary school and every second upper secondary school had received a notice from the School Inspectorate regarding deficient student health, despite the fact that we know that mental ill-health among children and young people is increasing.

We know that the years of youth never come back. Sweden's children and young people deserve better than a closed door on the day they need help to be able to live and not just survive those years. That is why I was pleased when I took part in the proposals that accompanied both the Tidö Agreement and the Government Bill.

It is about strengthened efforts for increased study time in the classroom. It is about a student health guarantee that guarantees an available counselor every day at the school. It is about cooperation agreements between school and healthcare to reduce the risk of children falling through the cracks.

But it is also about principals' clarified responsibility to maintain safety in the school and increased powers to move students who cannot respect their classmates. It should always be the bully and not the bullied who are forced to change schools.

Madam Speaker! School shall be a place for the future. It shall be a place where young people receive the support to understand, the study environment to be able to learn, and the peers to be able to develop with. But then school must begin to be a safe place. The threshold to get help during long, tough days must also be low.

The coming years must be a new start for school health and for the mental health of children and young people.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! I shall be brief. Nike Örbrink wrote in Expressen Debatt that the story of the immigrant who succeeds against all odds must stop being an exception. I would then just like to ask how that aligns with the Tidö Agreement's proposal not to abolish waiting time as a basis for selection. It is precisely the waiting time that causes children who have immigrated here to fall behind because their parents have not been able to place them in the queue, unlike children who have parents born here who have had knowledge of the Swedish school system.

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

Nike Örbrink (KD)

Madam Speaker! Integration truly begins in school. A functioning school is also a foundation for more people to be able to come in and become a part of Sweden and enter the Swedish community.

When we look at the Tidö Agreement, we also see the investments in that. It is about more teachers who get more time for each student. It is about reforming both the intake and the school time, for that part. It is also about giving the School Inspectorate stronger powers to oversee the quality in the school. I believe that is where the key lies.

I come with experience of the education policy in the City of Stockholm. We have looked closely at precisely the schools in disadvantaged areas. We have worked actively and raised the knowledge results. That is where the key lies.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! We are all aware that when we saw the Tidö Agreement, we saw very much migration and very little integration. It is also obvious that the market shall continue to cheer.

Children of parents who have immigrated here will continue to lag behind. It is bad integration policy from the new majority in Sweden's Riksdag.

Since you, Nike Örbrink, were so eager that children of immigrants should not succeed against all odds, I had hoped that you would have a better policy.

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

Nike Örbrink (KD)

Madam Speaker! I believe that the most important thing is that these children who need help with the Swedish language and homework reading get it. It is A and O. That means this.

I also note that you do not provide any proposals on how the Social Democrats want to improve student health and how the Social Democrats want to introduce a student health guarantee. It is something that the Social Democrats have not introduced but which we are now moving forward with. Instead, you choose to highlight something completely different.

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

Mats Wiking (S)

Madam Speaker! I want to highlight the after-school activity operations. When my children grew up during the late 80s and early 90s, children went to after-school care until grade 3 at the latest. It was also common that they became so-called key children as early as grade 2 and went straight home after school. Many children were not even enrolled in after-school care at that time. Today it is different. In principle, all children who have the right to after-school care go to after-school care.

Madam Speaker! What has happened with fritis during all these years? Well, a separate curriculum was received in 2016 where it states, among other things, that the after-school center shall stimulate the child's development. It shall deepen the children's knowledge and experiences and offer a meaningful leisure time and social community. The curriculum also states that the children's groups at fritis shall have an appropriate composition and size and offer a good environment.

What does it actually look like? Unfortunately, the children's groups at the after-school centers have increased significantly during the 90s and early 00s, and not even half of the staff working at the after-school centers have pedagogical education. In many ways, the after-school centers have become a form of storage. It is quite clear that the after-school centers have not been prioritized in the municipalities' budgets.

School politicians in the municipalities have however not been able to miss that more parents choose to keep their children in after-school care at older ages. The activities then need to be adapted and changed based on the new needs that arise. Even more important is it for children who come from home circumstances that are not so good. In those cases, a functioning school and after-school care activity is A and O to create security for the children.

Madam Speaker! So what are the opportunities for the after-school centers? As I see it, the big part is the fine curriculum from 2016. It states that the basis is that there should be learning when a child attends fritis. Learning does not only occur in the classroom, but learning should occur in interaction with other children in play, in the activity, where children develop their emotional ability and learn to take others into consideration.

Through organized break activities, the after-school centers also play a crucial role in increasing physical activity among children in school. And when children's mental health, Madam Speaker, becomes worse, the staff at the after-school center can be crucial for strengthening the child's well-being. So it is clear that the after-school centers have many more and important functions than just being childcare.

But to meet the curriculum's objectives with preschool, smaller child groups as well as more trained educators and politicians who understand the value of investing in preschool are required.

Madam Speaker! The Social Democratic-led government has, during 2014-2022, made significant investments in school, health care, and elderly care. Half a billion has been allocated annually to develop the after-school activity. A parity grant has also been introduced for the purpose of compensating schools, including after-school activities with greater social challenges.

The groups at fritis have actually become smaller under the S-led government. From 2014, when the groups were at approximately 41 children per department, the figure today is down to about 35. We Social Democrats have also commissioned an inquiry that will map out and identify which areas of development exist within the leisure activities.

The investigation shall also propose measures to increase quality and strengthen the leisure center's compensatory mission.

With an S-led government, investments in schools and after-school centers would have continued, but what does the new right-conservative government say in the so-called Tidö Agreement about the after-school centers? Nothing, absolutely nothing.

(Applause)

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! In my hometown Malmö, which has for many years been a social democratically governed municipality, we have long struggled with poor school results.

Just over 20 percent of Malmö's school students completed grade 9 this summer with incomplete grades and therefore do not have access to all upper secondary programs. Despite these mediocre results, it is still supposed to be an improvement compared to previous years.

Is it true that school results have improved to today's level? The answer is yes - if one ignores grade inflation. That is, we do not know for certain.

This grade inflation that exists in many schools in Sweden is a major national problem. However, it is very palpable in my home city of Malmö. In the core subjects Swedish, mathematics, English, and Swedish as a second language, Malmö has, in the latest statistics presented by Skolverket, a larger grade inflation in all these four subjects compared to the whole country. It is thus the difference between the results in the national tests and the grades obtained that shows the grade inflation. According to Skolverket, the national tests are a support for an equivalent and fair assessment and grading of a student's knowledge.

If one looks a little closer at this year's results in Malmö, one sees that it is a subject that stands out in particular, namely mathematics! It is a very concrete subject that should be quite simple to grade.

Ten schools have set a grade average in mathematics that exceeds the results in the national tests for grade 9 by one to two grade levels. The majority of these schools are located in so-called marginalized areas.

Madam Speaker! It has unfortunately also been shown in investigations that teachers at certain schools in Malmö have been urged to give higher grades - very unpleasant, I think. I am aware that there is a political value in wanting to report good results for the activities one is responsible for, but at some point, reality catches up.

There are several obvious disadvantages with this grade inflation. All these students who have received "joy grades" and then continue in upper secondary school will, in many cases, find it difficult to complete their education. We must also not forget the students who have received fair grades. They are also many, but they have not gotten into the specific upper secondary program they applied for because they have been overtaken by other students who have received unfair grades. This is not okay!

Several measures are required to eliminate or mitigate grade inflation. It could involve a new or old-fashioned grading system, but it could also involve state ownership of the Swedish school system.

There is hope here. A state ownership will be investigated in connection with the new government that has just taken office, and it is something that I believe will please many.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! I have read the Tidö Agreement, at least the section concerning the school, very carefully. Nowhere does it state that the incoming government intends to investigate a nationalization of the school. Jörgen Grubb is speaking falsely in the chamber.

I would actually like to talk about something completely different, namely that language is the foundation for all learning. The research is unambiguous. Bilingual students benefit from language development in both languages, that is to say, becoming good at one's mother tongue makes it easier to learn one's second language.

The Sverigedemokraterna's writing in the Tidö Agreement is, in principle, a direct instruction to slaughter mother tongue instruction. All research is in agreement, namely that mother tongue instruction strengthens the learning of Swedish. Do the Sverigedemokraterna believe that the Swedish school should rest on a scientific basis?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! Of course, the Swedish school shall rest on a scientific basis.

There are many tasks regarding mother tongues. We have debated this in this chamber for several years, and I have also debated it locally.

There are some research institutes that in the early 70s produced figures suggesting that mother tongue instruction would be good. The research was conducted in the USA. Then scientific research was conducted properly closer to home in our neighboring country Denmark. Several thousand students were examined. There were those who had mother tongue instruction, and there were those who did not have mother tongue instruction. Then they were compared. There was no difference – neither better nor worse in any way. This shows that mother tongue instruction in the question of better learning does not provide any benefit. There is also nothing negative, but there is no benefit.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! Last spring, a doctoral thesis was published at Umeå University stating that there is a cross-influence between language development in the mother tongue and language development in Swedish. This means that if one becomes better at Swedish, one becomes better at the mother tongue, and if one becomes better at the mother tongue, one becomes better at Swedish. Bilingualism does not make one half-lingual – on the contrary. They strengthen each other.

We do not need to discuss what the research says. The research is unambiguous. I am right. You are wrong. The question is whether the Sweden Democrats will pursue a policy that involves pursuing a scientific basis.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! I hear Member Linus Sköld claim that he is right and I am wrong. But those words must stand for Member Linus Sköld.

I relate to reality, that is, what is actually happening - not what is compared in different research results. There are arguments both for and against, but reality shows that there is no difference. That is what we will stick to.

We will work to remove the mother tongue instruction.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Madam Speaker! Jörgen Grubb speaks in strong words about the importance of combating grade inflation, but he misses a small detail: It is the profit-driven friskolor that have grade inflation to a particularly large extent.

It is well documented that the Sweden Democrats, after intensive lobbying from the business sector, chose to abandon their previous ban on profit extraction from schools. I have respect for that one changes their opinion after political reality, but the fact is that the marketization of Swedish schools continues to spread.

A majority of the Swedish people want to see a stop to the profit-taking from Swedish schools. SD's voters want to see a stop to the profit-taking from Swedish schools. Why do the Sweden Democrats choose to listen to the business sector instead?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Aylin, for the question! I have received the same question before in this chamber, and the answer will be the same because it is from reality.

There is something called Siris. It is statistics that Skolverket maintains. It is on the internet; it is completely open. It was from there that I took the figures for Malmö that I mentioned in my speech. There, one can compare the differences between national tests and actual grade results. That is, what is called grade inflation; if that I think we actually agree on. It shows a poor result for both independent schools collectively and for municipal schools collectively. However, it is a little, little worse for municipal schools. One has, therefore, a little, little higher grade inflation in municipal schools compared with independent schools, but it is quite sad results on both sides.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Madam Speaker! It is a fact that the profit-driven friskolor are getting away with enormous grades of joy.

I did not receive an answer to my question. Why do the Sweden Democrats continue to defend the owners of the school companies' right to profit over the children's right to learning? It is billions of kronor that disappear annually from our students to venture capitalists.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! What our party defends is, above all, schools that provide and create a good education for their students.

That it can then be unreasonable profits - which can occur, absolutely; it certainly occurs - we try to remove by having sufficiently strict rules for this and inspections.

There are five points in the Tidö Agreement that demonstrate this. One only has to read and see.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Member Grubb said here that the Sweden Democrats see reality as it is. But reality is very selective in the Sweden Democrats' Sweden.

We have countless times seen testimonies from religious free schools where students suffer mentally. Students suffer mentally and are pressured to belong to religious activities that they may not want at all.

In the Tidö Agreement, the Sweden Democrats - for I presume it is the Sweden Democrats who have written that point - write that it is only about Muslim independent schools, that the problem and that reality only concerns Muslim independent schools.

What do the Sweden Democrats intend to do for all those children who actually suffer in the Christian independent schools? They are not standing by.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Niklas, for your question!

We are operating quite equally when it comes to the mental health of children and students. It should naturally be good at all schools, regardless of the head of the school and regardless of municipality, county, or region. The same rules apply throughout Sweden.

If you look at the agreement that we call the Tidö Agreement, you can see that it says the following: "There is a major problem with extremism and Islamism among schools with a Muslim profile." That is what we stand for. We do not see Islamism in other religious schools. That is the answer to your question.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Then I shall give a tip to Member Grubb to watch Uppdrag granskning this afternoon and this evening, after this. In August, they showed several striking testimonies from different schools all over our country, all with a Christian profile. There were countless students who suffered so poorly mentally that they still have [scars] 10-15 years after their schooling.

Those who believe that there are only problems in Muslim schools will find evidence to the contrary here. Look at that documentary!

(Applause)

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thanks for the tip, Niklas!

We do not like any mental ill-health, and we hope that the parents also take their responsibility if students are feeling very poorly in a school and move them to another school if they have the possibility. I have personally done that with our two children. The school should, of course, ensure that it manages itself perfectly, but if it is anything else, one moves one's children.

We have, as we have said, the same requirements for all schools. For us, it is obvious; one does not need to say it.

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! Yes, school and education concerns all of us who are here today, and it concerns our entire country.

School and education should not only convey knowledge and skills. School and education lay the foundation for the individual's development and future, and it lays the foundation for our society.

Sweden is a fantastic country. We have come a long way in the work for equality, we are at the forefront of technology, and our young people have good knowledge in, for example, English. This is to mention only a few examples of favorable factors when it comes to education.

But the Swedish school system as a whole is unfortunately not a success story. We have talked about it earlier today. We know, for example, that one in four students in 2021 did not have passing grades in one or more, in the worst cases many, subjects when they left primary school. Much suggests that we have skyrocketing school absenteeism in both primary school and upper secondary school. It also climbs further down, all the way to preschool. Teachers testify to rowdy classrooms, and one in three teachers says that a large part of the teaching time must be spent just on obtaining a working environment of peace and quiet. Furthermore, it is perceived that the mandate to maintain order is weakened.

Madam Speaker! I am sure that all governments, both the one currently in power and those that have governed previously, have wanted well. Everyone wants us to reverse the negative development. But I regret that one often tends to get stuck in the school's form of operation. It is not that simple.

There is much that needs to be done to get order in Swedish school, and the most important conversation, the most important meeting, that which we need to talk about most, is that which takes place in the classroom between teacher and student.

Madam Speaker! Everything begins with security, social security that drives curiosity. That is when we can learn. But the trust that the school can deliver the intended intentions also needs to increase. We need to give principals and teachers the mandate to do what is required so that every young person can achieve their potential, and success is spelled expectations and cooperation - expectations of students, expectations of each other and expectations of the school but also that authorities can cooperate and function together.

Madam Speaker! We know that learning begins with security. We also know that knowledge is conveyed through the teachers, and therefore the teachers are key individuals in key positions.

The new government is putting the teacher's role in focus. We want to say to Sweden's school leaders: We see what you are struggling with, and we want to help you succeed better.

We also continue to see the alarming teacher shortage. We see great mobility between schools. We also see that teachers teach less and work more with administrative and social tasks. It is unsustainable.

The good news is that we have a new policy and a new direction for Sweden that will be able to make a big difference for everyone who works in the school system. We want to meet the staff. We want to give a new direction and new hope. All points can be read in the Tidö Agreement.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! The member represents the largest party in the government that has just been formed. It is distressing to me that the Sweden Democrats have been allowed to rule the agreement that exists, that is, the Tidö Agreement, to such a great extent. It is also distressing that a party whose Prime Minister says that one should unite and heal – not divide – the country explicitly agrees to formulations about "a major problem with extremism and Islamism among schools with a Muslim profile" and that it is this that is addressed in the area of religious free schools.

For me, it is actually distressing that as a Moderate, one lets SD set the agenda in this area. In the presentation, it was stated that it is an equal school that stands in the first place. Why then are the rights of Christian independent schools superior to the children's right to equal education?

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! It is a justified question, and I believe the member knows the answer to it. In politics, we must focus on substantive issues, and a negotiation takes place where we give and take.

We have agreed that this is what we need to start with. We have not agreed on what the end is or what we shall do next, but we have agreed on where we shall start.

I agree with the member that there is more we need to review. The friskola reform, which is now on the agenda, is a beginning. I can promise the member that there will be a continuation beyond this.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Even if one is not for anything as a party, one is nevertheless, when leading the government, responsible for the policy that one has agreed upon with the parties one cooperates with. Right now, it is the Moderaterna who are the largest party in the government, and it is therefore also the Moderaterna who are responsible for the policy in the Tidö Agreement and for the policy that was presented in the government statement.

That policy is clear: Muslim independent schools are being made into something that Christian independent schools are not. Why are you making a distinction?

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! I repeat what has already been said: This is a beginning. This is a collaboration between many different parties. I respect that we must meet. We may not have had the same starting point from the beginning, but in politics, we find common denominators.

I stand for this. This is a beginning. Much more will happen.

(Applause)

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! The last time we had a Moderate Prime Minister, a new school law was introduced - the year was 2010. One of the portal paragraphs in the school law initially reads as follows: "All children and pupils in all school forms shall be given the guidance and stimulation they need in their learning and their personal development so that they, based on their own circumstances, can develop as far as possible according to the goals of the education."

At the same time, we have a government here that protects the right of friskolor to extract profit from their operations. Every krona in profit is an obstacle to students reaching as far as possible. Even when all students have an A, they should go further – that is how the management is structured in the Education Act that the Moderaterna themselves decided on twelve years ago. Are the Moderaterna prepared to change this fine portal paragraph in order to protect the school companies' profits?

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! I hear that the member in the debate is getting stuck in what we often get stuck in when it comes to the school debate, that is, the form of operation. It is regrettable, because it is not that simple.

It is obviously the case that the reform regarding the friskola needs to be reviewed, and we have also said that we want to do that. Taking out profit is per se nothing that is bad or wrong. But when quality is not achieved, profits shall not be able to be taken out either.

I think the Social Democratic member needs to realize that there is a lot that is going to happen here. Be patient!

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! I perceive it as that the member did not understand my reasoning. "As far as possible" means that if there are funds left over for profit, one has not fulfilled the mandate one is assigned to manage. Therefore, we cannot have profit distribution in a school that is to live up to the mandate that the Moderaterna themselves have determined the schools shall have. How does the member reconcile this equation if she is not prepared to change the portal paragraph or forbid profit withdrawals?

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! When one runs a company, profits are taken out for various reasons. One reason can be that one wants a future and to be able to invest in something that happens ahead. All profit that is taken out is therefore not consumed directly, but it can be a reinvestment. Therefore, a profit in itself is not wrong, but there are different arguments for why there should be different profit withdrawals.

With that said, it is important that quality always comes first. We cannot have a school where profit extraction occurs without this as a basis.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is the only country in the world that allows unlimited profit withdrawals from tax-funded schools. Every year, billions are taken out in profit. If only last year's profit withdrawal had been reinvested in the school, it could have resulted in 2,200 more teachers. Tax money intended for children's and students' learning disappears into the pockets of venture capitalists. Is it reasonable that Swedish schools continue to be drained and segregated because of the pursuit of profit? The Swedish people do not think so. We Social Democrats do not think so. It is time to ban the profit withdrawals.

The problem is only that the Parliament's right-wing majority has time and again voted no to regulating the unlimited profit extractions and that the new right-wing nationalist government does not see the problem. The Sweden Democrats even defend the school corporations' pursuit of profit with the words "Our party does not want a socialist school system."

But, Madam Speaker, do the Sweden Democrats really mean that every other country in the world has a socialist school system? Sweden, the country in the middle, stands out today as the country of extremes. Nowhere in the world have the school's adaptations to the market gone so far, and it has major consequences. OECD, which can most closely be regarded as market-liberal, has in report after report and year after year failed the market elements in Swedish schools. The incentive to make a profit leads to students who are not considered profitable being sorted out. The gap between the best and worst performing students has increased, and family background plays an ever larger role when it comes to school results.

The marketization of Swedish schools must be stopped, and therefore we Social Democrats want a holistic perspective. Ban the profit-seeking, create a fair school choice, and stop overcompensating independent schools with tax money that creates large profit margins! We want a cohesive school with one focus: the students' development and learning.

Several parties now say they want to limit profit withdrawals, an announcement that, among others, the Liberals made during the election campaign. But when it comes to profit distribution, the government's new school agreement only lands on that profit distribution should not occur during the first years, which is completely toothless. This is even welcomed by Academedia, which argues that it will not affect their expansion. Furthermore, linking the right to profit withdrawals to schools' results risks fueling grade inflation and increasing teachers' administrative burden.

It is clear that the Riksdag's eight political parties have different loyalties and that for some parties it is difficult to sever the ties to the business sector's market interests. But as members of Parliament, we have a duty to serve democracy and to put the Swedish people's best interests first. Then it must end with using our children and students as a means to make a profit on the school market. Every krona intended for children's and students' learning must go to children's and students' learning.

(Applause)

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Aylin Fazelian, for the contribution, which has been repeated a few times today!

I see a great concern with the fact that the school does not always function. Teachers are fleeing from the school because they do not have peace of mind in their work. Students do not function and suffer mentally in school. In that case, it is important that there are different types of schools, that there are independent schools. Then we also want to review the independent school, but we want a high quality in the school, both in municipal and in independent schools.

I think it is a bit unfortunate that the member only speaks about something that the member is against, instead of speaking about how one wants to do so that it works better.

The country has now been governed for eight years by, among others, the member's party, and unfortunately, things have not improved in the school. The school results have fallen, the students are feeling worse, and the teachers are fleeing from the school.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the floor. The answer is that the market management of the school is the reason why the school continues to be torn apart.

We heard the Moderates in the debate today say that it can be good if companies take out profits. But a school cannot be seen as a company like any other.

The pursuit of profit affects the entire school system, including the municipal schools. This, in combination with the right of free establishment, means that independent schools choose to establish themselves in areas where the students are considered most profitable.

I presented our holistic perspective. It is, of course, about banning profit withdrawals but also about introducing a fair school choice and, may I add here, of course, about continuing to fund the school in an equitable manner. Therefore, we have significantly expanded the equity grant.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank you very much for the answer.

I have worked for many years within school policy in the Gothenburg municipality. There, one saw a great concern that the municipal school was not functioning. But where there were independent schools that had slightly higher quality, specifically in this area, there was actually also higher quality in the municipal school, because if one is to retain the students, one must offer a good quality. We also saw great advantages with different orientations, which many independent schools have - municipal schools can also have them, but it is primarily independent schools that have them. That caused the quality to be raised in the municipal school, which was very important there.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Madam Speaker! If we are to have a school system that once again ranks at the top in the world, every single tax crown intended for the school must go to the school. But as I pointed out in my speech, billions disappear annually that could have gone to teachers, to school books, and to the children's learning and development. But they disappear out, and it affects the entire school system. This, in combination with an unfair school choice with queues, has led to a market system that we must move away from.

(Applause)

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

Adrian Magnusson (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is in many ways a fantastic country. The Swedish welfare state has, since it began to be built up, led to many people being able to live lives that they otherwise could only have dreamed of. The boy who grew up in poverty has been able to acquire a villa and a Volvo. The girl who in her childhood had to get up early and help her parents with the farming has been able to learn to read and count. All this because we once in time collectively decided that in this country, your background, your social class, and your origin shall not play any role for what life you specifically want to live.

As I believe many of us know, the foundation for all of this is laid in school. It is in school that you receive an education and meet others who live and grow up in this country. It is in school that you meet others who have not lived a life like you have lived, who have not had the same upbringing as you and whose parents do not have the same incomes as your parents.

It is in school that the basic understanding of our differences and inequalities is laid. That is why it is so incredibly important that we have a school system that holds together, where different children get to meet, where the resources that are to go to the school also go to the school, and where all children are given the opportunity to shape the lives of their dreams.

Madam Speaker! What we once collectively decided in this country is under threat. The Swedish school system today is not characterized by the fact that every child, regardless of background, should be given the chance to live the life of their dreams. Instead, the focus lies on the well-being of market forces.

We have a right of establishment that is almost unlimited. The large school corporations' applications to start profit-making independent schools are rarely denied. The municipalities can certainly submit statements regarding the establishment and in sharp terms describe the negative consequences of such an establishment, but often it is a cry of warning to deaf ears. The right of establishment comes first.

I have experienced this myself in my own home municipality, Ystad. The education administration and a political majority were clear. The establishment of a new corporate school would threaten the municipal schools. Despite this, the large school corporation was granted permission to establish itself.

The municipalities' interest in having a well-functioning municipal school does not have the same dignity as the large school companies' interest in making a profit. This leads to municipalities being forced to cut back on the school or, in some cases, close schools. It is often the rural schools that are hit hardest. The conflict between city and country thus becomes ever greater when it is the market forces that are to be prioritized.

Madam Speaker! More needs to be done to secure all children's right to a good schooling. The municipalities, which are closest to the residents, need more tools to be able to give all children and young people in their municipality the right to a good education that they deserve.

It should be inherent in the nature of the matter that the democratic leadership in the Swedish system of government, which is responsible for education and which is also held accountable by the voters when it comes to education, has the tools they need to ensure that the education system functions.

As a Social Democrat with municipal political experience, I am convinced that a municipal veto against the establishment of independent schools is needed as soon as possible. It is therefore my hope that the new government will return to the Riksdag as soon as possible with such a proposal, even though it is missing from the palace agreement. The alternative is that we continue with the current order, where certain municipalities are out of breath every time a statement is to be submitted following an application from one of the large school companies to start an independent school.

I am convinced, and so is the Social Democratic Party, that we should not have it in a country where the government claims that the education issue is a priority, because Sweden can truly do better than that.

(Applause)

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

Caroline Högström (M)

Madam Speaker! A degree with passing grades is the best insurance against future exclusion. A completed education creates better conditions and provides more opportunities, not only for higher studies but also for finding a job or starting one's first company.

Madam Speaker! School is therefore one of the most important things we have, but I am concerned about the development. We see that more and more students are dropping out early and that we are not succeeding in providing vulnerable students with the support they need. It starts already in preschool with large groups of children and a workforce that cannot quite cope. It then continues in school with teachers who are burdened by a mountain of administration and with worry and disruption in the classrooms that prevent students from concentrating. Too late, students who cannot read are discovered, and resources are perceived as not being sufficient.

Madam Speaker! Schools and preschools are filled with passionate people who work significantly more than both their salary and job description actually allow. Among teachers and preschool teachers, however, illness due to stress is the most common reason for sick leave. It is a tough environment for those who have the most important job: to educate our children for the future.

At the same time, we see the consequences of a far-reaching shortage of trained staff. In my home county of Västmanland alone, 1,700 teachers and preschool teachers are missing until 2025. We see the same development across the entire country. These are alarming figures. The proportion of qualified teachers is also insufficient, whether viewed at the regional, municipal, or school level within the same municipality.

But, Madam Speaker, there are solutions. It is about achieving safety and focus in the classroom. It is about the right competence in the right place and that teachers' administrative burden is seriously eased so that they can focus on their important teaching mission.

Madam Speaker! The new government will, among other things, develop teacher education so that one is properly equipped when finished, including with a reinforcement of the leadership component in the education. An appreciation of the profession is also needed, and here we politicians have a special responsibility.

In conclusion: Preschool also needs better and long-term conditions, including smaller child groups and career paths for preschool teachers, so that more people can manage and want to stay in the profession. The profession must become more attractive to secure competence for the future. It is an undervalued job where an important foundation for future school success is being laid today.

(Applause)

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! As I have previously mentioned, I have looked at the palace agreement, because I think it is important to know what policy the newly appointed government intends to put into practice.

In the palace agreement, it appears in the school area that the government wants to introduce "jourskolor" (specialized schools). Those who are curious about what jourskolor are and who know that this is a Moderate-led Sweden Democrat government can go to the Sweden Democrats' parliamentary motion on jourskolor from the 2019/20 parliamentary session and read the definition of jourskolor there. They are, therefore, schools for those students who do not function in the normal school situation and who create anxiety or insecurity. The probability that the students intended are students with different functional variations, for example, neuropsychiatric functional impairments, is quite large.

The Moderates must take responsibility here and are answerable: How do students with disabilities benefit from being sorted out based on their disability and placed in another school?

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

Caroline Högström (M)

Madam Speaker! I believe that Linus Sköld must take responsibility for his interpretation, and it is problematic to say the least.

A problem in today's school is that one does not have the possibility to meet all students. Special teaching groups have been removed in many municipalities, and it does not work. One then stands as a lone teacher with 25-30 students with quite diverse abilities and lacks the resources to meet them all.

We must return to a possibility of being able to provide the right resources to the right students. Some students need less context in order to be able to develop.

I believe, as I have said, that Linus Sköld's interpretation rather shows his view of these students.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! I referred to the Sweden Democrats' parliamentary motion, so it was not at all my interpretation but their definition of what the target group is.

We have just made a fairly broad political agreement to organize the structure for resource schools so that there is a legal space to also start municipal resource schools. I perceive that as extensive special support. I perceive day schools as repression. Is that not correctly understood?

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

Caroline Högström (M)

Madam Speaker! I cannot be held accountable for what is written in the Sweden Democrats' parliamentary motion, but I can be held accountable for what is written in the Tidö Agreement. It is established here that there are students whom the regular school has difficulty meeting, for example, violent students. In that case, we need to find other solutions, and the special school can be one such solution among many other solutions for students who are in need of special support.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Education within the school system aims for children and students to acquire and develop knowledge and values. Education shall be designed in accordance with fundamental democratic values and human rights such as the inviolability of human life, the individual's freedom and privacy, the equal value of all people, equality, and solidarity between people. Education shall be based on a scientific foundation and proven experience.

This is an excerpt from what are called the portal paragraphs in the Education Act.

Madam Speaker! I and with this, it is for us Social Democrats self-evident that all religious free schools should be prohibited. The school shall be a place for students to break ideas and thoughts. The school shall be a place where students grow as human beings by socializing and learning from others with completely different backgrounds. There, the entrepreneur's child shall meet the worker's child, and the child from a Christian family shall meet the child from a Muslim family. That allows all our children to grow and develop as human beings.

In recent years, the former Social Democratic government has presented sharp proposals to achieve a school free from religious influence. It has been about setting higher requirements for actors who run schools, about giving the School Inspectorate sharper tools, and about introducing democracy criteria in the management and ownership review.

We have also presented sharp proposals to introduce a moratorium on the establishment of confessional free schools from 2024. The bill is prepared, ready to be presented to the new government if they dare to tackle the problem. We have seen the problem and presented a proposal for a solution, but this government appears to be dodging it.

Madam Speaker! It is crucial that we take steps to achieve a school free from religious influence and religious instruction. All children should have the right to attend a school where the focus lies on teaching and education. This is the path to a school where students get access to what the Education Act explicitly states: The education shall be based on a scientific foundation and proven experience.

For me as a politician, it is a duty to work to ensure that all children receive this opportunity.

For many, religion means a great asset and something that unites people in society. Children and young people find belonging and strength in their religion, and we must cherish that. But for other children, it is exactly the opposite. Religion feels forced. We know that many children and young people experience that the religious elements in today's religious free schools do not feel voluntary but forced.

We Social Democrats want the school to be a breathing space for these children. The school shall be a place where one feels free to develop and find one's way in life.

We Social Democrats stand up for an education that promotes every child's right to development, learning, and a lifelong desire to learn. That is why we Social Democrats will stand up for the ban on religious free schools.

(Applause)

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

Nike Örbrink (KD)

Madam Speaker! I do not believe that anyone in this chamber protects unserious actors. I do not believe that anyone in this chamber in Sweden's Riksdag considers that any child should be forced to undergo any form of religion. But in the will to guarantee this, do not throw the baby out with the bathwater!

I am going to ask a straight, concrete and simple question to Niklas Sigvardsson: What does he have against a school like the Jewish school, which follows the Swedish curriculum, which guarantees a good education but which perhaps focuses on serving kosher, which puts a little extra emphasis on celebrating the Jewish holidays and where many children and students thrive and where the teachers and parents are satisfied with the school? Why does Niklas Sigvardsson want to close a school like the Jewish school?

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! The member raises an important issue. The Jewish school and Jewish congregations have expressed concern when we have put forward proposals on establishment stops and on banning independent schools. In the submitted propositions, we have taken into account that the Jewish minority, which is one of our constitutionally protected minorities, should be able to feel secure even in the future.

It is, as I said, about equality. That is why we Social Democrats work hard so that all children have the right to an education based on scientific foundations and proven experience. It is nothing else that makes us convinced that we must introduce establishment stops. It is about children's right to be able to develop as far as is possible.

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

Nike Örbrink (KD)

Madam Speaker! I may have heard incorrectly, but I understood it as Niklas Sigvardsson explaining in the speaker's chair a few minutes ago that all confessional independent schools would be closed. I cannot interpret this in any other way than that it would also include a school such as the Jewish school, for example.

The fact remains: There is a number of unserious actors, and the School Inspectorate shall have increased powers to shut them down. All schools shall rest on a scientific basis, but why throw out those schools that function well and where teachers, students, and parents are satisfied, just because they place special emphasis on religion?

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! It is about the fact that we need to ensure the constitutionally protected right for minorities to continue to practice their culture. We have taken this into account in the bills that we have submitted in this area and in the dialogue that the previous government has had with the Jewish congregations when these have expressed concern.

Last but not least, it is about how we should act. We want to stop the next step, or the profit-seeking in the independent schools. It is also about completely different types of independent schools. The best would be if we got a school that focuses entirely on the scientific basis and proven experience.

(Applause)

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

Annette Rydell (S)

Madam Speaker! My speech will be about popular education and the importance of continued investment in study associations, such as ABF, and in cultural and folk high schools.

As a seasoned industrial worker who has worked in the industry for 40 years and as chairman of IF Metall Blekinge, I know how important it is to be able to receive education at all ages. Education in working life is just as important as primary school, upper secondary school, or university, and in that regard, adult education is an important complement and a skill-enhancing alternative.

There is a clear need now, as we have the new transition study support. I become a bit concerned here when the new government speaks about going in and tweaking the new LAS agreement, which has been developed by the labor market parties and is strongly anchored in politics as a whole, just so that there won't be changes when a new government arrives.

Madam Speaker! Popular education is important so that everyone is given the opportunity, together with others, to increase their knowledge and education for personal development and participation in society in a transition to match the labor market.

The LO family, the trade union movement, collaborates with ABF and the folk high schools throughout the country and is a crucial part in ensuring that our members can access knowledge that increases their competence. This also applies to everyone else in society who needs to receive an education that provides jobs.

We have many skill shortages today where we need competence to cover parts of the welfare system but also many industrial jobs. In this, the study associations with the folk high schools play a large role. This is culture in the working life. It is about creating activities based on the participants' prerequisites and needs. The participants learn from each other.

Popular education is also about preserving our history as it has its roots in the temperance movement, the free church movement, and the workers' movement. It is about freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and women's suffrage. These groups have been important for creating the democratic society we have today, and that is what we must safeguard.

Madam Speaker! Folkbildningen is characterized by the very important principle of free and voluntary, which means that it stands free from state control and that it shall always be voluntary for participants.

The state's support for popular education aims to support activities that contribute to strengthening and developing democracy, enabling increased diversity and ensuring that people can influence their life situation in order to create engagement in societal development, level out educational inequalities and raise the level of education and training in society and contribute to broadening the interest in increased participation in cultural life.

The children's perspective is of the utmost importance when it comes to cultural life. Employment in young years and during school time is important preventive work so that children and young people are kept away from crime but also feel that they are a part of society. Therefore, I hope that the streamlining and reforming to be carried out in the area is not about cuts but about continued investments that lead to greater participation for more to participate in both studies and culture and also to strengthen democracy. Popular education is enlightenment.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Riazat (V)

Madam Speaker, honorable members and listeners! For 34 days now, Iran has been in flames, flames whose fire received a revolutionary ignition after the fundamentalist regime's morality police murdered Jina Mahsa Amini, who was deemed to be breaking the rules regarding mandatory hijab.

General political debate Other matters

During the last 43 years, the brutal dictatorial state power in Iran has persecuted, imprisoned, and murdered innocent people whose only crime has been that they have taken up the fight for democracy, equality, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, minority rights, and gender equality. That the regime in Tehran murders innocent people is nothing new, but the revolution begun during the last month shows that this murderous regime will not shy away from any means to silence the population.

Children and young people are murdered in the open street, and university students are imprisoned, tortured, or murdered at the universities where they study. In Baluchistan and Kurdistan, we have seen how the regime uses attack helicopters, tanks, and the military to kill peaceful demonstrators. The number of those killed after the arson attack against the notorious Evin prison, where many political prisoners are held, has still not been established.

The main slogan for this feminist revolution is: zan, zendegi, azadi, which is a Persian translation of the Kurdish jin, jiyan, azadi coined a couple of decades ago by an anti-capitalist and feminist movement and means woman, life, freedom.

It is time for us as politicians in Sweden and in Europe to show where we stand. Some of us have already done so, while others still remain silent. Will the previous government's silence towards this dictatorship continue with Sweden's right-nationalist government? Will it be more important for this government to safeguard economic interests, as has been done in the case of, for example, Turkey, rather than to defend the struggle of 85 million Persians, Kurds, Balochs, Lurs, Arabs, and many other ethnic groups against the Iranian mullah regime? Will the lack of feminism in foreign policy, which has now been declared, mean that the government turns a blind eye to this feminist revolution?

Until now, most parties have only talked, but nothing has been done. When we in the EU Committee last had a meeting before the EU summit with Europe's foreign ministers and discussed Iran, it was as an additional current issue. The matter did not even receive its own point from the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell. At this meeting, it was essentially only the Left Party and the Social Democrats who raised the issue of Iran and who also criticized the EU and included aspects such as feminism and equality regarding this issue.

The decision at the EU summit was sanctions against certain individuals within the regime, which is good. But it is far from what needs to be done to support this revolution.

The people in Iran demand that Iran's embassies in Europe be closed. In Sweden, we have had a government, and have one, that does not even want to call the ambassador.

The people in Iran demand that Iran be expelled from international sports and cultural contexts. Even on this point, there is total silence.

The people in Iran have demanded that the EU should not sign the nuclear energy agreement with Iran, with the fear that Europe will become even quieter on the issue of human rights.

For Nika, Jina, Sarina, Mahsa, Hadis, Ghazaleh, Mino, Navid, Neda and all others who have fallen victim to this murderous regime, I call upon Sweden and Europe to wake up. The people's feminist revolution against this horrific regime in Iran needs our support. It is time to move from talk to action.

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

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! During my three years as an elected member of the European Parliament, which I have now left for the Riksdag, I have warned against a naive, unrealistic and out-of-touch climate and energy policy and what it would lead to.

I have warned that the goals and the planned economic methods would not lead to extensive emission reductions, but rather to skyrocketing electricity and fuel prices, large geopolitical risks, waste of taxpayers' money, and declining competitiveness for the industry.

I have also consistently warned about how the policy will hit ordinary people such as families with children, single-person households, small business owners, pensioners, and against the already heavily burdened taxpayers.

Madam Speaker! All these thousands of billions that are now being invested in a climate transition within Sweden and the EU should, in my opinion, be followed by two simple questions. What will the investments mean concretely for ordinary people, and what effect will they have on the global climate?

I have asked the question to several politicians but never received any concrete answers. I have also asked the question to the EU Commission and actually received an answer: The investments will have a marginal effect. More resources will, however, be needed.

Yes, you heard correctly. More resources will be needed. Thousands of billions in invested tax money are therefore expected, besides the now visible energy poverty and the diminished competitiveness, to have a marginal effect on the global climate.

I must also add that the marginal effect will be completely absent if the rest of the world continues to increase its emissions, which they are doing at the present time.

Madam Speaker! As a controller in the energy industry, I have seen how a sound and rational energy policy has yielded to pipe dreams. It has been heavy - a hopeless struggle against dogmatism and idealism. But I actually stand here today filled with a large portion of hope. The change of power, the solid government statement, and the Tidö Agreement indicate much-needed paradigm shifts in several areas. The energy and climate part of the agreement breathes sobriety, common sense, and decisiveness.

The coalition parties agree with us Sverigedemokrater that the time of rosy dreams must now be over and that realism must prevail moving forward. The agreement contains concrete energy policy to meet the energy crisis this winter but also the necessary investments in nuclear power that are needed to eventually recreate a well-functioning energy system.

Madam Speaker! The energy and climate section in the Tidö Agreement reminds me of why I became a Sweden Democrat. We are simply a party that takes the issues seriously and sees reality as it is.

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

Åsa Westlund (S)

Madam Speaker! It was interesting to listen to Jessica Stegrud's speech, where it became clear that the Sweden Democrats do not think that Sweden should be a leader in the climate transition, but they also do not think that the EU should take measures regarding the climate. It is always someone else who is supposed to provide these solutions.

A question for Jessica Stegrud is, of course, how Jessica Stegrud will get the rest of the world on board with the climate transition. How will Jessica Stegrud ensure that we manage the climate transition? It is still the case that the Sweden Democrats see reality, namely that we must reduce climate emissions?

Sweden now risks losing billions in investments across the country because we are losing the lead in the climate transition. This will lead to lost jobs. Many of Jessica Stegrud's voters will be affected. How does she justify that Sweden should give up this lead, lose billions in investments, and instead point to someone else?

(Applause)

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

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! There are few things that have worsened the conditions for companies, households, and ordinary people as much as the pursued energy policy and climate policy, which have completely destroyed competitiveness along with the skyrocketing electricity prices and fuel prices. If we become poorer, no one will be happier for it, believe me!

This matter of us going first is something that is also discussed in the EU, i.e., that we should be leading in this transition. I do not believe, however, that any nation around the world will follow a country that makes itself poorer. That is not where the change lies. It is countries with high growth that have the opportunity to invest in precisely climate-smart ideas, innovation, and development. It is those countries that will be followed, not countries that destroy the world's cleanest fossil-free energy mix and a brilliant competitiveness. The key, therefore, lies somewhere completely different than in the politics you pursue, Åsa Westlund.

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

Åsa Westlund (S)

Madam Speaker! One can choose to turn a blind eye to the war in Ukraine and blame everything, for example the price increases regarding energy, on the outgoing government. Of course, one can do that – but it is not the reality, Jessica Stegrud.

I have sat in the European Parliament for ten years, and I negotiated many times. The only argument that worked to get other countries to follow suit was to show that it worked - that it went well and that the companies actually became winners and got a completely new market. That successful strategy now dumps the Sverigedemokraterna, and unfortunately, it risks Sweden's competitiveness.

(Applause)

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

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! But it is this that you are doing and ruining, Åsa Westlund. You are ruining the world's best energy mix, which has laid the foundation for all our international successes and which has laid the foundation for the fact that we today have an incredibly clean industrial production—which we should be focusing on exporting from, not the other way around. It is better for China to become like Sweden than for Sweden to become like China. That is, in my world, completely out of touch with reality.

When it comes to this matter of leading the way: We are very good at innovation, and that is the path we shall continue on - period.

The general political debate was hereby concluded.

General political debate Other matters

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