Labor market and working life

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the proposal in the report.

We are going to debate the government's and the Sweden Democrats' budget for expenditure area 14 Labour Market and Working Life. Yet another budget has been negotiated between the government and the Sweden Democrats. The conditions have not been simple as one has simultaneously grappled with the fight against inflation as well as a recession that has contributed to higher unemployment and reduced employment.

Madam Speaker! The set direction has, however, been clear: a focus on bringing down inflation as well as an established work line with a maintained safety net. This is a difference from the previous government's destructive contribution line linked to a completely irresponsible immigration policy that strongly affected the Swedish labor market negatively and contributed to one of Europe's highest unemployment figures, despite the high economic boom prevailing at the time. It is a Social Democratic legacy that, according to all expertise, unfortunately will affect Swedish society for generations to come.

Madam Speaker! There is no room for messing around. Sweden is still in a recession. The costs continue to increase. We received the latest report from Arbetsförmedlingen today.

But even here, one begins to see the light at the end of the tunnel, albeit still very faintly. A while ago, we were able to review Byggföretagens' latest report, which shows that housing construction is actually increasing by 5,400 started homes during the forecast period 2024-2025. And in a business cycle forecast, it is projected that construction of 33,700 apartments and small houses will be started next year. It is not a large increase, but it is still an increase. These are small steps in the right direction.

We who have experienced both booms and recessions know that it always turns eventually. And both negative and positive consequences usually manifest first within the construction sector. I therefore see this as a small positive sign that things are about to change.

Madam Speaker! Education is A and O. It is the single most important effort one can make to establish oneself on the labor market. The Government and the Sweden Democrats are making extensive investments in vocational training, within the University of Applied Sciences and regional vocational adult education, to train more people for the professions that the labor market demands. With these investments, there will be 50,000 places at the University of Applied Sciences and 72,000 places in vocational adult education next year. These are educations that shall be available across the entire country.

Madam Speaker! The Government and the Sweden Democrats want to significantly tighten the requirements on the individual to make themselves employable and to complete the required education. At the same time, we have listened to the municipalities in order to facilitate and increase the possibility of using the aforementioned funds and proposals.

The municipalities have pointed out challenges with planning for school places with only one-year state grants. Therefore, the government and Sverigedemokraterna are now ensuring that the municipalities can apply for and receive grants for up to two years ahead so that they do not have to pay back the state grants, as it has been under previous governments. It has been quite steadily recurring. Now, the municipalities get the peace of mind they have long requested.

Furthermore, the contribution to mentors within apprentice education is doubled. It is a good measure, which will also ensure that companies will engage more. Clear requirements, guidelines, and opportunities to increase the matching on the Swedish labor market are the way forward in this budget.

Madam Speaker! I shall also speak a little about the investments in the working environment. A good working environment where everyone can be involved and contribute is important for us to achieve a safer and more sustainable Sweden. Therefore, it is positive that Arbetsmiljöverket has significantly increased the number of inspections over the past year. This is also clearly reflected in the statistics.

The Sweden Democrats and the government are progressively increasing the appropriation to Arbetsmiljöverket, in line with their own wishes, so that they can continue their work both with an increased number of inspections and against work-life crime, which permeates our entire society. Even within other expenditure areas, strong efforts are being made to expand the collective work against work-life crime.

We will return to the issues of the work environment in the spring in a separate report on precisely the work environment, which we will then debate in the chamber.

Madam Speaker! Before I conclude, I also want to say a few words about the other government alternative's budget proposal. Those parties have chosen to put forward their own proposals, and they clearly show large differences between the parties.

When one reads the budget proposals, the Social Democrats appear almost like a fifth Tidö party. There are extremely small differences in the budget in this expenditure area. The biggest difference is that they want to introduce the highly criticized extra services. It is a labor market measure that is mostly known for being extremely costly for taxpayers and creating displacement effects, especially within the municipal sector.

But it was a profitable business, primarily for social democratically governed municipalities. The abuse in S-governed Malmö is the clearest example. When the extra services in Malmö were audited, it was discovered that several had no employment, but the municipality chose to collect bonuses because on paper they had created a lot of jobs. It is a municipality that has been governed by the Social Democrats for decades and which today has an unemployment rate of 12.6 percent. It is the second highest in Sweden. The highest is in S-governed Perstorp.

Otherwise, there is very little difference between the Tidö parties' and the Social Democrats' budget proposals within the mentioned expenditure area.

Centerpartiet stands out in the second government alternative. They want, contrary to their coalition partners, to finance their initiatives by significantly lowering and worsening the AKAS. They also want to worsen the support for persons with disabilities, as they want to significantly reduce the support to Samhall by 2.5 billion annually, among other things because they want to finance increased immigration through an increased reception of quota refugees. They also want to finance intensive care for newly arrived people with money that currently goes to persons with disabilities.

The Left Party's budget proposal clearly shows an increased subsidy line, with a significantly increased tax burden for Swedish wage earners. In its budget, unlike the others in the opposition, it chooses to significantly increase its appropriations.

Miljöpartiet also lies very close to the Sweden Democrats and the government in their budget proposal for expenditure area 14. They also have a couple of proposals for new initiatives that are quite interesting. They might be worth looking at.

Madam Speaker! The only thing the opposition has in common is that they clearly want to increase immigration to Sweden again. Everyone is investing money in increased immigration.

(Applause)

In this speech, Ann-Christine Frohm and Michael Rubbestad (both SD) concurred.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to thank Magnus Persson for the speech.

Magnus Persson spoke about the social democratic heritage. Let us talk about the social democratic heritage. From the 1930s onwards, there has been a focus on active labor market policy. If there is unemployment in the construction industry, one should invest in housing policy and build away the unemployment. If transition is required in the construction industry, one invests in labor market training.

Magnus Persson has been in the construction industry for a few years and knows what is required to push down unemployment in the construction industry. Investment support is required, and active measures from the state are required so that construction workers and scaffolding workers do not go unemployed.

What is this government doing then? The first thing one did in the middle of a recession was to abolish the investment support for the construction of rental apartments. It is not difficult to go to a construction site here in Stockholm, in Uppsala or in Skåne for that matter and find young, laid-off and soon unemployed construction workers.

What does Magnus Persson intend to say to the dismissed or laid-off construction workers in the construction sheds about the reduction of the "akassan", about the deteriorations in the income insurance, about the lack of an active labor market policy and last but not least about the abolition of the investment support for the construction of housing in the middle of a recession? What is Magnus Persson's message to the construction workers, Madam Speaker?

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Unlike Ardalan Shekarabi, I meet with construction workers every week and have good discussions about this. Swedish construction workers will get jobs again quite soon. Today, Swedish construction workers are being hired.

You say: "Go out and meet young construction workers!" There are no young Swedish construction workers. They are replaced by posted labor. That is due to a completely unregulated labor immigration that Ardalan Shekarabi and his party have turned a blind eye to for eight years.

Regarding the investment support, I am not an advocate for doping the market. Giving a lot of support is well and good, but when it then becomes a boom, it is very difficult to take them away. I believe in the market here, and I believe in Swedish construction workers. They get jobs if they want jobs.

Let me take an example from home. I just met a guy who had been laid off from his job and was going to go home at Christmas. He chose to look for a job the whole time. He didn't have to clock in for a single second, but got three jobs to choose from. He wanted to work and got a job.

I believe that Swedish construction workers are finding jobs. The economy is turning now.

It is absolutely not acceptable to dope the market and only operate with subsidies. The market must be allowed to decide for itself how it should look. Investment support - fine. But the most important thing is that the market handles it itself. The construction industry will increase again, and the jobs are there.

All recessions bring something good with them. Does Ardalan Shekarabi know what it brings for the construction industry? It is that unserious actors disappear with the recession. Serious actors remain. There is therefore something positive even with a recession. If you familiarize yourself with how it works on the Swedish construction labor market, you will understand this a bit better! Feel free to join me out and visit a workplace sometime! It wouldn't hurt.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I understand that Magnus Persson is getting nervous. I would not want to meet construction workers if I were to lower the allowance for them or if I were to abolish the only state support for housing construction in a situation where the recession hits just construction workers.

Yes, there are young construction workers, Magnus Persson. There are people who want to realize their life dreams and who have exerted themselves, struggled and labored. They have pushed through all barriers and obtained employment despite social dumping, something that is partly due to the labor immigration that the Sverigedemokraterna otherwise defend. They are out there, but they are unemployed. Many of them become unemployed today because the government does not do what is required for us to get housing construction moving.

No, the market will not solve this. Active measures are required. That is what made Sweden strong during the 20th century. Active measures in the construction industry are needed so that we can build away the housing shortage and create jobs for construction workers. We know that when a construction worker is hired, it leads to more people being hired.

Let us go back to the question that was not answered by Magnus Persson. Why should the unemployment benefit be lowered? What is it that is so important that those who are now affected by unemployment should receive a worsened benefit from day 100? The government is not content with worsening the unemployment benefit but also targets the privately financed income insurance. It is lowered due to the changes that the government and Sverigedemokraterna are implementing.

To worsen the economic security for those affected by unemployment - what kind of policy is that towards the construction workers?

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is clear that Ardalan Shekarabi does not have such a good grasp of how things look.

We have definitely not lowered the floor for Swedish construction workers. We have raised the ceiling, and that benefits Swedish construction workers so that they get higher wages.

On average, a Swedish employee gets a new job within 100 days. I met representatives from Akademikernas akassa last week. They have an average time of between 30 and 50 days until one goes to a new job. They are very satisfied with the new proposal regarding the akassa.

This does not, therefore, affect Swedish construction workers.

What Ardalan Shekarabi does not mention is that when we changed the tax bracket, we raised the minimum level for those who have it worst and are at the very bottom. Something like that the Social Democrats have not done for over a decade, but Ardalan Shekarabi does not mention that when he claims that we have lowered the tax bracket. We have not done that. We raised the ceiling, and the majority of Swedish wage earners benefit from the proposal.

Then Ardalan Shekarabi is welcome to stand here, Madam Speaker, and preach about how we have lowered the allowance. No, we have increased the allowance for most of the Swedish wage earners. That is what we have done, and I stand by that every day of the week. I stand behind the decision one hundred percent. Ardalan Shekarabi, on the other hand, has always ignored those who have the worst allowances. He has forgotten these people.

One makes it sound as if the Sweden Democrats and the government have worsened the labor market. No, we have strengthened the labor market for Swedish wage earners. Swedish wage earners want to go to work. Swedish wage earners largely find a new job within 100 days.

Akassan is a transition insurance. The Social Democrats may see it as a benefit reform, but the Sweden Democrats definitely do not.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I came to Sweden at the turn of the year 1989/90. Before that, I lived outside Iran's capital Tehran during my first ten years.

When people were unemployed in little Shahriyar, where I grew up for the first ten years, they had to go to the big square and stand there and wait for employers to come and pick them up for a day's work. They were day laborers. Unemployment was synonymous with passivity and waiting to receive the daily sustenance - if some employer showed up and picked them up.

Since I came here. Opposite the first apartment we lived in, there was a large sign where it said AMU. I thought it would be pronounced "amo" as in Persian means uncle. I therefore asked my brother and others who had been here a bit longer why it said "uncle" on the sign on the other side of the street. Then I got an answer that made a very strong impression on me. They said that if someone in Sweden is unemployed, you go there and then you get an education so that you can take the jobs that companies have. I remember thinking: "Wow! What a smart society! Here there are no day laborers, no passivity or poverty, instead they go there and get the right education and can take the jobs that exist."

In the name of honesty, this is precisely the active labor market policy that made Sweden really strong throughout the entire 20th century. It made Sweden a role model and a pioneer in terms of the labor market, economic security, and prosperity for wage earners.

What has happened with the active labor market policy during the recent years, Madam Speaker? Since the autumn of 2018, when the opposition's budget was passed, something that was encouraged by the Sverigedemokraterna, we have had cuts in the active labor market policy. Investments in labor market training and active measures to get people into work have been replaced with passivity. We are now seeing the effects.

Today, almost half a million Swedes are unemployed, and unemployment is rising in various industries and affecting young and old in many different regions in our country. Despite the fact that nearly half a million Swedes are unemployed, there are only 6,000 people in labor market training.

At the same time, there are companies that need to recruit. Unemployment is therefore combined with a labor shortage. The business sector needs labor, but it needs skilled labor and people with the right competence. That is where the labor market trainings come into the picture, as they are adapted to the business sector's needs and the conditions that the unemployed person has.

The government, with the support party Sverigedemokraterna, does not see active labor market policy as an important part of the future Swedish success story. That is why nothing is being done, even though only 6,000 people are in labor market training today. That is why no extraordinary measures will be taken when unemployment rises. The latest report came today regarding an increased number of notices and growing unemployment. Despite that, no measures will be taken.

When one looks at expenditure area 14 and reads the government's proposal, one thinks: My God, have I ended up in the wrong parliament? Is it another country's parliament that is processing these proposals?

These proposals are not particularly radical in a situation where half a million people are unemployed. Or is it that the government and Sverigedemokraterna have abdicated and tolerate that half a million people are unemployed?

Mr. Speaker! What is required is an active labor market policy that ensures people have the prerequisites to make themselves available for the jobs that exist. What is required are active measures so that people have the right skills. We must have reasonable expectations of our citizens. One must make oneself employable. One must be prepared to move. And one must be prepared to undergo training. But then society must offer the active measures. Then we must have an active labor market policy and, not least, large-scale investments in labor market training.

Mr. Speaker! The government's and the Sweden Democrats' labor market policy is a betrayal of the unemployed. But it is an equally great betrayal of the business sector and of our economic development, because half a million unemployed means poverty in our country and lower growth. But it also means that our business sector cannot recruit the right personnel. And thus, we do not get the development and the productivity increase that we want to see in the business sector for continued prosperity.

The Social Democrats therefore state in the special opinion the need for the proposals that we have put forward. It is about increased appropriations specifically for education and specifically for active measures so that people will get into work. It is actually about prioritizing active labor market policy and ensuring that Arbetsförmedlingen exists throughout the country, even where unemployment is high, and has the conditions to assign people to the education programs that we want to see. The Social Democrats' proposal is a no to cuts in active labor market policy during a year when we unfortunately have mass unemployment in our country.

I want to conclude my speech by making an appeal to the right-wing members who are present and to those who may later be able to listen to this debate. Do it again and do it right! Invest in that which has historically built Sweden strong and straight, namely an active labor market policy. Do not choose passivity! Do not choose to wait for the market to turn, but use the time to train people to the right competence so that they can take the jobs where they are!

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Those were big words, but Ardalan Shekarabi says nothing about the policies and the proposals that are under expenditure area 14.

Then I actually thought that Ardalan Shekarabi was born in Manchester in England, but apparently he was not, according to what he himself said just a moment ago.

We have approximately 360,000 registered at Arbetsförmedlingen today, not half a million. If we count everyone who stands outside, who are long-term unemployed and who are not registered at Arbetsförmedlingen, it is over 800,000, I believe. The biggest contributing cause to that is the pursued immigration policy for which Ardalan Shekarabi and the government he sat in bear an enormous responsibility. We have discussed this so many times, so we shall not discuss it now.

What I want to discuss is how Ardalan Shekarabi views the labor market measure "extratjänster" (extra services) that the Socialdemokraterna are proposing in their budget proposal and want to reintroduce. It has been very clear that it creates large displacement effects in many municipalities. It has encouraged cheating and more, and has been very expensive for the taxpayers. What is it that makes the Socialdemokraterna want to reintroduce the extratjänster again?

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Mr. Speaker! Let me first thank Magnus Persson for mentioning the word fraud in the labor market policy. That is very good. It is fantastic if we can talk about these issues and about the fact that fraud occurs. Not least, we have nystartsjobb which leads to a great deal of exploitation, dumping, and displacement effects. Let us talk about how we can solve that issue. This is the government's and the Sverigedemokraternas policy, where they passively watch how this is exploited and do not do what is required.

Let us look at the private elements within Arbetsförmedlingen that have not been so successful and which lead to fraud. I would be very happy to do that. We are very active. It is stated very clearly in our motion, in the committee report, and in our specific statements how we want to ensure that there will be order and clarity on the Swedish labor market.

It is very good with extra services and other types of targeted subsidized employments. People should not be in passivity. People should get jobs. And if they need help to get the first job, society should step in and support and ensure that they get in and gain their work experience. It is completely correct to use subsidized employments targeted at the groups that need this support. On the other hand, it can be questioned whether it is right to have general reductions of costs for employments that are not targeted at the groups that need it. That is something we would need to discuss in Swedish labor market policy. But of course, extra services and other types of subsidized employments were needed for the groups that need this support. That was what built Sweden strong during the 20th century.

Again: Targeted efforts are needed for the groups that need help to enter the labor market. No one should be passive. Everyone who can should work in Sweden. That must be the starting point for the active labor market policy.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I did not receive an answer to my question as to why the Social Democrats wanted to move forward with the proposal on extra services.

I will ask another question to Ardalan Shekarabi. When it comes to the fight against crime in the workplace and investments in Arbetsmiljöverket, I see that the Social Democrats choose to invest a bit more than the government, and that is positive.

But can one take the Social Democrats seriously this time? For eight years they did almost nothing. During the last year they sat in a governing position, they launched the A-crime center with more. Otherwise, they were quite passive and voted no, for example, to proposals regarding extended prescription periods for workplace crimes, which is a very strong weapon in the fight against crime in the workplace. Many, in fact, get away because of the prescription period. It was nevertheless a proposal that the Social Democrats went to the election on in the elections in 2014 and 2018. It was a proposal that LO pushed for the Social Democrats to push. But the Social Democrats have chosen to vote no to this every year in the Riksdag chamber, despite it being their own proposal and despite there being a majority for it. Why did you do that? Was it because the proposal came from the Sverigedemokraterna?

I can reassure Ardalan Shekarabi that the Government Offices and the Coordination Office are working on the issues regarding the prescription period. Therefore, something will happen in this regard. It is only a pity that it did not happen eight years ago, because it could have.

I want to ask a simple question to Ardalan Shekarabi. When the proposal on extended prescription periods for workplace environment crimes comes to the table once again, will Ardalan Shekarabi then vote yes to it?

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Mr. Speaker! Let me express my joy that Magnus Persson highlights the issue of exactly prescription periods. We have, in fact, just received a proposal on the table regarding prescription periods that does not solve the problem that Magnus Persson wants to solve. It would therefore be very good if Magnus Persson is prepared to pull the government by the ear and actually say that this shall be handled. It is clear that we must handle the prescription rules. But that is not enough.

We would need to have a needs assessment of labor immigration. Magnus Persson knows that, and I do not need to tell him. We would also need to ensure that we get public procurements that protect Swedish conditions and collective agreements. We would need much stronger trade unions and a protection organization that is strong enough so that one can get rid of fraud, exploitation, and labor crime. We know that it is never possible to combat labor crime without strong organizing. It requires really strong trade unions, a really strong protection organization, and secure wage earners to combat labor crime.

There is not a single authority in the world that can crush crime in the labor market unless the workers have the right organization. And how are the workers to be organized in a system where we do not even have a needs assessment of labor immigration? That is a question I think the Sweden Democrats should ask themselves if they are serious about wanting to solve these issues.

When it comes to the prescription rules, we will truly do what we can to have this resolved as soon as possible. I was a bit disappointed that this was not included in the proposals that were submitted. I thought that the high level of consensus on these types of issues would also lead to some real change in at least some area, now that there is an agreement to lower the level in the a-kassa already after 100 days.

(Applause)

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving to approve the proposal in the report.

The fight against inflation is won, but the effects remain. Ten years of real wage increases have been erased, and Sweden is still in a recession, even though we see a brightening in 2025. Despite the fact that Sweden today has one of the highest employment rates in the EU, 1.2 million Swedes of working age cannot support themselves. That is as many as the entire population of Norrland. Unemployment is the highest in ten years, with the exception of the pandemic, and the recession has caused those who already previously stood far from the labor market to find it even harder to find work.

Today, it does not pay off enough to work. Many families even lose disposable income by moving from benefits to work. It is neither right nor fair. It should always pay off to work. Sweden should be a country where everyone does their part and where education and effort pay off. The tax on work shall be lowered, and it must be ensured that the benefit and transfer systems promote precisely work. It is the work line, not the benefit line, that builds Sweden strong.

That as many as possible work is central to our current and future prosperity, but it is more than that. It is also a question of what kind of society we want. Sweden shall be a country where everyone does their part. When it pays to work, it also becomes clear that it is right to strive to create a better life for oneself and for others.

There are major challenges with the supply of skills in the labor market while more people than ever are standing outside. For example, 410,000 people need to be employed within municipalities and regions by 2031. That is as many as all the inhabitants of Dalarnas and Jämtlands län combined. The matching between employers and job seekers is not working, and three out of four companies have difficulty finding the right skills. At the same time, more than 360,000 people are registered with Arbetsförmedlingen.

What is the government doing then? We are restoring the work line by lowering taxes for everyone who works, especially for low- and middle-income earners. Effort and education shall pay off. The government has developed a self-sufficiency measure to obtain a representative picture of how many individuals, regardless of employment rate, can actually support themselves. The purpose is to make political reforms more accurate.

We will combat long-term unemployment with effective labor market measures and a functioning education obligation. Support for people who are far from the labor market with large support needs is strengthened, for example, by nearly half a billion kronor over three years. The Government is also working to implement a major benefit reform so that the sum of various benefits never becomes higher than the wage for work. Requirements for full-time activities corresponding to work capacity shall also be introduced in order to receive full benefits.

We want to improve the matching on the labor market through an efficient employment service responsible for the exercise of public authority, control and follow-up, as well as assessment of the job seeker's needs. A limited number of independent actors take overall responsibility to ensure that the job seeker receives the correct interventions.

We are investigating a model for how universities and colleges' educational offerings can better meet the labor market's needs. The investigation is to be presented during the spring of 2025. We are also allocating funds for 11,000 new educational places within regional vocational adult education and initiatives for Jobbsprånget's work in offering individually tailored internships to meet companies' needs for the right skills and labor.

The government has reformed the unemployment insurance into a clearer transition insurance that strengthens the work line and reduces the risk of fraud and errors. We ensure that the ceiling levels and the tapering clearly encourage returning to work.

We have a high level of ambition for the work environment policy to meet the various challenges that exist in working life. One such challenge is that everyone, both women and men, should have the strength, ability, and desire to work for an entire working life. In this context, Arbetsmiljöverket also has an important role. Arbetsmiljöverket has therefore received large additions to its appropriation during recent years.

The most important thing to ensure a good working environment is well-functioning preventive work environment work at the workplaces. Here, both Arbetsmiljöverket and the parties have an important role. Supervision of the working environment is crucial to maintain the protection for the employees and for fair competitive conditions to prevail on the labor market.

Arbetsmiljöverket also has a central role in achieving well-functioning work environments in the Swedish labor market. The agency's work therefore needs to be well-functioning and efficient. No one who works in Sweden should have a job where they are exploited or risk dying or being seriously injured.

In the budget bill for 2025, we are adding extra funds to the Swedish Work Environment Authority for a stricter and more efficient supervision regarding serious work environment risks. This also includes developing the selection of which workplaces should be inspected so that the supervision can be directed to a greater extent toward those workplaces where the risks are the greatest. Earlier this year, the Government gave a special investigator a mandate to prepare a proposal for the Government's new work environment strategy for the period 2026-2030.

Authorities, municipalities, and unemployment funds need better access to information about individuals and companies in their work against the incorrect payments that are currently occurring and, above all, against crime in the labor market. It is therefore important to have strengthened opportunities to exchange information.

The criminal economy is estimated to turn over - listen and be amazed - 100-150 billion kronor annually. To stop crime, one must get hold of these funds. The system of employer declarations must therefore be reviewed in order to reduce tax evasion and labor-related crime and stop incorrect payments from the welfare systems.

We have appointed an inquiry that will conduct a thorough review of Samhällens mandate, activities, and conditions.

We are also taking action against crime in the working life. The Government has, among other things, allocated resources to improve the exchange of information between authorities so that they can stop the benefit fraud that occurs today. The Swedish Work Environment Authority has received increased resources for the work against crime in the working life. The Swedish Payments Agency has started its work to prevent, deter, and detect incorrect payments.

Mr. Speaker! The Government is taking powerful measures for increased growth and more jobs and to ensure that it pays to work. We believe in every person's inherent strength and will to participate in that so important social community. No one shall be left behind.

(Applause)

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! It should pay to work. We shall lower the tax on work.

The one for whom it pays off the most to work is the one who already had a very high income. The one who, for example, is the Minister for Employment gets a tax cut of 45,000 kronor a year. But for my colleagues at Ikea, it does not pay off that much in the same way to work. They only get around 200 kronor a month in reduced tax. What kind of signals does it send when it is only those with the highest incomes for whom it pays off the most to work?

There is talk about the work line and that everyone should work. I also heard Saila Quicklund say exactly at the end of her speech that no one should be left behind. But that is precisely what the government is doing. When one says that everyone should move from benefits to work, one leaves a large group of people behind. They do not want anything other than to move from benefits to work.

I often meet people in different types of disability rights movements who say: Everything is completely closed. There is no one who invests in us or ensures that I can get an education or an opportunity to participate in the labor market and contribute to my own livelihood.

I wonder what Saila Quicklund wants to say to them so that they have the right to go to work like everyone else.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Ciczie Weidby, for the remark!

Vänsterpartiet never denies itself. It is typical of them. It is a flood of contributions to those who do not work. It is contributions to unemployment benefits and activity support that are increased by a full 12.3 billion. It is an additional 2 billion to Arbetsförmedlingen, without requirements for delivery.

We have had briefings from the Director General at the committee conveying that it is a system error, and an enormous amount of money is being sent back. Here, the Left Party wants to send in amounts of money that will not be used and that will go back to the state. But that sounds rhetorically good.

I am also working for a scrapped care day where the state takes the entire cost. It costs 5.2 billion. One wants to increase the benefits for the unemployed and people who are on activity support by 12.3 billion, as I said earlier. For us, it is extremely important that diligence and studies should pay off. That is also the reason why we have the job tax credit.

I share the opinion that no one should be left behind, as I also expressed in the speech. Therefore, we are investing in vocational colleges and vocational training. Arbetsförmedlingen shall also work more closely with individual support for each person. We are conducting an investigation on how Samhall can become even more effective in creating jobs for specifically those with disabilities. The Government is doing a multitude of things in the area for which Ciczie Weidby is requesting measures.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates and the Liberals never deny themselves either. Much shall be given to those who already have. We must make a distinction between people and people. Diligence and studies shall pay off, and they shall, of course.

But when the middle class wants someone to move their piano, they should receive a subsidy for it. Who is it that is supposed to perform that job and at what price? There we have a major point of contention that sets us apart.

It is always only those who already had who always want more. It is not important to include everyone. One does not want an equal and equitable society where everyone should be included and have the opportunity to contribute on the same terms as everyone else.

The work line must, after all, be about exactly that, giving all people the prerequisites to be able to participate in the labor market. Everything else is completely economically unreasonable for society.

We do not want people to be unemployed. We want people to have a job. In a capitalist system, one always wants everyone to work and be able to keep the wheels turning, right? Saila Quicklund must also think that is a good thing.

If I do not deny myself in the Left Party's policy, it is truly so clear that the bourgeoisie also never deny themselves. There must be a difference between people and people, and there are always some who deserve a little more than everyone else at the expense of others' work.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am surprised every time I hear this argument. It is so painful that the nurse and the police officer get to keep more of their salary.

We started during the alliance period, but also earlier. We have lowered the tax nine times for those whom Ciczie Weidby calls the most well-off, the high-earners and the wealthy. If we look at the figures, we know that high-earners are those who earn more than 380,000 kronor. That is a nurse and a police officer.

We also think that they deserve to keep more of their salary for their hard work. We have 4,000 kronor more per month for those occupational categories thanks to the job tax credit. It is right. I truly stand for diligence paying off and for studies paying off. That is our slogan.

I am glad that we have moved away from the period when the S-led government prematurely retired 130 people a day. It was to forget and hide people who could have been involved and contributed to the community. Those times are over now.

We believe in every person's inherent strength. They shall be allowed to be part of the community. That is how this government works.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Government points to the benefits and attacks the most vulnerable in society with the claim that it would reduce unemployment if one lowers the benefits and introduces a benefit ceiling.

Mr. Speaker! There is not a single employer who cites the contributions as the cause of the high unemployment. Everyone points out that the cause is a skills shortage.

At the same time, the government chooses to cut back on labor market policy, focus on benefits, and blame the unemployed. It is not the unemployed who lack will, but the government that lacks solutions.

In what way does introducing a benefit ceiling contribute to reducing unemployment? The member said one thing in the exchange with Ciczie Weidby. The unemployment insurance is an insurance and not a benefit. I would like to receive an answer on how a benefit ceiling is to lead to reduced unemployment.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the reply, Leila Ali Elmi!

I will answer the question. We are cutting back on measures that do not yield results. That is what it is about. We are not cutting back on the labor market policy that has yielded results. We build on what we believe in.

The extra services were raised earlier in the debate. They were totally ineffective. Municipalities could receive a subsidy of half a billion. They were fully funded. We have stories of how people sat at home in their apartments. But the municipality profited from using the extra services. It also became a way to dress up the unemployment statistics.

We are removing such reforms. It is not about us slaughtering the labor market policy, as it is sometimes expressed. On the contrary. We are adding new reforms that we know have an effect. We have a basis with fantastic transparency to ensure that it is effective effects that we are presenting.

I understand that there is a frustration within Miljöpartiet. You are burning money today and passing the debt on to our children and grandchildren. Miljöpartiet wants to shock-increase the tax by 94.5 billion next year, and you are making it unprofitable to work. It goes directly against this government's policy.

The Green Party wants to invest in a policy that makes Sweden significantly poorer. What surprises me is that you have tried before, and you have seen that you have not achieved any effect from this. There was low growth, and unemployment was high despite the fact that there was an economic boom. Still, the Green Party, together with the other opposition parties, presents exactly the same solutions again. It is unfathomable.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I do not feel that the member has answered my question at all. Instead, she is talking about the Green Party's policy. The Green Party's policy is a policy based on a fair distribution, and we do not shock-increase taxes for ordinary people. But we want companies and those who emit to pay more tax. I think that is reasonable.

When it comes to the criticized extra services, I can absolutely agree; there is indeed criticism there. But you have not replaced them with anything at all. Low-educated foreign-born women are those who have the hardest time entering the labor market. You have removed the intensive year and have not replaced this with anything either.

You are investing significantly less. When we were in government, we allocated 11 billion to the labor market policy, and it yielded good results. Here, you are allocating barely 7 billion. And it is not just about the extra services, it is a total reduction on the entire labor market policy.

Furthermore, you focus on benefit ceilings and other things that do not solve the problem of unemployment. The government's policy is like changing the tires on a car that has an engine fault. In what way does a benefit ceiling solve the problem of unemployment in Sweden?

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Leila Ali Elmi expresses that the government is at a loss for action.

Let me just briefly refer to what is happening: We are making the largest investment ever in vocational training. We are introducing a compulsory education. We have a subsidy reform. We are fighting crime. Those reforms never came to fruition previously, because most of the proposals submitted in the justice area were considered to be infringing on privacy.

We have started a payment authority. We are conducting a review of the wage guarantee. The new-start jobs are being restricted to correct and ensure that the fraud that occurred previously no longer happens.

We have an improved and more accurate unemployment insurance fund where we initially, during the first 100 days, actually raise the ceiling for the compensations.

The construction sector was recently at the center of the debate. You are critical of us removing the subsidies for the construction sector. But when we vote on the tax deduction, which benefits the sector and makes black income white, all opposition parties vote no. It is striking and strange when you simultaneously criticize us for not providing subsidies. It is about subsidies that went directly into the pockets of the construction companies but did not create more jobs. Not even the construction companies themselves want these subsidies. That is why we introduced the tax deduction, which you are now saying no to.

The government is making a multitude of efforts. We are correcting, we are adjusting, and we are looking positively forward. People are now talking about that growth is increasing. We have fought inflation through good economic policy from the government. There are bright spots, and the government is making a multitude of efforts.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! After two years in power, the priorities of the government and the Sweden Democrats are clear. Instead of making things easier for households, healthcare, schools, and elderly care, they are investing in tax cuts for the rich.

Vänsterpartiet notes that the government, point by point, fails to handle the serious societal problems we are currently in the midst of. Large groups seem to be invisible to the government base because they completely ignore the problems affecting those who have difficulty making their everyday finances work. With the government's and Sverigedemokraternas budget, inequality increases. The growing unemployment is left completely without action, and the climate transition is put on hold. Furthermore, the cuts within welfare continue.

The Left Party's budget proposal stands for a policy that truly addresses society's problems and protects those who are in the worst position. To create room for, among other things, a prioritized increase in resources to the welfare sector, an accelerated climate transition, lower costs in public transport, a high-cost protection in dental care, as well as higher compensations in unemployment benefits and social insurance, people with higher incomes must contribute more.

Mr. Speaker! The Left Party's policy strives towards full employment where everyone who wants and can work shall have a job that it is possible to support oneself on. No one should have to be unemployed for more than short periods, and the ambition for the employment rate shall, of course, be that it shall be high enough to be able to finance a generous public welfare. Such a policy clearly requires an active employment service and labor market policy as well as robust security systems for individuals when they actually cannot work.

The largest individual expenditure item in the Left Party's motion on the expenditure area is the contribution to the unemployment insurance fund and the activity allowance. The Left Party wants to re-establish a strong unemployment insurance fund where the objective is that 80 percent of employees shall also receive 80 percent of their previous salary during unemployment.

It is also not reasonable that the unemployment insurance benefit and the activity benefit are eroded over time in the way that is happening today. Therefore, we want to increase both the maximum daily allowance and the basic amount. We also want to index the benefit amounts to wage development. Vänsterpartiet also opposes the reduction in the unemployment insurance benefit that the government has decided on. In our motion, we account for improved qualification and benefit conditions, and we reintroduce the study condition.

Mr. Speaker! The chaotic privatization of Arbetsförmedlingen was a product of the January gang's wise minds. Arbetsförmedlingen had long been criticized for being quite inefficient and costly and showing lacking results. It was argued that the agency was bureaucratic and that the measures were not adapted sufficiently to the individual's needs.

But instead of strengthening Arbetsförmedlingen, the government chose to sing the praises of the market and privatization and opened up for more private actors. Vänsterpartiet warned quite directly and said that this will affect those job seekers who are furthest from the labor market. These are people who are long-term unemployed, people with disabilities and newcomers.

We also said that it would lead to a significant reduction of Arbetsförmedlingen's physical presence, especially in rural areas. We meant that this would, in the long run, come to reinforce the geographical inequality.

We advocated then and still maintain that what we need is a strengthened and modernized employment service that shall continue to be state-run. It is only in that way, we believe, that one can ensure local presence and equal service throughout the country.

Mr. Speaker! When IFAU released its report, An impact assessment of employment services with independent actors, which showed that the private matching services did not lead to more people in durable employment, well, no one, at least not I, was particularly surprised. Despite higher costs, the group that received help through the private actors did not receive better wage income, higher employment, or durable work to any greater extent.

Therefore: Allocating resources to private actors and operators only leads to a waste of tax money and demonstrably does not result in more people being put to work.

What is needed is, of course, more resources for Arbetsförmedlingen to improve the quality of its services, to ensure that there is a physical presence throughout the country, especially in rural areas, and of course a clear social perspective with a focus on helping those who are furthest from the labor market.

Mr. Speaker! I truly believe that there are very many good reasons to re-establish a truly active labor market policy. We are in a situation where the economy is slowing down, costs are increasing, and unemployment is expected to rise. In that case, even more investments in labor market policy programs and measures are needed. Despite this, the government chooses to lower the appropriations for just this.

Mr. Speaker! If the two talking points one has that describe one's labor market policy are that people should move from benefits to jobs and that it should pay to work, one must have a proper, functioning labor market policy. Above all, one must also have a disability rights policy that actually allows all people to do so.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I just want to say that we of course also must take action against the increased crime in the working life, which feeds organized crime and, in the long run, is actually very threatening to the system. Much more resources are needed to combat it.

As we know, a number of authorities have been carrying out a joint work for this since 2018, and it is Arbetsmiljöverket that is responsible for the work.

Several trade unions testify to a sharply increasing work-life crime over the last ten years. Given that we see it is a growing problem - several are pointing it out - I mean that one should devote much more resources to combating it. But it is not only money that is needed for it. I think it is starting to be time to ask why work-life crime is increasing. Why is it increasing, and where and how does it arise? Perhaps it could be time to start investigating and reviewing if there are different types of laws or rules that could make it more difficult for criminal networks to enter the welfare sector and run HVB homes, or perhaps review the large number of subcontractors in the construction industry that cause one to lose all control. But the government has no analysis whatsoever and therefore, unfortunately, no solutions or measures to forcefully tackle work-life crime. I think that is very regrettable.

I would have wished that I could have raised a reservation in the report, but unfortunately, I cannot do that because we are investing much more money than the government is. Therefore, I am only submitting a special statement.

(Applause)

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

Camilla Rinaldo Miller (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by expressing my approval of the committee's proposed decision.

The government's budget proposal for 2025 is a clear roadmap for how Sweden's labor market shall be strengthened and how conditions for a sustainable and inclusive working life can be created.

As a Christian Democrat, I am pleased that several of the priorities highlighted in the budget are important steps towards a society based on the human being with human dignity at the center and where the family perspective is taken into account in the labor market policy. One example is the more flexible parental leave, which gives parents better conditions to combine work life and family.

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats see the labor market as a place where people not only contribute economically but also get the opportunity to grow and develop. The workplace can be an opportunity to develop in community with other people. We have a strong focus on creating a society where everyone, regardless of background, can participate in working life and get the opportunity to work one hundred percent of their ability. A society where all people's unique character, capacity, and ability are taken into account and where everyone gets the opportunity to participate in nation-building is my starting point as a Christian Democrat.

Mr. Speaker! The following can be read in the report regarding the expansion of the växa-support: The Government makes the assessment that the reduction of employer contributions for the first employee, the so-called växa-support, should be expanded to cover two employees, and the amount limit for how large a compensation is covered by the reduction should be raised to 35,000 kronor per month.

We know that four out of five jobs are created by small and medium-sized enterprises. These companies' role in the labor market is important. More focus needs to be directed towards them and their opportunity to grow and develop. The Christian Democrats want to strengthen small and medium-sized enterprises, and this is reflected in the government's budget proposal. With an expansion of the growth support, small business owners are given a greater chance to hire employees. In this way, more jobs are created.

Mr. Speaker! Furthermore, the government has appointed a regulatory simplification council - all so that it should be easy to do right by entrepreneurs. For this to happen, a great deal of regulatory simplification will be needed. The administrative burden for Swedish business shall decrease.

Small and medium-sized enterprises are often family businesses. Often they are inherited over generations and are workplaces for several in the family. In the part of the country I come from, small-scale entrepreneurship is a given and the foundation of the business sector. I see examples every week of individuals' ideas, creativity, and entrepreneurship being given the opportunity to flourish in entrepreneurship.

Mr. Speaker! As a Christian Democrat, I also see the central role of the family in working life. I am pleased that the budget contains reforms that strengthen the conditions for a better balance between family and work life, for example through more flexible working time solutions. A society that facilitates for parents to combine work with the family's needs is a society that builds security and long-term sustainability.

The government has taken several steps in the right direction with this budget, but I am impatient. There is room for improvement. We Christian Democrats will continue to work for an even more humane working life, where the family is given a clearer place and where every person's unique value is respected.

Let us together build a Sweden where more people get the opportunity to contribute, grow, and live a good life both at and outside of work.

(Applause)

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden faces a crossroads, and there is only one path that leads forward.

To build a strong Sweden that holds together for the future, we must focus on ensuring that all people who are in Sweden reach their full potential. If we do not promptly reverse the development of an exclusion that creates a division in our society, it will have devastating consequences for a long time to come. Therefore, social mobility must increase, and it must happen now.

We believe in a shared responsibility, so that all people have the freedom to realize their lives and their dreams. The individual has a responsibility to seize the opportunities that exist, and society has a responsibility to create even more opportunities. When people can reach their full potential and have the freedom to live the lives they want to live, when people succeed, it is good for Sweden. It benefits Sweden's growth, strengthens the cohesion in the country, and is what creates resources to continue investing in both people's and companies' opportunities.

To build a strong Sweden that holds together for the future, we must focus on ensuring that all people in Sweden reach their full potential. Sweden should simply be the world's best country to make life journeys in. For that, growth and new jobs are required. In a society where the freedom exists to create new companies and new ideas, many more opportunities are also created to emerge from exclusion and achieve a successful integration.

Unfortunately, Sweden is currently losing out in new entrepreneurship, growth, and job creation, while unemployment is rising. That trend must be reversed. For some groups in society, it is harder today to embark on a life journey than for others. Statistically, the step into the labor market is largest for foreign-born women and young men. For foreign-born people in general, failed integration is a root cause of why many life journeys do not happen. 86.1 percent of domestic-born people whose both parents are domestic-born are employed. The corresponding figure for foreign-born is 74.9 percent. That is a difference of a little more than 11 percentage points. Had foreign-born people had the same employment rate as domestic-born people, an additional 180,000 people would have had jobs in Sweden. It is an enormous waste.

The task of politics is to give everyone a chance, while at the same time the individual has the freedom to take responsibility for their life and their life's journey.

Mr. Speaker! The Centre Party sees four structural problems that prevent people from making a life journey.

The threshold to the first job is many times too high, and the incentives for self-sufficiency are too low.

Jobs are created in small and growing companies, but new business creation is falling and the cost of hiring is high and has even been increased during the Tidö Government.

The large competence needs of companies are not matched by the skills of those who are unemployed. The need for education is crying, and the jobs are created in places other than where unemployment is high.

The Swedish language is an important key, not only for entering Swedish society but above all for entering the Swedish labor market. Despite some changes having been made, SFI is still far too inadequate, and too few learn the Swedish language.

These were four structural problems that the government is doing far too little to solve. Now, major structural reforms are required for a labor market in transition and to be better equipped for the future. Not least, reforms are needed for groups with weak competitiveness who are to enter the workforce and to reduce the division of the labor market. At the same time, reforms are needed to maintain a high employment rate in other groups. The unemployment that we see in Sweden today is largely the result of a failed job integration. Unemployment is draining for the individual, contributes to large costs for the public sector, and constitutes a large untapped potential for society.

The way forward is to open the door to the Swedish labor market wide. High costs for hiring lead to people being shut out from the labor market. To enable more simple jobs and thus more paths into the labor market, both reinforced education, lower costs for hiring, new forms of employment, and a better introduction to the labor market are needed. We must dare to prioritize what is truly important. Therefore, Centerpartiet prioritizes proposals that create jobs.

When it comes to the unemployment insurance, the Centre Party believes that the work line must be given clearer priority and that the unemployment insurance should therefore be relatively high at the beginning to subsequently be scaled down faster. This design implies a large saving which allows us to invest in other, more effective, job-creating measures.

Another thing that is not working well enough is the establishment jobs. Therefore, they need to be expanded to also include companies without collective agreements. The integration of newcomers must be accelerated, and expanding the establishment jobs is an important component in that work.

Mr. Speaker! The Tidö government's policy is characterized, at best, by passivity, lack of initiative, disorder, and murky priorities. At worst, it is characterized by populist proposals that hinder entry into the labor market. Despite several parties in the Tidö government adopting the epithet conservative, the job policy is anything but conservative. The costs for hiring are increased for companies instead of being lowered. Benefits pay off better compared to work with increased a-kasse levels.

The problem that too many foreign-born individuals stand outside the labor market should primarily be solved by ensuring that those whom the Tidö parties consider not to be integrated receive money to return to their former home countries. It is a proposal that the investigator himself believes will not work, but rather will exacerbate the integration problems and make it more difficult to enter the Swedish labor market.

The government simply has no solutions. Furthermore, the fact that the government repeatedly points out certain groups creates even greater rifts in society that risk increasing exclusion. And this will have consequences for our country for a long time to come.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thought the Social Democrats would request the floor given the rebuff I received regarding the unemployment insurance fund, but I understand that one does not want to quarrel with future coalition partners. The Centre goes significantly further than the government does when it comes to the unemployment insurance fund.

Mr. Speaker! With the current proposal for the a-kassa, what is it that is the big problem? Is it the raised ceiling that C considers to be the big problem, or does one want a faster phase-out? I still think it is a fairly good proposal. I would like Jonny Cato to explain what is the big problem with today's proposal for the a-kassa.

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! We want a faster phase-out of the unemployment insurance fund. We had a long debate about the unemployment insurance fund when the proposal was implemented and we voted on it in the Swedish Riksdag.

It is clear that the proposal is a compromise between the Tidö parties, and it is clear that it is a victory for the Sverigedemokraterna in the matter of it being more profitable to live on benefits than to work in Sweden.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not really know what to believe about Jonny Cato. First he says that the allowance is an insurance, but when the government presents a proposal, it is a benefit.

Another thing that Jonny Cato mentioned in his speech was that the government is pitting groups against each other. In that case, I would like to hear Jonny Catos explanation for why the Centerpartiet is lowering the grant to persons with disabilities. You are cutting Samhall by 2.5 billion per year for three years, partly to finance increased immigration and an increased number of quota refugees. You also want to finance an intensive year for newcomers. Who is it really that is pitting groups against groups here – is it the Sverigedemokraterna or the Centerpartiet?

One is striking against those who have it hardest on the labor market, namely people with disabilities. One is cutting the grants to them in order to increase immigration to Sweden. Doesn't Jonny Cato think we have had a sufficiently high immigration to Sweden?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! Here is the rhetoric again: people with disabilities or immigrants. Politics is not so simple and black-and-white. One can, of course, make investments that work for people who are far from the labor market, both because of a functional variation and because they have recently arrived in Sweden.

The Center Party invests in job-creating measures for everyone, regardless of how you look - regardless of skin color. That is the difference between the Center Party and the Sweden Democrats: the Sweden Democrats only invest in those who look like me and Magnus. The rest should return. They shall receive 350,000 so that they return home. Furthermore, they can now regret it and come back, and then we can state that they have received 350,000 kronor unnecessarily. It is 350,000 kronor that could go towards things that work - towards integration efforts that enable people to enter the labor market.

Another thing I can ask myself is what it is that makes Magnus Persson think that Samhall works so incredibly well. What is it that makes Magnus Persson think that people who are far from the labor market will get closer to it with Samhall? We have had quite good discussions, not least under the leadership of Saila Quicklund in the committee, about the problems with Samhall. But one must also dare to tackle them. In the investigation from the government that is now on the table, one only looks at a small part of the problems with Samhall.

Yes, the Center Party is cutting back on Samhall. We mean that it is inefficient labor market policy. Instead, we want to invest in what we believe works, that is to say, to invest in people. We see people as an asset, not as a problem. That is the difference between the Center Party and the Sweden Democrats: We believe in everyone, regardless of functional variation and regardless of skin color.

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

Mr. Speaker! This morning, the alarm clock rang for several million hardworking individuals in a Christmas-light-beautiful Sweden. It is the final exam for the third-year high school student in the metalworking program, it is the start of the Christmas schedule for the midwife – she who will work a little extra this week to be able to be off on Christmas Eve – and it is the retail employee who will listen to White Christmas over and over again for a few more days before it is time for Christmas peace.

Even though the clock strikes early and it is dark and cold, there is something or someone waiting - someone who misses you if you do not come to the breakroom for the morning coffee, if you do not show up at the check-in point in the hospital's staff entrance, or if you do not come to the commuter parking lot to meet your colleagues for the shared morning commute.

Even though the morning is dark here in December and the steps can sometimes feel heavy, it is precisely the sense of belonging - to belong and be one of the group - that makes the work something much greater than mere livelihood. Having control over one's income and being independent provides freedom and choices for the individual, but it also creates a society where we all contribute and build community - where we together create security and quality of life.

The Liberals and the government want more Swedes to be given the conditions to be a part of the construction of society and the community. The work line is important, but to reach there, an education line is also needed. A labor market policy that takes responsibility knows that a student cap in the wardrobe almost always guarantees a work community. Therefore, a functioning primary and secondary school is, in the long run, the most important labor market measure.

However, it helps little for those who have finished school and are unemployed here and now. But high-quality education strengthens the individual's opportunities to establish themselves in the labor market and makes it possible to utilize everyone's competence. Ensuring that more educations are created in areas where the competence shortage is greatest is important. In the budget bill for 2025, the government adds 900 million to regional vocational adult education within komvux, including student support. This means 11,000 more annual study places. The contribution to supervisors in apprenticeship programs within komvux and lärningsvux is also increased.

A few weeks ago, I met with students who were at that time undergoing a labor market training to become bus and truck drivers. They are guaranteed jobs as soon as they finish, according to the employment service officers I met at the same place. The employment service officers say they could fill the courses with job seekers several times over and that there would be jobs for everyone—if the job seekers were only ready. But many of the job seekers who want to do so lack the basic skills to even get into the labor market training.

It is primarily about the language, and the government's focus on strengthening SFI is absolutely crucial to closing the knowledge gap. After the turn of the year, the municipalities will take greater responsibility to ensure that the students succeed. The students shall have more opportunities and more support, but there will also be higher expectations and requirements to succeed in mastering the language, which is so important for a successful integration.

Mr. Speaker! When I meet people, I sometimes hear: "Arbetsförmedlingen actually did no good for me; I fixed a job myself much faster, with the help of old friends. It shouldn't even be called Arbetsförmedlingen, because they don't have any jobs there." Excellent, I reply - Arbetsförmedlingen's resources are not to be used for those who have the strengths and abilities to manage their own transition.

Previously, the first step when one risked losing their job was to turn to Arbetsförmedlingen, but now one is expected to start by inventorying their own networks and their own competence in order to move forward. Only when that has failed should Arbetsförmedlingen be active. Arbetsförmedlingen's resources shall be used in that way, that is, for those who need it most.

A group that has however had to manage far too much on their own after the reform of Arbetsförmedlingen that was carried out during the previous term is the group of unemployed people who are furthest away from the labor market. This may be due to disabilities, mental ill-health, or language difficulties. For that group, personal and close contact with case officers was needed.

The government has allocated funds, because sporadic digital contacts are not sufficient for the group that is furthest away from the labor market. For that group, close, trusting, and motivation-creating personal relationships are needed so that the individuals can get closer to a working life - so that everyone shall have the chance to be missed at work on an ordinary Thursday in December.

Mr. Speaker! When I was in Umeå and Skellefteå and met representatives from both the municipality and the business community, it became clear that it needs to be easier to move to where the jobs are. As an unemployed person, the finances are often tight, and therefore the government's announced increase of the compensation for those who visit a new employer in another part of the country is important. Regardless of whether a skill is in demand in Skåne or northern Sweden, geographical and professional mobility must increase, and this decision is a step in the right direction. It is good to financially supplement the regulatory letters' requirements that people should always be prepared to retrain or seek work in a different municipality than the one they live in.

Unemployment in Skåne is the highest in the country and stands at 8.2 percent. It is very welcome for an Öresundsbo like me that our government prioritized finally getting a new Öresund agreement across the finish line. Finally, the poor agreement that was signed by the Löfven government was improved from a Skåne perspective and thus from a Swedish perspective.

In the largest labor region in the Nordics, 12 percent of Malmö residents are unemployed. At the same time, unemployment on the other side of the sound, in Copenhagen 1 ½ miles away, is below 3 percent. There, Swedish labor is in extremely high demand.

Every step closer to a functioning work commute is valuable. Many thanks to my representatives in the bourgeois government, who finally saw the importance of further connecting Sweden's southern region with Denmark and the continent! I am also full of confidence knowing that our liberal Minister for Employment is well aware of the remaining obstacles and that he continues to hold discussions with his Danish counterpart.

As usual, when we stand here in the rostrum, we debate vigorously how we should distribute the millions and the tax revenues. We all have our own favorite measures. Far too little speaking time is used for how we should increase the common cake that we can distribute.

How are we to get more people to dare and want to start their own companies? Far too many have for far too long not seen entrepreneurship as a possible alternative when they begin to consider future employment. One step on the way is to give small companies the opportunity to grow. Previously, so-called one-person companies have received a reduction in employer contributions when a first person is hired, so-called growth support. Now, it will be possible to get a reduced employer contribution even for one's second employee. At the same time, the limit for how large a compensation is covered by the reduction will increase from 25,000 to 35,000 kronor per month. This will increase employment because it will become cheaper for small companies to hire the competence they need.

It is our small and medium-sized enterprises that, through hard work, create new opportunities for individuals and ensure that we here in this chamber continue to have tax revenues to distribute to our welfare.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! A report has recently been released from IFAU, where it is pointed out that the private actors cost significantly more than Arbetsförmedlingen and that they do not get more people into work. I was present when this issue was negotiated. This was a compromise that we in Miljöpartiet agreed to - a very bad compromise, as it turns out now in hindsight. I would even call it a failure. I also remember that Liberalerna were very driving in this.

My question to Camilla is: Do the Liberals regret the privatization of Arbetsförmedlingen?

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question, Member Ali Elmi!

No, we do not regret that we wanted to privatize parts of Arbetsförmedlingen. We must not forget that it was not particularly good before. But it is clear that it is a great disappointment that the result looks the way it does. One must, however, consider what it is due to.

Arbetsförmedlingen has not succeeded in ensuring that there is a functioning rating system. They have not ensured the removal of unserious actors. Today, we see a difference of between 2 percent and over 50 percent. It is clear that the companies that deliver the least in such a system should disappear. We should have a regulation stating that Arbetsförmedlingen shall no longer offer their services.

My conviction is that we must adjust the reform so that the skilled, high-quality companies that actually exist – many are skilled and deliver significantly better than Arbetsförmedlingen – get the opportunity to deliver, while we remove those that do not succeed.

I met an Australian who works with the same thing in Australia. We have been inspired by their way of working when Arbetsförmedlingen has received new conditions. He told me that they have about 40 companies across all of Australia dealing with this, while we in Sweden are constantly a bit over 300. One is well aware of this in the government. One has also suspected this, which has caused one not to have hurried the expansion.

However, it does not mean that the reform is to be removed. It means that the model is to be adjusted and become better.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Committee on Employment and Labour went on a trip to Australia in 2018. Those who advocated for privatization certainly got their picture of this, but those who considered privatization to be the wrong path also got a clear picture when they were on that trip.

I will return to my question, because I feel that Camilla did not quite answer the question.

The private actors are 70 percent more expensive. Why should one pay more for the same thing? Arbetsförmedlingen's efforts yield the same results, so why should one pay 70 percent more? In some cases, the private actors yield worse results.

We in Miljöpartiet deeply regret the compromise we agreed to. Do the Liberals regret the privatization of Arbetsförmedlingen? What you claim in the Tidö government is that you are going to streamline the labor market policy. In what way is this efficient?

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

Mr. Speaker! Then I say it again with the exact same words as in my previous reply: No, we do not regret it, but we see deficiencies that we must rectify. I am convinced that a collaboration between the private and the public sector can solve this in a very good way.

I have also listened to Arbetsförmedlingen when the director-general was in the committee and explained that they had fallen short in certain matters. It has been about deficiencies in procurement, the way they monitor, or the opportunities that the regulatory letter provides. Such things must be rectified.

We cannot keep the unserious actors. On that, we are in complete agreement. And we must handle tax money very carefully. We are not doing that now. It is too expensive. It costs more than it tastes. But we do not think the reform should be rolled back. On the contrary, we believe in the reform, and we must rectify the errors that exist.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! We face great challenges in the labor market. Unemployment is high, especially for the long-term unemployed and groups that are far from the labor market. Even though parts of this can be linked to the economic cycle, structural problems in the labor market and an all-too-high unemployment rate persist.

That many low-educated foreign-born individuals have difficulty establishing themselves on the labor market is one such problem. That unemployment is high despite many industries crying out for labor is another. But these are structural problems - not something that the individual human can alone bear responsibility for.

The Tidö government has long spoken about this being something they have inherited from previous governments. And yes, the problems with high unemployment, especially among certain groups, also existed then. But the Tidö government has had two years to turn the development around. After they have been in power for more than two years, it is reasonable to expect solutions that actually make a difference. Those solutions, however, are conspicuously absent.

Mr. Speaker! The problem is that the government's solutions do not meet the real needs in the labor market. The government speaks of an effective labor market policy, but at the same time, during the mandate period, they have significantly cut the funds for labor market policy. Particularly noteworthy is that the government is shrinking the program grant for Arbetsförmedlingen while simultaneously saying that more people must work and support themselves. That logic does not hold. Instead, it becomes a policy that hits hardest against precisely those groups who, due to structural barriers or individual challenges, stand furthest from the labor market.

It is about people with different types of functional variations, people who lack education or low-educated foreign-born women. It is precisely for these groups who stand furthest from the labor market that Arbetsförmedlingen is needed most. Reducing the program grant to Arbetsförmedlingen is a short-sighted policy that benefits neither the job seekers nor society as a whole.

Mr. Speaker! The government has also removed the extra services. Yes, they were costly, but they were important so that many low-educated foreign-born women could get closer to the labor market. Especially when it concerns groups that already stand far from the labor market, more resources are required to get more into work, not fewer. If the government were actually interested in meeting the needs of the labor market, they would have prioritized this and dared to invest. Now, they have removed this without replacing it with anything else.

The same applies to the intensive year. Measures have been phased out without being replaced. The government is reducing the opportunities for integration and establishment when more measures were actually needed to get more people into work. This hinders both integration and people's opportunity for self-sufficiency. This is what the government does when we instead need to build bridges into the labor market.

Mr. Speaker! Miljöpartiet proposes a different way forward. We want to individualize the establishment program. In today's system, the program is often far too general, and it does not suit everyone. Newcomers are not a homogeneous group of people with the same prerequisites. They carry with them different experiences and knowledge that affect their opportunities.

If we are serious about getting more people into work and ensuring that everyone can support themselves, the establishment process must be adapted to the individual's needs and abilities. A person without primary education has different needs than a person with upper secondary education. We need to create solutions that suit the individual's background and circumstances. For those who lack basic education, it may involve receiving language training and basic skills, while a person with upper secondary education may need labor market training or internships to gain relevant experience.

This does not only mean a more efficient way to get people into work. It is also a long-term solution to reduce the mismatch in the labor market. Miljöpartiet sees everyone's potential and wants to give them the right tools to succeed.

Mr. Speaker! I say it again: If we are to be able to reduce unemployment, it is necessary that the unemployed obtain the skills that are in demand on the labor market. Miljöpartiet proposes that labor market training should be expanded, for example within welfare and industry, in order to reduce the mismatch on the labor market.

We also want to introduce a national coordinator for skills supply. A coordinator could identify the needs in the labor market so that educational programs and vocational training can be developed targeted at shortage occupations. This is a function that does not exist today but which could make a big difference for people.

These are important measures for a more efficient labor market. At the same time, there must be sufficient funds so that smooth solutions can be provided. Employers' needs must be better matched with the skills that exist. Today, entire communities in northern Sweden are crying out for labor while unemployment in southern Sweden is disproportionately high.

Long-term solutions are needed to ensure that people receive the right education so that they can take the jobs that are available. Reducing unemployment is not about lowering benefits, but about giving people the right education and the right support so that they can enter the workforce.

Mr. Speaker! The Government speaks of streamlining the labor market policy, but their definition of an efficient labor market policy is mostly about removing important measures, which worsens integration and the opportunities for people to get a job. Many people need the right conditions to enter employment. It is cynical to believe that it happens by itself.

The policy being pursued today is misguided in many areas. The government says that they want to increase equality, but they are lowering taxes for the very richest and increasing the gaps between people. They say that they want to combat gang crime but ignore the segregation, which fuels the exclusion. They say that they want to reduce unemployment but are cutting back on the labor market measures that are supposed to help people get an income of their own to live on. They say that they want to combat climate change but are increasing emissions. The government's policy does not lead to the results we need.

It is particularly important to point out that the government is wrong when it suggests that benefit caps should be a solution to unemployment. It is a gross simplification of reality. People are not unemployed because they have too high benefits. They are unemployed because they lack the skills that are in demand on the labor market. Reducing benefits and plunging more people into poverty will not result in more people entering employment. It will increase the inequalities, and it risks weakening the entire society.

If we are to be able to reduce unemployment, we need to focus on education, skills development, and targeted measures for those who are furthest from the labor market. The government chooses instead to go the opposite way. Now, there is a risk of increasing exclusion by devaluing those who are already vulnerable.

It is not the unemployed, Mr. Speaker, who lack will. It is the Tidö government that lacks solutions.

The government's policy leaves the most vulnerable without support and escalates the problems in the labor market. Miljöpartiet is ready to take responsibility for a different way forward. It is about a policy that strengthens the labor market, equips people with the right skills and truly reduces unemployment. It is about a policy that creates jobs, integrates people into society and drives the green transition forward. It is time to prioritize the most vulnerable and ensure that more people receive the right education and opportunity for work.

Mr. Speaker! I do not participate in the decision. I have submitted a special statement.

(Applause)

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

Johanna Haraldsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! People are dying at their jobs. In recent years, in Sweden, it has been an average of one person per week who has set their watch, packed their lunch box, said goodbye to their family and gone to work - to never come home again.

It is the worst thing that can happen when you are just going to work. But this is rarely due to chance or bad luck. It is due to a poor working environment.

During 2023, almost 40,000 work-related injuries were registered that led to sick leave. This concerns employers who have not done everything they can to prevent ill health and accidents, despite being obligated to work systematically and preventatively to create a healthy and safe work environment.

The conclusions of the Swedish Work Environment Authority are crystal clear. Almost all fatal accidents could have been prevented if the employer had simply followed the rules, carried out proper risk assessments, and taken their responsibility. No one had therefore needed to die, Mr. Speaker, if the employer had simply done what the law says one should do.

It is completely unjustifiable that carelessness, ignorance and pure nonchalance are allowed to cost human lives. I refuse to accept such an order.

Mr. Speaker! We have a strong work environment act, but a law is only as effective as its compliance. And it is clear that compliance is lacking.

The inspectors of the Swedish Work Environment Authority play a crucial role in ensuring that the rules are followed, but they only manage to visit a fraction of the country's workplaces every year. Therefore, it is important that safety representatives are present at the workplaces to drive the work for a safe working environment. Safety representatives also play a central role when it comes to sounding the alarm and stopping the work when the protection is substandard.

The measures for a better working environment must, of course, be taken at the workplaces. But we here in the Riksdag also have a responsibility. We must ensure that the regulatory framework is clear, that the follow-up is sufficient, and that the penalties for those who do not follow the law are so significant that they deter from negligence and law-breaking.

We Social Democrats believe that more inspections, better support for safety representatives, and harsher sanctions against those who break the law are needed. Therefore, in our budget proposal for 2025, we propose 100 million kronor more to Arbetsmiljöverket to increase the number of inspections and take steps towards fulfilling the ILO convention regarding the number of occupational health and safety inspectors, i.e., 1 per 10,000 employed.

We are allocating 30 million kronor more to the regional safety representatives so that they can visit more workplaces and strengthen the support for small workplaces and employees at companies without a safety committee.

We Social Democrats consider it fully reasonable that we in Sweden should have as many workplace inspectors as the ILO recommends, but that requires the number of inspectors to be almost doubled and that the Swedish Work Environment Authority's resources be significantly expanded.

Our Nordic neighbors - Norway, Denmark and Finland - already fulfill the ILO's requirements of 1 inspector per 10,000 employed. They even have more than what is required according to the ILO's convention. That Sweden lags so far behind that we would almost need to double our number of inspectors is embarrassing.

The more inspectors we have, the more workplaces can be inspected. It is logical. This increases the pressure on employers to follow the rules. The motivation should, of course, lie in having healthy and productive employees in the workplace, Mr. Speaker, but in far too many cases, it is rather the risk of sanctions that makes companies tighten up.

Mr. Speaker! At workplaces with five or more employees, a safety representative shall be elected, but at far too many workplaces, local safety representatives are missing. Without safety representatives, the employees are powerless in the work environment work. Those who are most affected by the work environment must, of course, have a real opportunity to be involved in shaping it. Here, the regional safety representatives play a decisive role, both for recruiting more local safety representatives and for supporting the work environment work at the smaller workplaces.

The grants to the regional safety representatives have not been increased for many years. This has forced some trade unions to contribute more of their own funds to maintain the operations, while others have been forced to reduce the number of safety representatives and workplace visits. This is not sustainable. Therefore, we Social Democrats want to increase the grants to the regional safety representatives, so that the protection for Swedish wage earners is not eroded in step with the grant.

Mr. Speaker! A safe working environment is not only about preventing accidents. It is also about stopping the stress and the mental ill-health that is spreading in our workplaces. Stress-related ill-health is one of our time's greatest occupational health challenges, especially for women working within healthcare, school, and care.

For a nursing assistant who is already on their knees, a pat on the back is not enough. For a teacher who goes home every day with a sense of inadequacy, a new and ergonomic office chair is never enough.

It is about having enough resources and colleagues to give every patient the care they deserve and to give every student the attention and the support the student needs.

We Social Democrats have therefore, in our budget motions in recent years, proposed greater support to municipalities and regions in relation to the Sweden Democrats' and the government's proposals.

For 2025, we propose an additional 6 billion kronor more than the government for welfare, something that the Tidö parties could also have done if they had prioritized welfare and its employees higher than tax cuts for the wealthiest.

We cannot accept that people break down - physically or mentally - from their work. And we cannot tolerate that employers who fail in their responsibility get away with it. The working environment in Sweden must be improved. This requires concrete measures: more inspectors, better support for safety representatives and resources to reduce stress in the welfare sector.

We need to take our responsibility and ensure that there are rules that are complied with and that no one should have to pay the price for a lack of protection with their life or their health.

(Applause)

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! Crime is spreading in Sweden, and even though shootings and explosions are what receive the most attention for natural reasons, we all know that the basis for the activity is economic. The links between the labor market and the criminal world are obvious, and the entire society's power must be mobilized even against crime in the working life.

Crime in the labor market leads to serious social problems and is system-threatening because it undermines trust in the entire society as criminal companies build their operations and gain competitive advantages through black labor, illegal labor, sham employment, human trafficking, poor working environments, and various benefit crimes.

Despite this, deregulation and so-called simplifications during the last decades have been implemented without an understanding of the long-term consequences. And here we stand now. We Social Democrats have long warned that these things do not just make life easier for entrepreneurs, which is of course commendable, but also make it both cheaper and easier for criminals to get in and knock out those who try to do the right thing on the Swedish labor market.

Honest entrepreneurs have received simplifications with a side of crime that, in the long run, undermines them themselves and risks the entire society. The self-regulating market that is capable of self-curbing this type of abuse and unhealthy competition does not exist, and the failed market experiments must come to an end.

Today, almost the entire Swedish labor market is affected by these problems. The construction industry, restaurants and taxis are well-known sectors that have been affected for a long time, but also the care industry, beauty care, industries and the real estate industry, to name a few, are being affected more and harder with each passing month.

In step with the growing problems, more and more of Sweden's entrepreneurs have also realized that there is a downside to the development. Prices are being pressured through exploited labor, violations of workplace safety laws, and black money from, for example, drug sales. The state also helps through lax rules for those who are employed via, for example, nystartsjobb or work permits.

Of course, a good deal of good things are also being done, Mr. Speaker. The A-krim center continues to be expanded, thankfully, new opportunities for authorities to share information are being realized, and it was recently decided to tighten the system with salary guarantees to curb criminal abuse.

When it comes to what we are facing, Mr. Speaker, it is required that we mobilize the entire society's strength and meet the criminals already at the door. They have no place in the labor market. It must be difficult to cheat, it must be easy to get caught, and there must be tangible punishments even in this area.

A beginning would be, for example, to tighten the rules for labor immigration, preferably through a labor market assessment. Individual companies shall not be allowed to decide whether there is a labor shortage or bring in people and exploit them while Swedish companies are being driven out of business and workers become unemployed.

Another measure would be to address the problems with public procurement. The public sector is a large procurer of both goods and services, and excluding the criminal environment from winning tenders with the help of, for example, expanded register checks and a shift from requirements for lowest price to a more comprehensive assessment should be obvious.

By blacklisting those who misbehave and expanding the possibilities to analyze public information available at various agencies and elsewhere, for example with the help of AI, we can create a good foundation for securing procurements with honest companies and stopping the unfair competition from those who do not want to follow the laws.

A third proposal is to tighten the control and the regulatory framework for subsidized employment, especially for start-up jobs which today hardly have a regulatory framework to speak of. There, one relies fully on the assumption that everyone who has a company and can hire someone and everyone who has been unemployed for a longer period are law-abiding and want to do the right thing. That assumption simply does not hold.

This development cannot continue. But despite there being much to do, the proposals delivered by the government in our area are extremely few, Mr. Speaker. That development must turn. We must take control of the labor market and ensure that the companies that behave properly also manage to stay on the market and are not knocked out by the unserious ones.

We heard earlier in the debate that recessions would mean that unserious companies would be pushed out in favor of serious, decent companies. The risk is that it will be exactly the opposite: When competition hardens and jobs become fewer, it is those who take the most shortcuts and exploit people for the lowest wages who remain and get the assignments that are available. That is not a development that feels particularly appealing.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Patrik Lundqvist, for a very good speech! I agree with most of what Patrik Lundqvist says.

I can only regret that the Social Democrats were not quicker to the ball when it comes to, for example, state labor market assessment. We had a majority for it in the Riksdag from 2014 until 2022. At that time, no one wanted to discuss the issue. Then the Sweden Democrats sat down with the governing parties and negotiated quite well. We did not go all the way. We would have gladly liked to introduce a state labor market assessment, but it was not possible. We had a majority in the Riksdag together with the Social Democrats for two full terms, but then the Social Democrats unfortunately chose to vote no to the proposal. It is just a matter of regret. It could have been in place a long time ago.

You who are listening to this debate should know - it is very important, when one constantly hears the Socialdemokraterna hacking at the Sverigedemokraterna, that the Socialdemokraterna are not allowed to negotiate and discuss with the Sverigedemokraterna. It is important to keep in mind in this issue.

Otherwise, I agree with most of what Patrik Lundqvist says, but I still have a question for him regarding countering the shadow society and the fact that illegal immigrants are exploited by ruthless firms: How do Patrik Lundqvist and the Socialdemokrater view the proposal on the reporting obligation? It would become a very good tool against the shadow society, black labor, and crime in the labor market if the police were given resources to be able to enter a workplace directly based solely on a tip and request identification from people, a measure they have not had the right to until now.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! We have heard this waltz from Magnus before: We had a majority. Why didn't we do things? The fact is that this majority remains. There was no other situation we had between 2018 and 2022 than the one you have now, where you did not reach all the way. It is easy to attack others and say things about what happened before, but then one must also remember what situation one sits in oneself. We both know what it was due to then and what it is due to now. There is no great difference there.

Of course, remember what has been done, but also remember what is being done now! I think it is quite important to land on that, if one is to land in a serious debate and actually look at what one does oneself and not just turn the other cheek and believe that the same thing means something else when someone else does it.

We have both sat in negotiations with other parties where the result has become what it has become. After that, one votes as one votes in this chamber, right?

Otherwise, perhaps we can move forward with this. The majority remains, doesn't it? We can manage to do this if that were the case.

There are very good opportunities for the akrim centers to handle these issues. I am not particularly well-versed in the legislation that Magnus Persson is talking about. We will have to see what it becomes when a proposal finally arrives. I have no major comments on this right now, other than that when authorities that have no contact with, or do not want any contact with, illegal [persons] are given additional assignments to report those people, I don't know if it will yield much. It is at least a consideration I have, Mr. Speaker.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I am glad that in any case we have negotiated better in two years than the Social Democrats managed to do in eight years when it comes to these issues. We have pushed through significantly more than the Social Democrats did. I am therefore quite satisfied with our negotiations. I am not completely satisfied. One should never be.

When it comes to the fight against the shadow society and the exploitation of illegal immigrants, I think Patrik Lundqvist is beating around the bush, Mr. Speaker. We do not need to go further than Patrik Lundqvist's own party leader, who had an illegal immigrant cleaning black in her own home, employed by a company that was quite unprofessional and had also been convicted of criminal acts. That is not the kind of society we want, is it? That is what we are supposed to oppose?

When it can go so far that a party leader for Sweden's largest party has black-market cleaning help in their home, it is something that is not right. Had the reporting obligation been in place, this might never have happened.

I would still like a clearer answer from Patrik Lundqvist here. How does Patrik Lundqvist view the proposal on the reporting obligation? He claims that he is not informed about it. This proposal has been on the table for quite a long time and has been debated very actively, both in the media and in this chamber, so he should know what it contains.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! Then we come back to the fundamental problem. We have a right wing in this chamber that wants individual companies to be the ones who decide who gets a work permit and who does not. It is that which enables them to bring people here, exploit them, and force them to work. We read, for example, last week about the bakery Bake My Day, where people were made to work 18-hour shifts for several months in a row with threats such as: If you do not agree to this, you are out, because your work permit is based on you having a job here. It is that order that is the fundamental problem.

We naturally also have a problem with entrepreneurs who have misbehaved being allowed to continue. The penalties are far too low. The business bans are not sufficient. Those who were behind the pension crimes in the so-called Allrahärvan received ten-year business bans after having stolen people's pension money. That cannot be reasonable. It is here we need to consolidate our forces.

I am quite convinced that if the laws are in place to judge those who are responsible for organized crime in the labor market, we will also get rid of them. There must be opportunities for authorities to say: No, but stop now! These people should not be running companies. They are not there because they are serious and want to do good for Sweden. They have other motives.

That is where we need to implement the measures. But that is not what we see now. The government ensures that one cannot employ family members with nystartsjobb, while criminals exploit the system to employ their friends in the gangs.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 17 December.)

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