Labor market policy and unemployment insurance

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! We are gathered here today to debate the labor market policy and the unemployment benefit. It is a special day to hold a debate on. Today, 5,000 people have received a final notice that the workplace they have seen as their own and that they have gone to every day has filed a petition for bankruptcy. It concerns Northvolt's bankruptcy petition.

This is primarily a tragedy for the people who are affected and for the society in which the company exists. Now, it is a matter of the politics being there, and we are doing that. We have one of the world's most well-functioning security and transition systems for the people who are now affected, and we must let the people be in focus at this moment.

The Swedish transition system has been praised from many sides. When researchers have investigated the capacity in the Swedish transition system, it has become clear that it is very well-functioning. Even before we got the world's most generous transition reform, the transition study support, in place, the Swedish transition system was well-functioning. There are good opportunities for the various transition organizations to be able to help and support people and ensure that they can move forward to a new job.

The previous notices of redundancy ensure that the possibility for people to seek further employment is good. We know from Swedish research that the chance of obtaining a job when seeking work from a job is significantly higher than if one seeks a job from unemployment. Therefore, it is the labor market system that we have in Sweden, with clear notices in good time to those who are employed, a prerequisite for a well-functioning transition and for holding back unemployment.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is in a difficult economic situation. We took over in a time of 10 percent inflation, which meant that we had to conduct a fiscal policy that was partially constrained and could not act in the recession. Therefore, it was very important that we prioritized, in close cooperation with the Riksbank, pushing inflation back to normal and manageable levels so that we can now conduct a policy that instead means that we invest our way out of the recession.

We have a series of reforms that are to strengthen the labor market, both structurally in the long term and here and now. The beating heart of our restoration of the work line is some of the reforms we have to debate today. This concerns, for example, the reform of the unemployment insurance that will come into effect at the end of the summer.

We are now ensuring that the incentives for the unemployment insurance are strengthened. One example of this is that we get a faster tapering. Instead of the taperings starting after 200 days, they will start already after 100 days. We ensure that there is tapering and strong incentives for work throughout the entire unemployment benefit, even in the activity support.

Mr. Speaker! The activity support was previously, if you will excuse me, somewhat of a citizen's income for the unemployed. It was a compensation that one could receive without sufficiently clear requirements being set, and it was at the same level for as long as it lasted. Now, the activity support will also be phased out by 5 percent for every 100 days of unemployment down to a floor.

These reforms strengthen the work line. They ensure that people receive support and expectations to return to a job. Why is this so important? For us, it is a question of view on humanity. We know that no human being is useless. We know that all people in Sweden are needed and that Sweden fares best when Sweden works. Therefore, we must ensure that all people, even those who have been unemployed for a while, are in demand by the Swedish economy in Swedish society. Therefore, we shall also have authorities that look people in the eye, but not with their heads tilted, and who do not come up with excuses for why someone is unemployed. On the contrary, they shall have clear expectations and requirements and provide the right support and help back to work, adapted to the situation of the person in question.

Mr. Speaker! Within this reform, we are also making important changes that reduce the bureaucracy in the system. One of them is a shift from basing compensation on hours worked to instead basing it on earned income. These are register-based tasks. It may sound a bit boring to talk about this in a parliamentary debate, but it plays a major role, not only for those who are unemployed and seeking a-kassa or for the a-kassas but also for the employers.

Employers today need to spend a lot of time preparing various tasks that are to support and strengthen the unemployed person when they apply for unemployment insurance. Now, instead, we will base the payments and the qualification for the unemployment benefit on earned register-based data that the Swedish Tax Agency has access to. This will facilitate work, reduce bureaucracy, and furthermore put a stop to some of the fraud and inaccuracies that currently exist to a high degree in the unemployment insurance.

The Inspection of the Unemployment Insurance has not only shown that errors and fraud occur, but it has also shown that Arbetsförmedlingen fails in its statutory responsibility, which one has been told by the government to set correct and clear requirements that the person who is unemployed shall seek work. If one is without a job, one shall train for a new job, seek available jobs, and take offered jobs.

Since we received the voters' trust, Mr. Speaker, we have ensured that these expectations are clarified. For example, they also apply to families with children. It is an important point to establish. It is more important that children see their parents go to work than that they get to live in exactly the same place where they have lived with their unemployed parents. What expectations one has in a society regarding individual responsibility to get a job and livelihood and build one's own future will play a role in how children fare as they grow up.

By reforming the unemployment insurance and clarifying the expectations for those who are unemployed, we re-establish the work line. By strengthening Arbetsförmedlingen and the expectations on the agency, we also ensure that Arbetsförmedlingen provides the right support and help. Through major investments in the support and measures that exist, not least vocational training, labor market training and other programs, we also ensure that those who are unemployed and lack certain skills are given the opportunity to strengthen their workforce so that what I can do can meet what you demand in a labor market.

Mr. Speaker! The reinforcement of the work line is the church in the middle of the village for our government. We ensure that the work line is reinforced. We ensure that we strengthen the economy and Sweden's growth. But most importantly is our project so that all people can feel the self-worth and hope for the future that comes from a job, from one's own salary, and from colleagues. We want to ensure that all people in our country have a job to go to and can build their own future. Therefore, I want to move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg (M) agreed.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I move for the approval of the Sweden Democrats' reservation 4 in the report.

I had intended to say a few words about Northvolt's bankruptcy, about the consequences for the entire Swedish society of a project that was doomed to fail, and about the 5.8 billion in pension money in the AP funds that has now gone straight down the abyss. But Oliver said what needed to be said, so I return to today's debate.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is suffering from high unemployment at the same time as employers have difficulty finding personnel with the right qualifications who want and can take a job. It is particularly problematic with the increasing long-term unemployment. A large proportion of those registered as job seekers at Arbetsförmedlingen unfortunately lack basic or upper secondary education, which today is almost a requirement to get a job on the Swedish labor market. They also lack other competencies and skills that employers demand. The unemployment and the risk of being affected by long periods without work is high among those who lack completed upper secondary education. Lack of knowledge in the Swedish language also constitutes a major risk for long-term unemployment. These problems are not new.

Madam Speaker! There are no shortcuts into the Swedish labor market. Subsidized employment is a clear example of that. In a majority of cases, the employment is terminated as soon as the subsidy ends. Only a few receive regular employment. Subsidized employment has for decades been the instrument that both right-wing and left-wing governments have used, and unfortunately, they would like to continue with this despite it costing Swedish taxpayers billions without providing any clear and good results.

The Sweden Democrats argue that the only way into today's labor market is through education. This applies to everyone, both those born abroad and those born domestically. Everyone must take the opportunities offered to make themselves employable. It must be a requirement on the individual. We therefore view it positively that the government has increased the resource allocation to various educational initiatives. We are also positive that municipalities and companies are beginning to be included in the work. There are many fine examples where municipalities, together with companies, have created their own training programs. This should be looked at more broadly. I always use the Karlskrona municipality as an example. The municipality has a good cooperation with one of the largest companies, and after internal training, one is guaranteed a job.

Madam Speaker! The difference in unemployment is large between those born in Sweden and those born abroad, especially when it comes to long-term unemployment. The differences are not unique to 2025, but it has looked similar for several years. This constitutes the absolute biggest problem on the Swedish labor market. It is also where a majority of the resources in the area are directed. Unfortunately, previous mass immigration of people with low human capital has affected Swedish society and the Swedish labor market very negatively. We cannot turn a blind eye to this, and we will have to live with this mistake for a long time.

It is in the light of the collective societal issues that today's costly labor market policy must be questioned. How has it come to this?

The Sweden Democrats want to see an arrangement where it is clear from the outset that the individual can participate in offered measures for a limited period, and if the individual does not succeed in making themselves employable on the Swedish labor market during this period, the next step is a request to return to the home country, i.e., to return.

There has been quite a bit of fuss over the Sweden Democrats' proposal, but now signals are coming from both Arbetsförmedlingen and private actors that they have enormous problems with a large number of people not being able to be matched against anything. There is nothing to be done about these tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people. When the Director General of Arbetsförmedlingen visited the committee, she was clear that they cannot manage this. It is therefore a major problem, and then politics must begin to look at broader solutions.

Madam Speaker! The government followed the Sweden Democrats' line and introduced the concept of self-sufficiency in the state budget. This is positive because it creates an opportunity to measure how many in Sweden are actually self-sufficient without a subsidized employment. Previously, the term employed was primarily used to get an idea of individuals' anchoring in the labor market. This concept was introduced after one failed to reach the goal of Europe's lowest unemployment. They simply did not want to put their finger on where the problems were.

Unfortunately, the government has chosen not to go all the way and has watered down the concept of self-sufficiency by, among other things, allowing those with different subsidized employments to be included in the group of self-sufficient. This is what the Sweden Democrats are critical of, and therefore I moved for approval of reservation 4. We want to change the definition in order to be able to measure actual self-sufficiency. It must be broken down, different things must be able to be measured, and there must be the courage to discuss the problems.

Madam Speaker! Instead of subsidized jobs where the individual has to leave the workplace on the same day the subsidy ends, we want to see more workplace-based training positions that give the individual the opportunity to gain useful work experience in combination with theoretical studies. We want to create the conditions for the parties to be able to build a Swedish apprenticeship system. Internationally, there are several successful variants, for example in Germany.

A Swedish model for such employments needs to be created based on the conditions that exist in the Swedish labor market. Naturally, the parties shall be involved in everything from the design of the apprenticeship positions to the selection of candidates, i.e., who shall have access to the positions. An apprenticeship employment shall not be limited to any specific category of job seekers but shall be guided by the needs and opportunities that exist to acquire the education.

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats have long advocated for a state-run, fee-free cash fund financed solidarily through taxation. We are quite alone in this. Already today, the fund is financed to a very large extent by tax revenue, which means that everyone who is in gainful employment contributes to the system.

The new cash payment, which is based on income instead of hours worked, is a step in the right direction as it reduces the administration for the individual and guarantees more accurate payments. The risk of fraud is significantly minimized as the income data is retrieved from Skatteverket, which in the long run will be a great gain for society.

Madam Speaker! The agreement between the government and the Sweden Democrats is a major step in the right direction for a modern unemployment insurance adapted to today's labor market because the ceiling for compensation is raised while the minimum level is also raised – something that has not been done in many years.

But in the proposal, requirements are also placed on the policyholder to seek work linked to a faster tapering off that has been adapted to what the current labor market looks like and the time it takes for the average person to get a new job.

We will thus move away from the time when the Social Democrats saw the "akassan" as part of a benefit reform – something that in the long run has been directly harmful to the Swedish labor market.

Madam Speaker! I shall also say a few words about Samhall and the support for people with disabilities. In our committee motion 2386, there are a number of proposals aimed at creating better conditions for everyone's right to a functioning working life. Here, the importance of Arbetsförmedlingen having special expertise to ensure support for job seekers with disabilities is emphasized. Furthermore, there are proposals regarding the possibility of providing rehabilitative measures and assistive devices to an employee who suffers from a disability. There are also proposals to have the costs investigated for linking the wage subsidy ceiling to the index that follows the general wage development – something the Sverigedemokraterna consider to be quite obvious.

We naturally stand behind these proposals, but in light of the ongoing work in the area within the Tidö cooperation and the mandate that Arbetsförmedlingen received in its latest regulatory letter, we choose not to move for approval of our motion. We instead follow up on it with a special statement.

We view the government's review of Samhall positively. The profit requirement was not raised initially, but we expect it to be reviewed during the course of the investigation. We believe that the government should ensure that the profit requirement is actually investigated.

The National Audit Office judged that both in the government's management and in the organization and management of Samhälls, there has been an all too high degree of prioritization of commercial development over the development of the employees' work capacity, which we consider to be deeply problematic.

The direction for Samhall moving forward should be to focus on the core mission, not to – as is the case today – be a complement to the row of failed integration projects.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! The idea that one works and has some form of collective care has probably existed as long as we humans have existed. The first text or writing, at least as far as I know, that in some way describes a redistribution between good years and bad years is the story of Joseph in the Old Testament, where one speaks of the seven good years and the seven bad years. It was a transition insurance at that time.

We can also look at it in another way. In the New Testament, it states, among other things, that one should not muzzle the ox that is threshing and that the worker is worthy of his wages. It also states there that one should take care of the widow, the orphan and the stranger.

The ideas and principles that exist – to both work and provide care – have existed among us humans, have been documented in various ways, and have characterized the entire West. It was, among other things, those principles that lay behind the guild system, where people supported one another. During the 1600s, people began to build up insurance, and during the 1700s and 1800s, they began with the order system. All along, the idea was that one works, behaves correctly, and has a work ethic, and in return, one has a collective protection.

There we have the whole idea with our own insurance systems, such as employment insurance, sickness insurance, and pension. Together we go out and work, and together we protect each other when we, for various reasons, find life a bit tough. This line – the work line and protection for those who need it – also characterizes the new unemployment insurance. We increase the compensation at the beginning, and it covers more but also has a clear tapering.

For my part, I believe that, given that we in Sweden have a labor market model where the parties have great influence, we could consider whether we in politics can find common ground in a way that we did with the pensions. All parties are today part of the pension agreement. This creates great stability regarding the pension system, which is an immensely important insurance system for us as citizens. One could very well consider the idea that we can find such a consensus also in the labor market area, especially considering that we already today let the parties handle much of this.

Are there challenges? Yes, one of the really big challenges, Madam Speaker, is the new economy. We have the gig economy, platforms and AI, which are highlighted in several motions and which challenge in several ways. These are completely new technologies that we most likely will not be able to say no to, but they are also new technologies that result in us having workers who are not respected and who do not receive the wages they are worth.

I believe that we as politicians will need to look at this. I also believe that the parties in the labor market must ask themselves: Is it reasonable that one can perform a service for any low wage? Is it fair? Will it work in the long run?

Even within the gig economy and the new economy that is emerging, one will have to have a reasonable attitude toward employment, who is an entrepreneur, and how to make it all hang together. Here I want to be honest and admit something. I see that the government is doing a lot, and I move for approval of the proposal we have. But I believe that this is something that we will work a lot with in the coming years, because it is a new economy that is emerging. It is a new way of relating to the labor market, and there I believe we have great challenges.

Madam Speaker! Several members have raised the issue of Arbetsförmedlingen. I will be completely honest and say that for my part, I believe that Arbetsförmedlingen has, in many respects, played out its role. The question is whether we do not, in the long run, need to find a completely different model where Arbetsförmedlingen might perhaps even be abolished and where the municipalities are given a greater responsibility.

We see that in large parts of municipal Sweden today, people are starting to work with boards that handle both the labor market, integration, adult education, and social assistance. The municipalities that work with this are, regardless of party affiliation, very good at getting people into jobs. The question, therefore, is: Where does the right competence lie when it comes to Arbetsförmedlingen? I am well aware that these are thoughts that are not held by the government right now, but they are still questions that I believe we need to look at moving forward.

I am positive about the introduction of a new concept, self-sufficiency. The Christian Democrats have raised that issue for a long time, and we are pleased that the government now includes it.

Another block that is almost always discussed when we talk about the labor market is, of course, education. Our basic position is that it is the regular education system that should catch the vast majority, but alongside that, there must be functioning opportunities for retraining. In that regard, we as Christian Democrats believe that the government is doing a good job.

There is, however, an area that we ourselves have sometimes highlighted, even when we have negotiated with our partners, and that is the folk high schools. They are incredibly skilled at finding that person who has had it a bit tough. There, we would like to see that together with our friends in the government, we can move forward and do even more so that these folk high schools can meet people in need and get them into jobs. This is the basic starting point for Christian Democratic labor market policy: work and the work principle, but also social care for those who, for various reasons, end up on the outside.

It is also not possible, Madam Speaker, to talk about this situation without briefly mentioning Northvolt. It is too early to draw any major conclusions, but many individuals are affected. There are many who have placed their hopes on that type of investment, both for environmental reasons and for economic reasons, and so that the whole country can live.

In the current situation, I believe, above all based on my own experience from 16 years in municipal politics, that it will be important for the municipality, together with the state, via the state authorities, to cooperate in order to try to catch as many as possible.

There are probably many workplaces and jobs to be had in northern Sweden. Here, it is important that we do not lose people with good competence who can work in other places. As has been said, it is difficult today, from the rostrum, to point out exactly what should be done, but that we will need to cooperate, I am completely convinced of.

With this, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the proposal in the committee report and rejection of all motions.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I would first like to move for approval of reservation 10.

What is happening with our country, Madam Speaker? Since the government took office with the support of the Sweden Democrats, unemployment has increased by 70,000 people. That is an old figure – unemployment has increased since it was produced. We have over half a million Swedes who are unemployed today, and now we are competing at the top of the EU league when it comes to unemployment. Watch out, Greece! We are on our way to approaching you in the level of unemployment.

When one saw the figures from January, one thought: How did Sweden end up here? And when one sees the figures today, one is once again astonished. How can we have a government that is satisfied with a development where half a million Swedes stand outside the labor market, where youth unemployment has increased sharply since the change of power, and where long-term unemployment has increased sharply since the change of power?

Madam Speaker! One could say it is the economic cycle. This is how it looks in the world. This is how it looks in Europe. But the trend is that Sweden stands out. We are lagging behind. And we see reports showing that had we had an active labor market policy and the same development as the rest of Europe, yes, then we would have had significantly lower unemployment.

Madam Speaker! At the same time as over half a million Swedes are unemployed with this passivity line from the Sweden Democrats and the government, we have a record low number of Swedes who are in labor market training. How does that add up? I would like to understand this. I would like to understand how one, as a right-wing politician, can go to the Riksdag in the morning and not be ashamed that we have half a million Swedes who are unemployed and only 6,000 on an annual basis who are in labor market training – when we know that we have a business sector that is in need of competent labor and that would grow and contribute to increased growth and productivity in our country if the state did what the state needs to do, namely invest in people and give them the right competence and base it on the classic approach in Swedish active labor market policy: reasonable expectations of the citizens and investments in education that allow us to transition and keep unemployment down.

How can the right-wing parties tolerate that we have a Minister for Employment, Mats Persson, who is unable to deliver more than 6,000 people into employment training when half a million people are unemployed in our country?

Put aside right and left! Focus on Sweden's needs! Put aside ideological blinkers! Focus on Sweden's needs! Put aside the talk about how I would want to do this and that and look at the reality as it looks here and now! Unemployment is growing and affecting our country. And unemployment does not only affect the unemployed, but what is happening is that the growth and productivity in our country is falling. It harms our economy. It harms our ability to invest in school and healthcare and in technological development that allows Sweden to take new steps.

There is a reason why Sweden focused so much on active labor market policy throughout the entire 20th century and why Sweden would need to focus on active labor market policy again and base it on reasonable requirements on the citizens but also investments in the citizens.

Madam Speaker! I do not know whether I should enter into the discussion about Arbetsförmedlingen, because while we hear about one of the largest bankruptcies in Sweden's modern history and have read about thousands of bankruptcies during the last months, and while industry after industry is hit and more and more people become unemployed, the government, with the support of Sverigedemokraterna, has begun the dismantling of the active labor market policy by further worsening the presence from Arbetsförmedlingen's side.

I believe that many who are listening to this debate are thinking: Is it possible to worsen the Swedish Public Employment Service's presence? Yes, it is. We could read in articles last week that the Swedish Public Employment Service is now stating in its reporting to the government that if the government's management of the Swedish Public Employment Service continues in this way, the availability will deteriorate further.

So, it is not enough that Arbetsförmedlingen has disappeared from municipality after municipality and that the employment agencies do not have the local conditions to work with the business community and the unemployed. Now people are going to have to wait on the phone even longer, and even more will be disconnected when they call Arbetsförmedlingen and need support.

Connect it with Magnus Persson's talk about support for people with disabilities! Connect it with the posts we have heard about active measures and training! What reality are we living in? Do we see it with what is happening with the active labor market policy today?

Then one thinks: Okay, but the government might just be neglecting active labor market policy, neglecting activity and investments in education. It still stands up for economic security for people. It would be nice if we could stand here and say that the government at least will not worsen things for the unemployed. It does nothing for them to get jobs or enter education that leads to jobs, but it safeguards the unemployed's economic security. But then I unfortunately have to reveal that the Sverigedemokraterna and the government during this year also lower the level in the account already after the 100th day of unemployment. My colleague will go into this a bit more closely.

No, Madam Speaker, Sweden needs an active labor market policy again based on the idea that everyone who can work should also work. Then Sweden needs to go back to an order where we invest in people, in education, and where we safeguard and promote transition in working life so that people are given the conditions to move on the labor market. Then a state is needed that takes responsibility and does not attack the unemployed but attacks unemployment.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I actually intended to ask another question; I shall see if I have time for it in this exchange of remarks.

Those were strong words from Ardalan Shekarabi. The Social Democrats are, in the ordinary sense, completely without guilt for anything that has happened in this country and for the way it looks as it does.

When it comes to Arbetsförmedlingen, we made a joint decision that we would reform Arbetsförmedlingen calmly and sensibly in a long process. But when it came to power for the Socialdemokraterna, they chose instead to make an agreement with the Centerpartiet, the so-called JÖK. They completely sidelined the entire reform work and contributed to undermining Arbetsförmedlingen solely to retain government power. Ardalan Shekarabi was himself a part of that government, Madam Speaker, so he knows very well which decisions were made. It was more important for Ardalan Shekarabi to be a minister than to have a functioning Arbetsförmedling.

That is how the Social Democrats function as a party. After that, they sold out power for money to a terrorist organization and a wild man, but that is a completely different matter.

I must ask the question to Ardalan Shekarabi that I had intended to ask. It concerns the proposal regarding driving licenses for youth – a very populist proposal, I must say.

I have written down some figures here. There are 179,000 young people in youth unemployment. Then there is seasonal work and so on. What should the selection work look like? How did you arrive at the sum of half a billion? Your proposal would cost many billions.

That is what I mean. It is pure populism from the Social Democrats' side to find voters instead of tackling the problems and seeing their own responsibility for the problems.

In 2019, during an economic boom, we had an unemployment rate of 6.1 percent. The legacy left by the Social Democrats is a very heavy burden to bear for this government and the Sverigedemokraterna, Madam Speaker, but we do the best we can. We try. We do not just sit and point fingers.

The Social Democrats have sat in the stands for eight years and done nothing, and during the economic boom, they put Sweden in a situation that is very difficult to manage.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, honorable Magnus Persson, for the question!

It is difficult to have a background as a worker but every day go to the Riksdag and vote against the interests of workers. I understand the frustration that Magnus Persson carries, because it is the workers that this government and the Sverigedemokraterna betray when they allow unemployment to increase to the level we have today.

I am very proud, Madam Speaker, that we have moved forward with the proposal to offer young unemployed people a better chance at jobs by financing driving license training.

It is about 60,000 young people who today are registered at Arbetsförmedlingen. Of them, 63 percent lack a B-driving license. Svenskt Näringsliv conducted a survey which found that six out of ten employers require a driving license. Magnus Persson knows this. Lack of a driving license leads to people not getting closer to jobs. Shall we then watch passively, or shall we invest in Sweden's youth and do what we can so that our young people do not begin their professional lives with long-term unemployment?

The Social Democrats have a proud tradition. The right to work, and people's duty to act to get closer to work, is completely central to our view of society and to our view of humanity. Magnus Persson should ask himself why the Sweden Democrats and the government are doing nothing about the fact that 60,000 young people are registered as unemployed at the Public Employment Service. If 63 percent of young people lack a driver's license and we know that employers require a driver's license to hire people – why are you not acting? Why this constant betrayal of workers and the unemployed from this government and the Sweden Democrats?

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am very proud that, unlike Ardalan Shekarabi, I come from the working class. The latest measurements show that the Sweden Democrats are the party that has the most ordinary workers in this chamber. I believe the Social Democrats will come in third or fourth place. The Social Democrats' time as the representative of Sweden's workers ended a long time ago.

I can advise Shekarabi to take a leave of absence, maybe get some dirt under his fingernails and try living on akassa – I have done that. It has never happened to Ardalan Shekarabi. He is a political product who has never gotten dirty in his entire life. Now I got that said. He put it together himself.

When it comes to the unemployment figures, it is very interesting that we see the highest unemployment in social democratically governed municipalities, especially in southern Sweden. They themselves go out and say that they have been subjected to social dumping. That is the problem.

What is Ardalan Shekarabi's message to municipal councilors in, for example, Perstorp and Malmö, which have Sweden's highest unemployment figures? Ardalan Shekarabi and the Social Democrats' policy in this chamber have put them in the situation they are in today through the extremely large immigration from 2015 onwards. I know, because I have been in municipal politics in a Social Democrat-led municipality since 2006. I am still there. I know exactly how it works and what it looks like.

Ardalan Shekarabi and the Social Democrats in this chamber owe their municipal politicians an answer. Why did it turn out the way it did? Does Ardalan Shekarabi feel any responsibility for the situation we have ended up in? Ardalan Shekarabi was, after all, a minister in Stefan Löfven's government. Löfven said that we are not building any walls and that it is free to come to Sweden.

I went to Denmark and listened to them after the refugee wave. They received about 300 people when the train arrived over the Öresund Bridge. No one wanted to stay in Copenhagen – everyone wanted to go to Skåne. What is the mandate for the Skåne municipal councilors within the Social Democrats regarding how they should handle this? Please answer that.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I have a very clear message to the municipal councilors across the country who feel the government's betrayal, who have seen Arbetsförmedlingen disappear, who have seen the state's active labor market policy dismantled under this government, and who now step in and voluntarily offer training and interventions to the unemployed, even though it is a state commitment. They are compensating for the government's passivity. It is a fact that Magnus Persson has given the most passive government in Sweden's history, when it comes to labor market policy, free rein to dismantle the active labor market policy.

My answer to the municipal politicians is that we will do what we can to put pressure on the government. We can at least double the number of people in labor market training from 6,000 to 12,000. We might be able to get the Minister for Employment to work a little harder and perhaps wake up? Then, of course, we hope for a change of power to get an active labor market policy that focuses on the needs of the labor market and the business community and that truly believes in growth. It is a policy that has increased productivity and growth as its goal.

Madam Speaker! One can say a great deal about the Tidö Agreement. There are many opinions about different parts of the agreement. But some things most are in agreement on; there is nothing in that agreement that deals with how Sweden's economy should grow, how more jobs should be created in Sweden, how the business sector should increase productivity, how we should increase prosperity or how we should combat unemployment in our country. These are blind spots, Madam Speaker, for this government, and they are blind spots for the Sverigedemokraterna. The price is ultimately paid by our citizens if one accepts 9 percent unemployment and if one accepts that growth falls in our country. It is time to go back to what has made Sweden strong and again build the country strong.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! Those were big words and a high tone from Ardalan Shekarabi. One can of course wish for that in the chamber if one wants to ensure that the debate receives a different framing than seriousness. In reality, one must remember that the government that Ardalan Shekarabi sat in had great ambitions. Sweden was to have Europe's lowest unemployment. Shekarabi's government did so poorly that they abolished the goal and tried to pretend as if they had never had it. We do not abolish any goals of getting more people into work, but on the contrary, we are re-establishing the work line step by step.

Madam Speaker! We strengthen the drivers for work through lowered taxes and the pension reform that was debated earlier today. We clarify the requirements for those who are unemployed with activity requirements in all transfer systems for the unemployed by strengthening the governance of Arbetsförmedlingen so that Arbetsförmedlingen begins to set requirements.

The government that Ardalan Shekarabi participated in allowed Arbetsförmedlingen to boast about not even following up on the legal requirement that job seekers should apply for jobs throughout Sweden and be prepared to change industries. They did not do that. It took a change of power for it to be addressed.

Large resources were added to vocational training and labor market training, but the places remained empty. Since 2017, on average every third place within vocational adult education has stood empty. That is not due to too few resources. It is due to the fact that sufficiently clear requirements have not been set that those who are unemployed must also participate in these trainings. The passivity line is therefore, unfortunately, a Social Democratic paradox. We are now replacing it with a work line that strengthens the drivers, sharpens the requirements, and offers the right support.

(Applause)

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! Oliver Rosengren is a person with a background in municipal Sweden. He is a skilled municipal politician and has a good grasp of reality. The reality is such that municipalities cannot assign labor market training to the unemployed. Nor can the private companies that are now to match and equip. They do not actually receive compensation for assigning people labor market training. That leaves the Arbetsförmedlingen to assign the unemployed labor market training and give them the right conditions. But where are the Arbetsförmedlingen staff who are supposed to have those skills? What is happening right now? I am not asking what happened five years ago. What is happening right now with Arbetsförmedlingen's presence in the reality that Oliver Rosengren and his party are responsible for?

It is a catastrophe, what is happening today. Arbetsförmedlingen is unable to assign people to labor market training. They send money back to the government every year while we have half a million unemployed in our country, many of whom could get jobs in the business sector. The business sector is screaming for labor. The unemployed could have received the right skills and training that would enable them to take jobs. But the belief in this government is that if you lower the allowance and make life a bit harder for the unemployed, then they will get jobs.

Madam Speaker! I have spent a lot of time meeting with construction workers who have become unemployed recently. But I still do not understand in what way those who have just lost their jobs will get closer to jobs if the allowance is lowered. It is also a fact that they pay higher tax now that they are unemployed. In what way does that make them more employable?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! If we start where Ardalan Shekarabi finished: An optional conversation with an optional person who has studied the functioning of the labor market will be able to give him knowledge of how, for example, economic incentives in transfer systems affect the labor supply in the economy. These are completely accepted facts within the entire field of economic research in Sweden and internationally.

I thank you for the kind words regarding my municipal political work. That time gave me several important insights into how labor market policy needs to be designed, and I am therefore glad that much of the work we did in Växjö is now what is the government's policy.

The municipalities certainly have great tools when it comes to education and work. They have control over vocational training in vocational adult education, and they have the opportunity to, to some extent, ensure that people participate in it if they receive financial assistance. Here, the requirements need to be partially tightened, for example by giving the municipalities increased opportunities to withdraw the compensation for those who do not participate. We cannot tolerate a situation where we have unemployed people without education who do not educate themselves for work.

I assume that Ardalan Shekarabi has read the report from the Swedish National Audit Office that arrived relatively recently and which examines the referral to regular education. What does it show? Yes, not that there is a shortage of employment service officers, Madam Speaker. It is, therefore, a shortage of people who are referred and who also show up for the education. Every third person who is referred to a vocational education does not go there, and Arbetsförmedlingen also does not withhold the compensation for those who do not meet the requirements.

We have a culture of dependency that has taken hold in the labor market policy. We are fully determined to end it and replace it with strengthened drivers for work, clear requirements, and individual support so that all people can return to a job.

(Applause)

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Oliver Rosengren!

It is not the requirements that we disagree on. It is good that society sets requirements. The entire Swedish model has been built on rights and duties, investments in people, and reasonable expectations of people. There we do not disagree. It is good that there are requirements for activity and that people should make an effort based on the ability they have. It was actually the previous government that began the work on activity requirements for social assistance.

What we do not agree on is whether it is reasonable not to invest in education that leads to jobs. That is what we do not agree on. I cannot be satisfied that we have half a million unemployed and 6,000 people in labor market training. Oliver Rosengren should not be either. Oliver Rosengren should instead call Labor Market Minister Mats Persson to this chamber and ask him what he is doing. How can he be satisfied with 6,000 people in labor market training in this situation?

How is an employment service agency, which constantly receives worsened conditions, which constantly has poorer local and regional presence and which constantly must grapple with new steering signals from the right and left, to have the knowledge required – individually, locally and regionally – for people to be able to make this journey and get to a training that leads to a job?

Here we need to rethink. I believe that the Swedish right and the Swedish left would need to take off the blinkers and perhaps try to agree on what conditions Arbetsförmedlingen needs to have in order to be able to do a job in the long term that leads to people entering employment to a greater extent than they do today.

We have the opportunity to have a significantly lower unemployment rate than what we have. But the development right now is going in the wrong direction. It now requires brave politicians also on the right side who speak out and set demands on their government, and I hope I can see that in this chamber.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is not without one remembering the years when one was a youth politician when one listens to the speeches here in the chamber.

Put aside right and left! I think that was somewhat what I perhaps cautiously signaled.

After that: How can you be satisfied? You should be ashamed! This government is doing nothing to get the unemployed into jobs! It might not feel quite as inviting as us putting aside right and left.

Arbetsförmedlingen, this mess! This after two years of a finally sound government.

This government is just passing the buck to the poor, suffering local politicians! I have been involved in local politics for 16 years, and I am myself somewhat more concerned about the unemployed who are having difficulty finding jobs.

The truth is that this mess, this rolling back where the state has retreated, has been going on for an incredibly long time. It is not the case that Arbetsförmedlingen goes down in history as the truly strong actor when it comes to getting people into jobs.

However, the networks do. The municipalities are extremely skilled. They work with a great deal of adult education. They work in different ways and make people employable.

I also noted in a burning post in a previous exchange of remarks that 6,000 people in labor market training is really bad. I actually agree with that. However, I share the previous speaker's analysis of why that is the case.

Suddenly, however, a doubling was very good – 12,000 in labor market training! Then we have solved the 500,000 who are unemployed!

Dear listeners, do not be deceived by this type of rhetoric!

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! Unfortunately, I did not perceive any question from Magnus Jacobsson, but I can take the opportunity to express a big thank you for the biblical references in various posts here in the chamber. It raises the general knowledge here; I am very grateful for that.

I do not believe that people fundamentally want to go around being unemployed. That is perhaps where we differ. I believe we would all need to spend a lot of time meeting people who are unemployed and talking to them. Most dream of a job, their own livelihood, and the freedom that it entails, and most do what they can with the conditions they have.

The problem is that we do not, to the extent we should and to the extent we traditionally have, equip them with the competencies required for them to be able to take the jobs. If one stands on Drottninggatan and interviews elderly people visiting Stockholm, it is not difficult to find some who took AMU courses in the 80s and 90s when they were unemployed. It was actually a way to free people from the obstacles that economic vulnerability and unemployment entail and equip them so that they could take the jobs that emerged.

We do not do that to the same extent in Sweden today, and that is what I mean by that the right and the left should agree that it is probably wise to invest in people. It is wise to ensure that more people enter labor market training.

I do not think it would be good enough if 12,000 people attended labor market training on an annual basis. But it would at least be a doubling compared to today's figures. Then Mats Persson could at least say that you have doubled the number. But unfortunately, we are not on our way there, Magnus Jacobsson.

We should help each other put pressure on Mats Persson so that some changes occur and a few more initiatives come from the government's side.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Now, the Riksdag is, and it is by necessity, built from a silo. But the government does much more than just be present on the Committee on the Labour Market. If we look at the government's entire policy, there are amounts of measures that in the long run not only break inflation but also lead to more job opportunities.

We have, for example, increased the appropriations to the folk high schools – not as much as during the Covid period, but those were temporary funds that even the Social Democratic government that the member himself sat in wanted to remove in its budget.

We had this debate six months ago as well, I believe. At that time, there were thousands of people in healthcare who were going to become unemployed. Where are all these thousands of unemployed in healthcare? They did not become unemployed, because the government invested more money in municipalities and regions. Not in our committee, but the government made an investment, and it yielded results.

I myself am more active in the Transport Committee today. The largest investment ever will take place in infrastructure. I promise that the construction workers who are concerned today will be grateful when these investments get rolling. They have actually already started rolling. I do not know how many who are listening to this have traveled by train between Stockholm and Gothenburg and noted that it is a bit complicated right now. That is because power lines are being replaced. It is difficult to run on the track when you are renovating at the same time.

Giant measures are being undertaken by the government aimed at putting Sweden into motion. One of perhaps the most important measures so far, Madam Speaker, is that we removed the loathsome reduction obligation, which drove up inflation and left people in poverty. This has given agriculture 2 billion in extra revenue and ensures that people can afford to travel to work.

It is much better now than before, Madam Speaker.

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

Ardalan Shekarabi (S)

Madam Speaker! I wonder if the honorable member's constituency is so close to Norway that the member follows the Norwegian state budget and not the Swedish one. There were no major investments in municipalities and regions in the latest budget. This was part of the criticism of the budget – despite it being record-breaking, there was no more money for welfare, which means that many regions and municipalities are struggling with enormous difficulties.

Magnus Jacobsson is welcome to discuss this with some who are present in this chamber. The honorable colleague from Jämtland can probably testify as to how things stand in Region Jämtland. I can probably tell about what our friends in Region Uppsala are struggling with right now, how it affects healthcare, and what consequences this ultimately has for employment and jobs in our country.

I believe the government made a huge mistake when they chose tax cuts for the richest instead of investments in welfare and jobs. It was probably stupid, but ideology governs politics – that's just how it is. The right's ideology is about limiting the public commitment and lowering taxes for those who have the highest incomes. This leads to a lack of priority for welfare. Therefore, we have the crisis we have in Swedish healthcare and welfare, and it also has consequences for jobs.

I believe, from my ideological standpoint, that this is the wrong policy. I believe it would have been better to take this money and invest it in jobs, welfare, and healthcare. I believe Sweden would have fared better as a country then, but it is ultimately ideology that determines what is prioritized.

Madam Speaker! We should at least agree that we should invest in people. Then more should be given the opportunity to educate themselves for the jobs that the business sector needs to fill.

(Applause)

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

Madam Speaker! Two years ago, I stood in this rostrum and said that my introduction could be the first in this chamber that was not written by a politician or a political secretary, but by a chatbot. Today, it feels like an eternity since then. Many of us use AI on a daily basis to get help with writing texts, to search for information, or just to get ideas. The technology is being refined. The bugs and problems are becoming fewer and fewer.

We are facing a major technological shift in the world. AI is affecting the labor market by taking over certain work tasks. At the same time, it creates new opportunities that require new skills from workers. It is happening here and now, regardless of what we think about it. The development is moving fast, and new ground is being broken.

What is then required to meet the new conditions? We need a forward-looking and flexible labor market policy. New ways of working and new markets have emerged, and we will see more in the future. It places demands on us as legislators to find new, reasonable balances between the market's demand and the employees' conditions.

As a Liberal, I note that labor market policy begins already in primary school. The most important unemployment insurance is a student cap in the wardrobe after a completed upper secondary education. Nevertheless, we have a large group in this country who do not manage to pass the upper secondary examination.

In the long term, we must have a better primary school and upper secondary school. In the short term, we must equip the large group that today stands without jobs so that these people can be matched with the right companies. During 2025, 120,000 adults will be able to undergo training for a profession. It is a prerequisite for us to address the labor shortage that currently exists in many sectors.

Despite the significant labor shortage that is being signaled, we have a large group of unemployed people who have skills. They are ready for work and have experience, but their opportunities are limited by age. Demoskop has conducted a survey on behalf of the Plus Commission. It shows that one becomes less attractive to hire as soon as they turn 50. This stands in stark contrast to the fact that 57 percent say they could imagine continuing to work after they have become pensioners. The age discrimination on the labor market is strategically incomprehensible, but nevertheless, we hear from more and more people that they feel excluded after a long working life. We must change this.

Madam Speaker! That the employers who are to provide training, for example in recruitment training, are allowed to participate in selecting those who are suitable for the profession increases employment opportunities radically. This I and the Minister for Employment experienced when we visited the Slaughterhouse in Sjöbo on a sunny Monday in February. There, Arbetsförmedlingen, together with a competence company, had tailored a 30-week training program. The owner of the slaughterhouse, Marco Andersson, noted that the fact that he, as an employer, was allowed to participate in selecting the participants for the training was decisive both for his willingness to start the training and for his ability to see opportunities to actually give the participants a job afterwards. So it should be done in more training programs.

As a Liberal, I want to emphasize the individual's responsibility to make themselves employable and, together with the authorities, find the measures that best and fastest lead to self-sufficiency and thus the opportunity for the individual to create freedom in their own life. It may mean that one has to move to another town or perhaps take the family and move to where the work is. Support must therefore be designed together with municipalities and regions. It is because it is not just a job that is needed, but also childcare, school, and other welfare services so that one can make oneself employable.

Madam Speaker! This morning, the news arrived that many of us had feared would come: Northvolt is going bankrupt, and almost 5,000 employees are facing an uncertain future. It is tough and challenging, but we must remember that Sweden has done it before. We are good at transition. I am thinking of AstraZeneca in Lund, which faced the same a few years ago. We have experience with transition. Arbetsförmedlingen is established in the area, and there is already established cooperation between many different actors.

At Arbetsförmedlingen, there are over 100,000 reported vacancies. I believe, however, that there are actually far more. As a former employer with experience in recruitment and with many friends who are today self-employed, I hear stories about the hunt for labor and that people have stopped using Arbetsförmedlingen as help. They simply search in their own networks.

Every job is important. The division between fine and ugly educations – and subsequently jobs – has been devastating. We must increase the attractiveness of our craft lines and practical educations. I see that more and more of those types of educations now offer Young Entrepreneurship. This is important and good. This can be part of it, but much more needs to be done.

Every young person has the right to experience the freedom that comes with the first earned salary. Every adult should be given the opportunity to be a nation-builder, regardless of what the person works with. Most importantly, perhaps, is to ensure that we have a business climate that allows one to run companies in Sweden. We politicians here in the chamber have no tap we can turn on to create 14 new jobs as a waitress in Helsingborg or 10 engineering jobs in Norrtälje. Jobs are created by driven people who dare to invest in their dreams. They build companies and see potential where others only see a load of gravel.

With this, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin with some reflections on the debate we have here today. Listening to the government parties is a bit like hearing a popcorn machine popping. Different snappy ideas come up. One has different desires and thoughts about what would be good for Sweden and counter unemployment.

What I believe the government parties are missing is that it is actually they who govern the country and are responsible for implementing these various clever and good ideas. For example, it is said that it is good if people have an education. We are in complete agreement on that. It would be great if the government could then also ensure that people can educate themselves and get work. People talk about it being good if the economy turns around and Sweden becomes bright again. We are also in complete agreement on that. But what is the government doing to turn the economy around and get the wheels of the country moving? Nothing, as far as I can see.

Oliver Rosengren spoke about how lower taxes provide incentives for people to work. The fact is that the government has lowered taxes. He speaks about how all research indicates that it reduces unemployment. But the reality is that we are now seeing how unemployment is increasing. For me, this becomes a very incomprehensible equation. The government implements this policy and gets it in black and white that it actually does not work as a labor market measure. It is not those with the highest salaries who will consume more and keep the wheels of this country turning. On the contrary, they will put their money into some ISK account for which they also have tax deductions. We continue to see the same low rate of development in this country.

Even the Social Democrats were pointing out that unemployment is now at a record high at just over halfway through this government's term. It is 10 percent unemployment, but the government is sitting on its hands. Those who have been given the trust to govern the country say things like that the economy is brightening but watch passively when it does not.

I believe that many people out there feel that it is definitely not getting any brighter. The person who has been or will be laid off sees a job market that this government has actively lowered. One encounters a public employment service that has been broken up into privatization across a lot of different actors, which might not even exist in the area where one lives and for which this government has provided too few resources for it to manage to match people with the jobs that exist. One encounters adult education that the government has cut back on.

Today, a gloomy announcement arrived: Northvolt is going bankrupt. One can only hope that Arbetsförmedlingen has very many case officers in Skellefteå. I don't think that is the case, perhaps, but it is something I must send to the government.

We have large investment needs in our country. We have, for example, water and sewage pipes in urgent need of upgrading, a housing shortage, and a need for railway maintenance that should have been carried out decades ago. If we invested in these things instead of, for example, lowering the tax for those with the highest salaries, more people could get jobs. The investments need, of course, to be combined with the education needed for work in the occupations of those industries.

Despite preschools being on their knees, nursing assistants wearing themselves out in elderly care and healthcare staff having to continue running between patients whose staff is currently being cut in the welfare sector – all to afford tax cuts for the highest paid.

It is understandable that the government representatives are not so worried about long-term unemployment and have never had to consider what it would be like to live on a benefit that is reduced after 100 days. We have seen how it is when one belongs to one of the government parties. If you lose your job because you have misbehaved, you get a company car before the contract is even signed, and then you have another job somewhere else. You misbehave and forget some papers somewhere, and suddenly you have another job in some office. So that is how it can go if you belong to this government. I understand, therefore, that one is not particularly upset about how it can be. One simply does not feel so strongly what it could be like to be unemployed in this country.

Vänsterpartiet is strongly critical of Arbetsförmedlingen's development in recent years. The extensive privatization and dismantling of the agency is and has been devastating. People need to be able to receive support to return to work. There is a need for an emphasis on good matching, so that people can be helped into education and work.

In a situation where the economy is slowing down, wages are increasing and unemployment is rising, there is a great need for an active labor market policy aimed at equipping the unemployed to take the jobs that exist and the new jobs that are emerging. Vänsterpartiet therefore considers that more unemployed people need to be given the opportunity to participate in labor market training. We in Vänsterpartiet have also proposed an initiative that we call Sverigejobb, a new labor market policy measure aimed at the unemployed with skills in construction and civil engineering. The model involves a form of employment support where the state covers 80 percent of the cost of the employment.

To create strong and secure earners, it is crucial to have an unemployment insurance that provides income security in the event of unemployment. I can only regret the heavy cuts that this government and Sverigedemokraterna are implementing and which come into effect this year. It will be an enormous hard blow to the hundreds of thousands of unemployed people who will see their benefits worsened. At the same time, we currently have a huge cost shock for Swedish households, with food prices skyrocketing. The government is doing nothing about this either.

According to Vänsterpartiet, the unemployment insurance should aim for 80 percent of wage earners to receive 80 percent of their wages. For 2025, Vänsterpartiet proposed a significant strengthening of the funds for the unemployment insurance in order to be able to achieve this.

When it comes to labor market policy, I want to emphasize the central importance that the Swedish Work Environment Authority has. In order for the Swedish Work Environment Authority to be able to carry out more inspections, more inspectors and a substantial increase in the agency's funding are required. I regret that the government does not see the need for this.

Many people today end up in limbo between the sickness insurance and Arbetsförmedlingen. Försäkringskassan assesses certain people as too healthy, while Arbetsförmedlingen assesses the same people as too sick for work. A significant number of those people who have been discharged from the sickness insurance end up in limbo today. They receive maintenance support many times over. The reason for this is that Arbetsförmedlingen assesses them as too sick for work. These individuals run a great risk of not receiving the support they need to be able to return to work, because the division of responsibility between the social services and Försäkringskassan risks leading to their needs not being identified.

It is good that Arbetsförmedlingen has now received clear mandates aimed at utilizing the work capacity of those on sick leave, but unlike the committee, I argue that significantly more needs to be done for those individuals who have been disqualified from insurance. I believe that the government should appoint an inquiry with a mandate to review how those individuals who have medical limitations, lack a sickness benefit-generating income, and receive social assistance can receive support to return to or obtain work.

In conclusion, I want to say that the government needs to take responsibility now. That we have 10 percent unemployment is a crisis. It is no longer possible to use ideological blinkers and claim that unemployment is due to foreign-born people or that people are lazy – or whatever arguments it may be that the right likes to use. It is time to take responsibility. It is not a hot dog stand you are running. It is a country you are responsible for.

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 11.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! I noticed a couple of questions directed at me.

It is still fascinating that it sits so deep inside and upsets so much both the Left Party and representatives of the Social Democrats when ordinary people are to get more money in their pockets.

A job tax credit has been implemented which has been strengthened eight times. In total, for two people with a median salary, the combined job tax credits mean 100,000 kronor more a year in the wallet for an ordinary family.

The money plays quite a large role for quite many families. It means that more can make ends meet in everyday life and can ensure that they live a life where they can have a bit more power over what they want to do with their time. That is one of the reasons why it is good to lower the tax on work. People get more freedom, and it pays off more to work.

The second reason is to ensure that fewer people are unemployed. It is not something that anyone on the right has made up, Madam Speaker. It is the collective evidence from Swedish and international economic research on labor supply effects during changes to economic transfer systems or tax systems.

Literature reviews show that there is a labor elasticity of approximately 0.1 to 0.2, meaning that a 1 percent change in the drivers for work gives approximately 0.1 to 0.2 in the corresponding change in the labor supply. These are quite large effects.

It turns out that labor supply reforms, that is, lower taxes on income, are the most effective way on the tax side to achieve lower unemployment. Unemployment can still increase if one has a recession. It seems that the members from Vänsterpartiet have a bit of difficulty reconciling that with the reforms.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Oliver Rosengren, for what you consider a clarification on what lower taxes lead to in the form of increased incentives for work.

I am still a bit curious about how the member views the idea that a significantly lowered tax for, for example, Ulf Kristersson or some other high-income earner would lead to more jobs. I find that very difficult to understand.

The large part of the money that the government has now allocated to tax cuts during the current year is directed towards those who have very high incomes. I find it very difficult to understand how that leads to more job opportunities.

The fact is that it is you who run this country. The member's government has actively chosen to lower taxes. At the same time, we now see how an enormous number of people are losing their jobs. They are becoming trapped in long-term unemployment.

The government refrains from doing the things that have evidence for getting people back into work. This is, for example, expanding the number of places in labor market training and ensuring that one invests in industries that are currently having a very tough time, for example, the construction and civil engineering industry.

At the same time as the construction industry is laying off a lot of people, we see how we have enormous needs in this country. We see how the housing shortage is acute. We see how the trains are not running. We see a lot of things that we would need to invest in in this country.

The government chooses to allocate the majority of its money in the budget to tax cuts. We see at the same time how unemployment is increasing.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! In the Left Party's economic system, no human can get better off without someone else having to get worse off. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

It is entirely possible to lower the tax for Ulf Kristersson who works, but also to lower the tax for someone who toils in healthcare, on a construction site, or in some other part of the economy. It is possible to do both.

In simplified terms, it can be said that lower taxes on slightly higher incomes are primarily justified by increased productivity and a higher self-sufficiency rate resulting from the tax changes. Lower taxes on average incomes usually result primarily in more hours worked. Lower taxes on low incomes primarily lead to increased employment.

It is one of the reasons why the government is lowering the tax in all the different parts of the income scale. It produces somewhat different effects for the Swedish economy. Further questions can certainly be answered by the National Audit Office, the National Institute of Economic Research, the Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy, or for that matter, the Fiscal Policy Council. There are many experts who can contribute to the knowledge base in those matters if the member has further reflections.

Madam Speaker! When it comes to the support, it is very much as the member from Vänsterpartiet says. It matters that we educate those who are unemployed because they lack education. We give them an education so that they can get into work.

It is one of the reasons why 11,000 places are being added to vocational education this year so that there will be 72,000 fully funded vocational education places throughout the municipalities in Sweden and that there are resources for labor market training at Arbetsförmedlingen.

But it is a problem, Madam Speaker, that the positions remain vacant. Why is that? Well, it is due to what is an ideological blindfold for the Left Party. We want clear expectations and requirements that those who are unemployed because they lack education should educate themselves for work.

It must be strengthened so that the places are filled and so that not every third place within adult education stands empty on average as they have done since 2017. That requires reforms that set slightly higher requirements.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! I can agree to some extent that low compensation creates incentives for work. In the reality that I live in, I now see very many people who describe their reality as needing to take extra shifts in order to be able to put food on the table for their children.

They work full-time as nursing assistants. It is single mothers who are now saying: I take all the extra shifts I can get. I take everything I can get, because otherwise, I cannot afford to put food on the table for myself and my children. That is the Sweden that the government has created, Madam Speaker.

I find it very difficult to understand how it is argued that the tax cuts the government has implemented now lead to people having it better. It is a reality that very many people do not share.

The fact is that the tax cut for ordinary people perhaps amounts to a hundred or 200 kronor. At the same time, one sees how food prices are skyrocketing. Buying a pack of coffee and a juice already makes one see 200 kronor disappear. I believe the member does not quite understand what it is like to be an ordinary Swede in Sweden nowadays.

People talk about how lower compensations would provide incentives for work. That might be an economic dogma. I believe that the vast majority of people are extremely eager to work and be able to put food on the table for themselves and their children.

All the statistics also show it. People want to work. The government is responsible for ensuring that people also have the conditions to be able to do so.

(Applause)

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservation 6.

Sweden faces many and great challenges. Integration, exclusion, and unemployment are some of them, and the solution is spelled jobs many times over.

More people must move from exclusion to inclusion. More people must become a part of the common Sweden. More people must undertake a life journey that involves them having a job to go to.

More young boys and girls must see their parents get up in the morning, work, contribute and pay tax, so that school, care and healthcare can become better, so that we can equip the Swedish defense and ensure that we invest in the railway so that the trains can run on time, and sometimes at all. For people to feel well, and for Sweden to do well, more people must have a job to go to.

Recent unemployment statistics have arrived, the worst in 25 years. As opposition politicians, it is sometimes easy to take the easy way out and simply criticize the government. But when it comes to labor market policy, it is so bad and non-existent that it is hardly even possible to give the government a failing grade. It is hardly possible to grade it. The Tidö parties have held power for more than two years, and reforms in the labor market area have been conspicuously absent.

To be honest: Where are the proposals for Arbetsförmedlingen to function better? Where are the proposals to make it even cheaper to hire? Where are the proposals for more people to learn the Swedish language and thereby get a first job? Where are the proposals for the skills shortage on the Swedish labor market to decrease? Where are the political solutions? Where are Mats Persson's reforms?

Madam Speaker! To be honest, one has been hardly impressed by the Tidö parties here today. We have heard Magnus Jacobsson, Camilla Mårtensen and Oliver Rosengren standing and dreaming about what one would like to have. They are somewhat different ideas, such as closing down Arbetsförmedlingen and other things. At the same time, we have heard Magnus Persson standing and reviewing the government – sometimes criticism, sometimes praise and sometimes in between.

It is time to stop dreaming and criticizing. It is time for the government and the Tidö parties to start delivering. It is no one else's responsibility but the government's and the Minister for Employment's that we have the worst unemployment in 25 years. One in ten Swedes is unemployed. One in ten – it is almost hard to grasp! Furthermore, unemployment is increasing in all groups, but it is worst among foreign-born women and young men.

It is simply time for the Minister for Employment to start working. Start working so that more foreign-born people will learn the language, so that it will become cheaper and easier to hire, and so that it will always and without exception pay to go from benefits to work!

The Center Party made important decisions on Friday regarding new reforms for Sweden. I have had the privilege of leading our reform group for life journeys with a focus on jobs, economy, and entrepreneurship. Our reforms are clearly about people needing to become more employable, it should become cheaper to hire, and it should pay off even more to work.

In order to become employable, more people need to learn the Swedish language. One proposal we present is to limit and condition the parental leave for newly arrived people who do not speak Swedish.

We in the Center Party do not only place demands on people in general but also on us politicians. The efforts that people undertake must become better. Therefore, we want to, for example, transform SFI into job-Swedish, with a focus on people getting a job. There shall be a close cooperation between education and the business sector.

It is not just about more people needing to become employable, but we must also create more jobs. It is not we politicians here in the chamber who create jobs, but it is small and growing companies that do it.

A proposal that I would call classic bourgeois liberal alliance policy is to make it cheaper for companies to hire so that more young girls and boys around the country can see their parents get up in the morning, work, contribute and pay tax.

Therefore, we propose that companies going from zero to ten employees should be exempted from the employer contribution so that more people not only dare to start companies but also dare to hire. Today, the big problem is that companies do not dare to hire and grow. Politics cannot create jobs, but we can help the companies, the job creators, to create more jobs.

Madam Speaker! I had intended to conclude my speech with this, but even I want to say something about Northvolt. It may be too early to draw too large conclusions, but at the same time, the government needs to show decisiveness. I am glad that the Minister for Employment will come to the Committee on Employment tomorrow to account for what the government is doing.

The Center Party has today itself entered with three important starting points.

Firstly: It is important that the investments that have been made in research and development and that Swedish authorities have made also find new homes and continue to drive Swedish knowledge about batteries.

Secondly: Now all relevant and affected authorities and municipalities need to do everything they can to ensure that all talent finds new homes. We also need to ensure that there is a competent and experienced coordinator who can ensure that everyone works together so that more people can come out of this in a good way.

Thirdly: Given the extent of this bankruptcy, there must be a flexibility in the three-month rule for foreign talent when it comes to finding new jobs and waiting for a potential new owner to arrive and take over. Sweden must not lose the competence that is currently in the country.

This is a dark day in many ways, not least for all those who today have lost their jobs and for all those young girls and boys who today see their parents become unemployed. It is time for the government to start tackling unemployment, because unfortunately, this is probably not the last bankruptcy we will see.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! It is important that we stick to the facts in the debate. In Jonny Cato's contribution, Madam Speaker, he said that one in ten Swedes is unemployed. The high unemployment in Sweden is very serious. It is a societal problem that affects many people, that affects the economy, and that weakens Sweden as a country and our cohesion.

But one in ten Swedes is not unemployed. I believe it is important that we do not contribute to a greater alarmism than the already very serious situation that we have rendered. It is 480,000, so approximately 500,000, who are unemployed in Sweden. 500,000 times 10 becomes approximately 5 million, and we are more than 5 million people in Sweden. Unemployment is not measured on the population but on the labor force, and the labor force are those who participate in the labor market.

A very important part of strengthening the labor market policy in Sweden is precisely to get many to participate in the workforce and then to ensure that unemployment is as low as possible.

When the Center Party was involved in governing Sweden, a reforming of the Public Employment Service (Arbetsförmedlingen) was carried out. My question to Jonny Cato is: How satisfied is he with the reforming of the Public Employment Service that was carried out by the Social Democratic government with the support of the Center Party? And what consequences does Jonny Cato assess it has in today's situation on the labor market?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! Oliver Rosengren is obviously right. I expressed myself a bit sloppily. But Oliver Rosengren is also always happy to correct everyone else, and he perhaps should devote more energy to ensuring that the government delivers concrete measures so that more people can move from exclusion to inclusion. Regardless of the exact figures, I hope we can agree that unemployment is heading in the wrong direction and that it is far too high.

I am, of course, not satisfied with the reform of Arbetsförmedlingen. It was initiated under the January agreement. We then began a major reform of Arbetsförmedlingen, and since the Moderaterna took office in a government position, nothing has happened with Arbetsförmedlingen. Nothing has happened; we have not had a single proposition in this chamber that has concerned Arbetsförmedlingen.

I am absolutely not satisfied with the direction that Arbetsförmedlingen has taken. The reform that we initiated has been progressively taken back by Arbetsförmedlingen itself, which has reclaimed control and is driving what the agency itself wants to see with its development. The political direction seems to be lacking.

It is quite rare that we have heard from this rostrum what the Moderaterna want regarding Arbetsförmedlingen. We have now been told that it is the Centerpartiets fault that Arbetsförmedlingen does not function; we have heard that for about two years. But it is also two years since the Moderaterna took power in Sweden. What is it then that does not function? What is it then that the Moderaterna want to see?

I am absolutely not satisfied. No one can be satisfied with this situation. A reform was initiated that was not carried through by the government. On the contrary, it was allowed to go in a completely wrong direction. It has become some kind of lukewarm compromise where everyone has a little responsibility, and so on.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! Arbetsförmedlingen has received a completely new board in order to turn around the development for the agency.

Arbetsförmedlingen has received a new director-general with a clarified mandate regarding the management of Arbetsförmedlingen.

Arbetsförmedlingen has received a sharpened task in its regulatory letter with a clearer focus on what they are to do, including shifting from its deeply ingrained culture of appeasement to more of requirements and control. They shall, for example, ensure that they fill the places within the labor market training, direct interventions towards those who are long-term unemployed, and abandon the customer perspective that managed to establish itself at the agency when the Centerpartiet was a government support to the Socialdemokraterna and which caused that instead the focus was on supporting persons with relatively good chances of getting a job to a job and put many resources into that.

Arbetsförmedlingen has received increased resources for the requirements and control assignment.

The supervisory authority, the Unemployment Insurance Inspection, has been granted expanded powers and a clarified mandate.

Overall, it can be said that with all the tools the government can use to clarify the direction for Arbetsförmedlingen, this has been done.

Despite that, Madam Speaker, Jonny Cato believes that it is the reform of Arbetsförmedlingen that makes the maiden voyage of the flagship Vasa appear as a triumphal journey we have to thank for the fact that there are things that are going well and that if this had only been completed it would have been great. Then I would like to recommend that evaluation of the parts where the reform had full impact that has been carried out by the Institute for Labour Market and Education Policy Evaluation: much more expensive and no effect. That is rarely a good grade.

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! I believe that the problems in the Swedish labor market are much deeper than that it is sufficient to change a director-general and a board. It can obviously be steps in the right direction, but the problems are much deeper than that.

The Center Party receives a lot of criticism from the Moderates, not least from Oliver Rosengren, for the outsourcing of parts of the Employment Service's mandate. But if I don't remember incorrectly, the Moderate People's Party wants it to be entirely private actors that deliver services that equip and match. Not least was this what we heard from the Moderates' number one in the committee when some of us participated in a debate at the Althing just a few weeks ago. The Moderates want to go much further than what the reform began. I therefore find it a bit difficult to see how this is the Center Party's fault.

Again: It is very good with sharpened controls, that Arbetsförmedlingen shall ensure that labor market training places are filled and so on. But that does not solve Arbetsförmedlingen's big problem: that they mediate far too few jobs.

One might think, as the Social Democrats do, that Arbetsförmedlingen should do this entirely. One might think, as the Center Party does, that it should be private actors. But what we hear from the government today is that this is the Center Party's fault. They do not have a common opinion on what they want to see instead, but they let Arbetsförmedlingen itself choose and decide when it comes to how it should proceed and how it should be communicated.

One needs to have a clear political direction for Arbetsförmedlingen to develop in the right direction. It is neither the board's nor the new director-general's responsibility. It is the government's and Mats Persson's responsibility. There, the government has not delivered.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I had not actually intended to request the floor, but when I listen to Cato's burning speech, I just wonder: Who are you going to carry this out with?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! Who are you going to carry out the shutdown of Arbetsförmedlingen with, Magnus Jacobsson? It does not seem that the Tidö parties are in agreement on this.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! That is how it is. But there is a small difference, and it concerns the labor market, the work principle, and implementing a policy based on the idea that one works and behaves correctly and thereby also creates the possibility for a security system. There we are in agreement within the Tidö agreement.

It is completely correct that I have pointed out an alternative and another way of thinking. We are also Christian Democrats. We take the liberty of actually discussing and thinking in the chamber, which gives the citizens an opportunity to reflect on different parties.

But when we land, I have moved for approval of the committee's proposal in today's report. I have three other speakers who have a fairly similar perception of reality. I thought the previous speeches here were excellent. They described very well what the government is already doing.

Then I return to the question: If one is the completely foreign bird in another potential government constellation, who is one to carry out one's policy with?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! The election is in two years. Two years for Magnus Jacobsson and the Kristdemokraterna to deliver. They have not succeeded in the two years that have passed, so perhaps they should focus on the two years remaining until the election rather than on what happens after the election.

But what I actually wonder is: Are the Tidö parties in agreement on the platform directive? Are they in agreement on the budget? Are they in agreement that it should become cheaper for companies to hire? Are they in agreement on lowering taxes for those with the lowest incomes?

I do not think they are so in agreement on labor market policy. That is why it is completely empty on the committee's table. That is why nothing is happening at all. It is no secret that the Sverigedemokraterna and the Moderaterna differ quite a bit in their basic view on precisely labor market policy. I would like to say that it is one of the areas where the Tidö parties stand furthest apart. That is why nothing is happening.

Then Magnus Jacobsson in the Center Party asks us how we want to implement our policy after the election. If one takes note of the media coverage, Madam Speaker, one can well state that there is quite a bit of creaking in the government cooperation. So who knows, Magnus Jacobsson – the Liberals perhaps would rather have a government that can provide the conditions for a bourgeois, liberal labor market policy. It is a long time until the election.

I can only state that right now, unemployment is the worst in 25 years. Because the Moderates, Sweden Democrats, Christian Democrats and Liberals do not agree, nothing happens.

I have just received criticism because we have carried out a reform of Arbetsförmedlingen. At the same time, Oliver Rosengren has comrades here in the chamber who want to abolish Arbetsförmedlingen. One should perhaps sweep clean in front of one's own door before starting to criticize others.

(Applause)

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Madam Speaker! Although this debate spans many topics, I choose to speak about Arbetsförmedlingen and the supply of skills, two crucial issues for a functioning labor market. It is here that the foundation is laid for people to be able to enter the labor market, for companies and welfare to find the right skills, and for Sweden to have a labor market that can meet both today's and future challenges.

Madam Speaker! Arbetsförmedlingen has a central role in helping people into work. But today, the agency's presence is lacking in many parts of the country. We see how offices have been closed, how digitalization has not been able to replace the personal meeting, and how certain groups have more difficulty than others in obtaining the right support. Especially persons with disabilities, the elderly, or those who for other reasons have difficulty using digital systems need more personal support.

Arbetsförmedlingen must be an agency that can meet everyone who wants to work regardless of their individual needs. Arbetsförmedlingen's lack of presence is particularly problematic in areas with socio-economic challenges, where the need for support and guidance is greatest and is crucial for integration to succeed. Therefore, we believe that Arbetsförmedlingen must strengthen its physical presence across the entire country with a particular focus on the socio-economically vulnerable areas.

At the same time, private actors have been given a larger role in labor market policy. But evaluations show that they have not delivered the expected results – despite the fact that their operations cost significantly more than Arbetsförmedlingen's own efforts. We must therefore question a labor market policy where we spend more money on inefficient private solutions than on upgrading the agency that actually has the experience and competence to help people into work. We have reduced Arbetsförmedlingen to a supervisory authority, but its core mission must once again be to equip people for the labor market and actively mediate jobs.

Without a functioning employment service and a policy that ensures the right skills are in the right place, we will continue to see companies suffer from skill shortages, the welfare system drained of staff, and people stuck in unemployment – despite there being jobs to be had.

Madam Speaker! At the same time, we have another major challenge, namely the skills shortage. In both the private and public sectors, we see how demographic changes and an aging population are creating major recruitment problems. This applies to everything from industry and the green transition to healthcare and school.

Miljöpartiet wants to see clearer responsibility for the supply of skills. Today, the Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education and Arbetsförmedlingen share the responsibility for the supply of skills, but in practice, clarity is lacking. Who takes the overall responsibility? Who ensures that companies' needs are matched with the education system's supply? In the current situation, too little long-term planning and coordination occurs, which leads to inefficient resource use and a lack of targeted measures. Therefore, Miljöpartiet wants the government to establish a national coordinator for the supply of skills. Such a function would have the mandate to collect and analyze labor market data from different actors to ensure that education matches demand. Furthermore, the function would coordinate state, regional, and local efforts to streamline skills development and ensure that resources for skills transition are distributed where they are needed most, especially in shortage occupations and in the regions where the needs are greatest.

The transition support must be broadened and strengthened. Today, it focuses primarily on counseling. But what helps a nursing assistant who wants to become an electrician if the educational opportunities are limited or if she cannot afford to study? In order for us to be able to meet the labor market's needs, the transition support must give people the actual opportunities to further their education into the professions where labor is needed. Therefore, we want the transition support to be broadened and reinforced with the goal that more people should be given the opportunity to educate themselves for shortage occupations. This could mean financial support for education in professions where there is a labor shortage.

Madam Speaker! It is not just about educational places. The work environment and the poor working conditions in the welfare sector are today one of the biggest obstacles to the supply of skills. It doesn't matter how many nursing assistants we train if they then leave the profession due to stress, low wages, and unsustainable working conditions. We need to review the working conditions and the work environment for those who work within the welfare sector if we are to be able to meet the needs of the future.

Madam Speaker! We face great challenges when it comes to creating a labor market that works for everyone. To succeed in that, we must ensure that Arbetsförmedlingen receives the resources and conditions required to truly be able to support everyone who needs help entering the labor market.

It is also high time to take political responsibility for improving the working conditions within welfare professions. Without improved conditions, we will not be able to retain or recruit the competence that is crucial for maintaining and developing our welfare. The supply of competence must be better coordinated in both the short and long term to meet the growing needs in society. It is not just about educating people for the jobs that exist today, but also about preparing them for the professions that will be crucial in the future.

With this said, I would like to move for approval of reservations 3 and 7.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we stand, as we have heard earlier, before the fact that one of Sweden's largest bankruptcies in modern times has been announced. In this debate, we are talking about labor market policy and also about the welfare system. My party colleague Ardalan Shekarabi spoke a little earlier about society's responsibility to support people in returning from unemployment. I will speak about the welfare system and society's responsibility to ensure that people also manage their finances when they become unemployed. In addition to this, we naturally have the individual's responsibility to take the help that is offered and make oneself employable, as it so strangely is called. One must ensure that one does what one can to get a job.

Madam Speaker! The unemployment insurance is one of the flagship components of the Swedish model. But today, it is not in the condition that we who work and create Sweden expect. The unemployment insurance, if it functions, provides both society and individuals with a number of important functions. It naturally provides individual security in the event of unemployment. It also provides the courage to change jobs when one has worked at a workplace for a long time, because one then risks ending up last in line in the event of a crisis at the new workplace. Here, the unemployment insurance interacts, for example, with the transition study support that was recently introduced. The unemployment insurance is also a guarantee that those comrades who become unemployed manage without competing on wages with those of us who still have jobs.

The collective agreement is not the most popular feature among the right, of course. They usually want to use the collective agreement to press down wages and instead create increased wage competition. It is incredibly important for everyone who has a job and wants to see a stable wage development.

Accident insurance is also important for the functioning of society. It mitigates recessions and secures the economy by ensuring that those who are laid off do not lose all purchasing power, but can instead continue to live somewhat decently until they find a new job.

Today, 5,000 employees were laid off as a result of the bankruptcy of Northvolt. The majority of them work in Skellefteå, a town with 40,000 inhabitants. This naturally has a significant effect on the economy in Skellefteå municipality, on the entire community, and on the labor market when so many go into unemployment at the same time. One can also easily imagine how much greater the effects would be if the fund did not exist for the employees. It would have affected large parts of the rest of society: the grocery stores, the clothing stores, the cinemas, and everything else that we expect to be in our vicinity. They would have risked having to cut back, and because of a company's bankruptcy, the effects would have been large for the whole.

A-kassan is, in short, the base for the Swedish labor market. It secures society and the individual against worse times, and it functions as an income insurance between jobs and a countercyclical stabilizer for the economy locally and nationally – now when we already have the highest unemployment figures in decades.

So, this is not just a question of justice and of Swedish workers' opportunities to insure themselves against worse times and wage pressure, even though that is of course an important basis in the insurance. It is also socio-economically important and functions better the more closely it follows the wage development.

During the Alliance's time in power, there was a different idea. One was to use the unemployment insurance fund to press down the trade unions' wage demands. They lowered the ceiling and raised the fees and linked them to the unemployment in the industry. But that did not lead to better figures on the Swedish labor market. It did not lead to lower unemployment. And the experiment ended, thank goodness, in 2014. We could thereafter raise the unemployment insurance fund in several steps, most recently during the pandemic when the coronavirus hit society and many people saw their jobs disappear.

Madam Speaker! Someone who has a median salary of 35,600 kronor a month experiences a drop of over 8,000 kronor a month from the first day of unemployment and, after 100 days, an additional little over 2,000. These are substantial economic cuts.

Sometimes it sounds like the compensations in the unemployment insurance are too high, but actually anyone can see that is not the case. Losing nearly 30 percent of one's income from the first day is seriously difficult for many people in the middle of life. One can only imagine what effect that has on a place like Skellefteå when 3,000–4,000 people lose those incomes all at once.

The government's proposal for a higher taper is also a hard blow against people who have done what they were supposed to do their whole lives, who are expected to go to work and who have taken their share of the common social responsibility. Today, many of them also see their jobs disappear in bankruptcies and cutbacks. Research shows that people can be affected by age discrimination in the labor market as early as in their 40s. They have a much longer way back to work than they did in their 20s.

The government's answer to them is therefore: You will also receive further reduced compensation when you are affected on the labor market. The answer is not to tackle age discrimination and ensure that the safety net actually exists for those who need a slightly longer transition, which we see in research that some people need, but rather the opposite.

This stands in stark contrast to the fact that we Social Democrats want to see a stable and secure economy as a basis for both security in work and support back to work, instead of as an instrument to squeeze those who are affected by unemployment.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! One of all the different things that our government inherited and then had to sort out after the Social Democratic government's eight years was how we demand that the unemployed make themselves employable, as the member expressed was a strange word.

The inspections of the unemployment insurance's audits show, for example, that every fifth employment service officer approves job applications for jobs where there are requirements for a driver's license even though the person applying for the job does not have a driver's license. Another audit shows that Arbetsförmedlingen has completely ignored setting requirements that one must move to vacant jobs or be prepared to change industries if there are vacant jobs in other industries.

The functioning of the labor market deteriorates when one does not have sufficient mobility or has sufficiently high expectations that everyone can actually participate and contribute to the economy and obtain a new own income.

Madam Speaker! I want to ask the colleague from the Social Democrats what the Social Democrats think about the problems with the Arbetsförmedlingen's culture of appeasement, which existed during their time in government and which we are now trying to rectify. And what do the Social Democrats think about us now tightening the requirements, for example, that we have clarified that the requirements to move for jobs and to change industries obviously also apply to people who are parents?

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! I am pleased that the member is raising the issue of driving licenses. It would be very good if the government could accept our proposal to introduce driving license training for young unemployed people and to ensure that they receive a driving license, so that they can apply for jobs with requirements for a driving license and also get them. That would have been a great reform. Then we could have met with each other and agreed on how we should solve at least that question. There we seem to be quite close to each other.

Naturally, society must place demands on individuals but also on businesses. This is a three-part issue. The state has its responsibility: to ensure that the systems work, that the training programs exist, and that people receive the support they need. The individual has their responsibility: to take advantage of the training offered, to apply for the jobs that are available, and to take the jobs they are offered. But there is also a responsibility that lies with the companies. Not all training can be driven and financed by the state. The workplace must also be able to provide training on-site and hire people who are close enough to having the competence in order to then further train them. There is a great deal to be done there today.

We believe that the whole of society, all parts, should take their share of the responsibility but also demand their rights.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! A driver's license has been a decisive factor on the labor market for a very long time. It is not a new phenomenon in any way. Young people have had summer jobs from a fairly young age and saved up some kronor. Parents have perhaps, in cases where it has been possible, put aside some kronor a month throughout the entire upbringing. One or another might recognize themselves in having made a deal about a candy ban and having to set aside a little money for the future driver's license. People see through toil and diligence to equip themselves to be ready for jobs and for the labor market.

For the Social Democrats, there are obviously no such limitations. Instead, they shall tax a single auxiliary nurse even more harshly, so that those who have not set aside those kronor through toil and diligence month after month so that the children or they themselves can get a driver's license shall only receive a driver's license from the collective. It is easy when the right of withdrawal from others' wallets is completely free.

Madam Speaker! That is not how we view the matter. We mean instead that it is primarily an individual responsibility to obtain a job and to ensure that one has the skills and the driver's license that are needed.

I want to return to my questions. What do the Social Democrats think about the requirements that someone who is unemployed should not only apply for a certain number of jobs but also be prepared to move for a job and change industries to get a vacant job, and that that requirement also applies to parents of children? That would be a good message to receive.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! These demands are not new. They have existed before, even during our years in government. I therefore do not see what the questions actually add to the debate.

I thought instead to return to some other parts. We just heard the member speak about free disposal of tax funds and each person's own responsibility. He also said earlier, in another exchange in the debate, that lower taxes are the most effective way to create jobs – on the tax side of the state's finances. That may be true. It matters very little in the large picture how effective it is, because it is the only thing one can do on the tax side to create jobs.

There are, however, other things that can be done. Thea Institute (Konjunkturinstitutet) released a report last autumn showing that public consumption and investments create three times as many jobs in society as the tax cuts implemented in this year's budget by the right-wing government. This is an enormous waste.

We Social Democrats want to invest in people – ensure that Sweden becomes stronger by having more people gain increased competence. This may be through vocational training or a driver's license to be able to take a job. The basis is, of course, that everyone must take their own responsibility. But we do have education later in life for those who have not completed upper secondary school, and I see no contradiction here either. In principle, everyone should of course finance their own driver's license. But if it is needed and if the timing is right, for example to lower the highest unemployment in 25 years, it is a good measure for Sweden to give people the opportunity to get a driver's license.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Patrik Lundqvist, for a very good speech! Unemployment insurance is very important; it is a safety net. For the Sweden Democrats, this is a natural part of the safety net for Swedish wage earners. When one listens to Patrik Lundqvist, one hears that he seems to agree that it should be a natural part of the safety net for Swedish wage earners, so I would like to ask the question: Could Patrik Lundqvist support a state-supported unemployment insurance fund, available to all wage earners regardless of whether they are members of a trade union or not? We saw the problems during the pandemic, when many who stood outside were hit very hard. It could be about a natural protection for all wage earners, especially since the unemployment insurance fund is largely financed by the state. My question is therefore: Could Patrik Lundqvist support a state-supported and controlled unemployment insurance fund today?

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! Thanks to Member Persson for the kind words he began with! I believe, however, that he actually knows the answer to the question himself. I see no contradiction between having trade union-controlled unemployment funds and also state-run ones. That is how we have it today. There is no reason for people to be without this just because most unemployment funds are linked to the trade union movement. The connection is natural, and this is also part of the Swedish model. As I also spoke about in my speech, this is one of the flagships of the Swedish model. The trade union connection also means that we have strong parties, which is another part of the Swedish model. So, I think it should remain. But I see absolutely no reason to change the situation where we have both trade union-linked unemployment funds, where one can be a member without being affiliated with the trade union, and other unemployment funds, where one can be a member without having to involve themselves with the trade union organizations at all, if one does not wish to.

Personally, I believe that all workers in Sweden should be members of both a trade union and an unemployment insurance fund (a-kassa). It would be absolutely best for strengthening the Swedish model, strengthening the position of wage earners in the labor market, and creating a better balance between the parties in the labor market. But this is, of course, not something I think the state should step in and regulate for that reason.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I agree with Patrik Lundqvist. In the best of worlds, all Swedish wage earners would be able to be involved and active in the trade unions. But that is not how it looks today, unfortunately. Many are denied positions. But that is another question.

It is pleasing to hear that Patrik Lundqvist does not fixate on the trade unions' power over the unemployment insurance funds. It has often been said earlier in this discussion that this is something the state should stay away from and that the trade unions should manage, as it is part of their work. When the union density is now decreasing quite significantly, especially within the LO unions, one should perhaps, according to my way of reasoning, find other ways to sell membership in the trade union and in an LO union. The Swedish model is built, as Patrik Lundqvist said earlier, on equal partners. If one party is weakened, the entire Swedish model is at risk. Now we unfortunately see that one party is being weakened constantly as the union density decreases. But that is another question.

Another question for Patrik Lundqvist concerns the large overfunding of the unemployment insurance fund (a-kassan). According to TCO, it was approximately 166 billion between 2007 and 2018 – money that went straight into the state treasury instead of perhaps being used to develop the unemployment insurance fund. How does Patrik Lundqvist view that scenario regarding the overfunding of the unemployment insurance fund?

Then I want to make a point that actually has nothing to do with this, but I want to make a correction. Now, the vice chairman of the Committee on Employment, Ardalan Shekarabi, has left the debate, but he claimed here in the chamber that Mats Persson made himself invisible to everyone regarding what happened in Northvolt. We in the presidium of the Committee on Employment have made a decision that Mats Persson shall come to the committee tomorrow, and Ardalan Shekarabi knew that very well. I therefore think it was a bit of bad style – I want it recorded in the minutes.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! If I remember correctly, Ardalan spoke about the Minister for Employment's visibility regarding the issue of unemployment in general, not specifically about Northvolt. We also know that he has had a press conference during our debate. I do not know exactly what he said, but my impression is that he spoke about Mats Persson's visibility in employment policy in general and the number of measures that are put forward by the Minister to the Riksdag.

I naturally agree that we need to strengthen trade union participation. In my speech, I spoke briefly about how the Alliance actively ensured that fewer people wanted to be members of the unemployment insurance fund by diversifying the fee, lowering the ceiling, and furthermore linking the size of the fee to the unemployment rate in the individual industry. It is such mistakes that we must not make. Several hundred thousand people left the unemployment insurance fund because of those fee increases.

We should naturally ensure that we have the solidarity funding we have today, where one pays a reasonable fee regardless of which a-kassa one is a member of. One could imagine a deduction right for union fees, for example. It would be a support for more to become members. It is also a matter of justice because the opposing party often gets to deduct their organizational fees.

I naturally consider that all the funding that comes into the unemployment insurance fund should be put into the insurance and go out to the people who are dependent on it. A large part of my speech was about how much worse the economy people actually get when they become unemployed. If we have money left over that has been paid into the unemployment insurance fund, it should naturally go there.

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

Jonathan Svensson (S)

Madam Speaker! It is clear that our country is in a recession with all the consequences that it entails for the whole society but also for all individual people all around in our country. I would therefore like to devote a part of this debate and my speech to highlighting a group that is extra vulnerable on the labor market, especially in the times that we find ourselves in right now. It is about the large group of young people who just now do not have a job or an occupation to go to.

According to the latest figures released by Arbetsförmedlingen, there are approximately 60,000 young people between 18 and 24 years old who are registered with the agency. This is a large increase compared to the same period last year and an even larger increase if one compares it to when the government took office in 2022. We can unfortunately state that almost every fourth young person in the country is unemployed.

That so many young people day in and day out do not have a job to go to is a clear failing grade for the government and something that we must address. It has major consequences for society as a whole but obviously also for the individual individuals. It can be about young people who have recently lost their jobs and have not yet qualified for unemployment insurance or about young people who do not succeed in taking the first important step into the labor market and now risk falling into exclusion.

Sweden's young people would have deserved a labor market policy that took youth unemployment seriously – a policy that would have taken powerful measures to improve young people's establishment in the labor market and a policy that would have seen the great consequences that the current situation brings with it.

That is why we Social Democrats, among other things, push for Arbetsförmedlingen to have the tools and resources required to support this group and strengthen their establishment in the labor market. We want young people to have an easier path into the labor market by being equipped with the right competencies within the education sector, but also that we should carry out a so-called "driving license lift," where many of the young people who today lack a job get the opportunity to obtain a driving license. It is clear that those who have a driving license can more easily participate in the labor supply in the labor market. When over 60 percent of all young people registered at Arbetsförmedlingen lack a B-license, we believe that this is a possible way forward. We therefore believe that this can be an important piece of the puzzle in the work to push back youth unemployment.

Unfortunately, neither the government nor the committee seems to share our concern and our insight regarding the need for powerful measures to combat the rising youth unemployment. We Social Democrats think it is regrettable and will continue to monitor this issue for a long time.

Madam Speaker! Another group in the labor market that, like young people, is extra vulnerable are those people who have a disability that results in reduced work capacity. This group has for a long time had significantly higher unemployment figures than the rest of the population, something that has made it extra vulnerable for a long time. Now we can see how unemployment is also increasing in this group.

If one looks solely at long-term unemployment, one can see that a full 31 percent of the long-term unemployed have some form of disability. This is significantly more than in the rest of the population. It is a relatively sharp increase since the government took office and a problem that we as a society need to manage.

We Social Democrats have as a starting point that all people are an asset and that we should take advantage of all people's experiences and knowledge in the labor market. Our grounds for this have to do partly with our view on human value and partly with the fact that we can see the great skills shortage that exists within both the private and public sectors, where there are masses of jobs that need to be done. It is therefore required that all people are given the right conditions to be able to take the step out into the labor market and contribute to our common society. We believe that is a matter of dignity.

In the current situation, however, we believe that not all people with disabilities receive the support they need when they, for example, seek a job. As the situation looks today, it often takes far too long before people receive the support they need. Often this is because it takes a long time to get the correct coding in Arbetsförmedlingen's internal systems, even though this is a figure that has been worked on in recent years. We also receive reports on how the processing of, for example, wage subsidies takes far too long, which can lead to engaged employers choosing not to continue offering wage subsidy employment and instead backing out.

A review was also recently released regarding private providers that have offered the "Steg till arbete" (Steps to work) intervention to Arbetsförmedlingen. It is an intervention aimed at people with disabilities and other forms of ill health. The review shows clear deficiencies in the intervention. Among other things, it highlights that the competence of the staff is too low, that the participants do not get access to their promised internship placements, and that the premises for the operation are substandard.

Another important tool for creating meaningful jobs for people here in the country is the state-owned company Samhall. Samhall delivers safe and good jobs every day to very many people all around this country, but there are, of course, also shortcomings here that we need to work on.

The Swedish National Audit Office has previously audited the company's operations, and among other things, it has found that the business perspective has weighed too heavily at the expense of the human perspective and that the adaptation of work tasks has not always been sufficient.

We have, of course, also noted the investigation regarding Samhall which will be presented shortly. It is, of course, welcome, even though we are critical of parts of it. For example, the investigator has in practice been forbidden to investigate organizational forms for the operation. We look forward to taking part in the investigation's conclusions and will continue to monitor the issue closely. It is crucial for very many people in our country.

Madam Speaker! For us Social Democrats, it is obvious that too little is being done so that people with disabilities can take the step out into the labor market. We believe that stronger and more individually adapted support would have been needed for these people to support them in the step out into working life. For this to work, we believe that Arbetsförmedlingen needs to ensure that they actually have the specialist competencies and resources within their own operations required to provide support to the group I am speaking about here.

Labor market policy and the unemployment insurance

All people with a disability would have deserved a labor market policy that took their challenges seriously – a policy that actually managed to deliver. Unfortunately, that is not the case today. We Social Democrats know that our Sweden can do so much better.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 12.)

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