Housing policy

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Two and a half years ago, the Tidö parties received the voters' confidence to lead Sweden, but we did not come to a set table. Two and a half years later, it is difficult to remember what it was like then. Inflation reached peak levels and approached double digits. Food prices were a concept around the kitchen tables when many Swedes were forced to review their household finances. The price of gasoline was up to over 23 kronor per liter, and for many, a full tank cost over 1,500 kronor. The price of electricity was record-high, and ordinary people's electricity bills spiraled. At the same time, insecurity spread. Shootings and explosions became commonplace in many residential areas.

In February 2022, Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. At that time, the Left Party voted against sending weapons, and the social democratic Prime Minister argued that it would be destabilizing if Sweden became a member of Nato.

Madam Speaker! In the housing market, the construction sector drove inflation, all fueled by billions in investment support that went straight into the pockets of property developers. On the business pages of the newspapers, one could read about the new property kings, such as Oscar Engelbert and the former S-top Ilija Batljan. At the same time, the government at the time did not present any concrete proposals to increase mobility in the housing market or to get the moving chains started.

The only revolving door they seemed to focus on was that of the Minister for Housing. During the Löfven government's eight years in power, a total of five different people held the post. One had to resign after a scandal with Turkish fascists, but the vast majority left the portfolio as soon as the opportunity arose to move forward in their careers.

Madam Speaker! It is only two and a half years later, and it is difficult to remember how it was. Now inflation is at 2–3 percent. The price of gasoline is 8 kronor lower than in 2022. The price of electricity has stabilized, and the work to build new, green nuclear power has begun. The deadly violence in Sweden has decreased. Sweden is a member of Nato, and we are one of the largest donors to Ukraine per capita.

The housing market is beginning to function slowly again. The construction company Veidekke stated in its construction market barometer from March 2025 that housing construction is now increasing, albeit from low levels. But unlike in previous governments, the housing minister has been the same the whole time.

Sweden is safer, freer and wealthier than it was just two and a half years ago.

Madam Speaker! There are, however, clouds of concern on the horizon. Let me begin with the obvious. The USA's tariffs against the rest of the world and China's high counter-tariffs against the USA mean that the world now stands on the brink of a trade war. The consequences are difficult to oversee, but the risk that the global recession takes hold is imminent.

Strengthening the Swedish economy in the face of turbulent times has been the Moderate-led government's primary budget focus. Therefore, we have put full force into combating inflation and securing welfare from day one. It is something that many in this chamber were critical of then, but which I am glad about now. If Sweden had not adopted a more responsible economic policy two and a half years ago, we as a country would have been worse equipped to now face the threat of trade wars and the risk of global depression.

At the same time, the war in Ukraine continues with unabated force. Most evidence suggests that Russia's great power ambitions do not stop at Ukraine. It will place demands on tough economic priorities if we are to secure Sweden's defense capability now and for the foreseeable future.

Madam Speaker! Achieving a functioning housing market is the primary housing policy goal for us Moderates. To reach that, long-term structural reforms are required. This is something that both international assessors and the government's own productivity commission have highlighted as key factors for strengthening Swedish productivity and competitiveness.

It is required that the regulatory burden decreases both when building new and when renovating and using the properties during their lifespan. It is required that lead times decrease. Estimates show that it takes an average of eight to ten years from idea to finished house. Time is literally money in these contexts, and long lead times mean, at best, increased costs, and at worst, that constructions never happen.

It is required that the buildable land increases. It is ironic that we in Sweden talk about a shortage of land when we are one of Europe's most sparsely populated countries. We do not have a shortage of land, but we have as a country set up so many rules and restrictions that we have created a shortage of buildable land for ourselves.

Madam Speaker! The Moderate-led government is now pursuing an offensive policy to achieve structural reforms. To reduce the regulatory burden, the government has, among other things, decided on a referral to the Council on Legislation for simpler regulations regarding building permits. This aims to streamline the building permit process, strengthen individual property owners' ability to control their property, and create a better utilization of existing properties.

The Government has also presented a proposition to create more purposeful rules for student housing. The current regulatory framework has made it unnecessarily complicated and difficult to build space-efficient student apartments, resulting in fewer and more expensive homes.

According to case studies from Studentbostadsföretagen and Akademiska Hus, the proposals are estimated to lead to between 11 and 18 percent more housing in the projects, up to 18 percent more residents in the apartments and between 3 and 11 percent lower rents – while at the same time the apartments become more functional. More than every fifth apartment becomes fully accessible for people with disabilities, and all apartments become accessible for visitors.

Madam Speaker! In order to reduce lead times, the Moderate-led government gave the Environmental Permit Investigation a supplementary directive in January this year to review how the lead time in construction projects can be shortened. This includes, among other things, assessing how the need for investigations in the detailed planning process can be limited and clarified. It shall also investigate how the processing time in the appeals process can be shortened and look at whether the appeal area can be reduced. Finally, it shall investigate a fee for appeals.

In addition, the government has worked on reviewing lead times in everything from land allocations to land survey proceedings and proceedings in court.

Madam Speaker! In order to increase the buildable land, the government has, among other things, announced a two-step reform to ease the coastal protection. In a first step, we will implement the prepared proposals that exist regarding, among other things, removing the coastal protection around smaller watercourses. What some parties in this chamber described as far-reaching reforms, we note, however, are minor changes on the margins. Therefore, the Moderate-led government will, in a second step, appoint a broader coastal protection inquiry which shall, among other things, look at the possibility of completely removing the general coastal protection.

Madam Speaker! A house with its own lawn is many Swedes' dream. Depending on how the question is phrased in various opinion polls, between half and three out of four Swedes answer that a house of their own is the dream home. But it is not primarily small houses that have been built in recent decades. Politics and the regulatory framework have instead encouraged and steered towards smaller rental apartments and condominiums. We are changing that now.

The government has appointed a small-house commissioner to take a broader approach to small-house construction and to kick-start a modern small-house movement. In the budget, we have provided planning bonuses to municipalities that develop detailed plans for small houses. We will also develop proposals for type-approved small houses that will be exempt from building permits, so-called Sverigehus.

Madam Speaker! Many experience insecurity in their residential areas. According to the Swedish Crime Prevention Council, almost every fourth Swede feels insecure where they live. But the insecurity differs between groups: Young people and the elderly feel the most insecure, women feel more insecure than men, and foreign-born people feel more insecure than Swedish-born people.

Now the government is shifting the crime policy from focusing on the perpetrators to focusing on the crime victims and the general public. Increasing safety in residential areas is a cornerstone of that work. We have already strengthened the rental housing sector by making it easier to evict criminals who use the housing as a tool for crime. We have introduced stay bans for criminals who commit crimes in a certain residential area, and we have increased the possibilities to install security cameras to prevent crime and streamline the police's work.

We will also introduce legislation that supports so-called BID cooperation, that is, cooperation between property owners, businesses, civil society, the municipality, and the police with the aim of increasing safety in an area. There is already BID cooperation in Sweden today, but international experience shows that you get the full return on such work only when there is clear legislation. The same experience says that some form of obligation is required for property owners who do not want to take responsibility on a voluntary basis.

Madam Speaker! Many crimes were also committed inside the walls of the home. Therefore, we have changed the legislation so that victims of violence in close relationships get increased opportunities to take over rental contracts that are in the perpetrator's name. We have also strengthened the municipalities' ability to give priority in the municipal housing queue to, among others, those exposed to violence.

The big problem, however, is that a non-functioning housing market with low mobility puts the person who is subject to violence in an impossible situation. Leaving the relationship means also leaving the home and, in the worst case, becoming homeless. It is for among other reasons that it is so important to once again get a functioning housing market where housing is no longer a scarce commodity.

Madam Speaker! The recession and the global unrest are persisting, but in Sweden, it is heading in the right direction. Today, it is difficult to remember what it was like when the Moderate-led government took over – high inflation, skyrocketing petrol and electricity prices, and widespread insecurity. Sweden is safer, freer, and wealthier today than just two and a half years ago.

Madam Speaker! I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is true that many in Sweden have become wealthier with this government, not least after the turn of the year. Others have not. Almost half of single people with low incomes have had to borrow to cover the rent over the last six months, and almost every fourth has had difficulty covering the bills. Single mothers testify that they cannot afford to pay for nutritious food for their children and often skip meals to manage to buy food for the children.

A single parent in Stockholm living in an average apartment of 70 square meters loses 500 kronor a month with the government's budget. My question, Madam Speaker, is therefore: Will the government extend the temporary supplement to the housing allowance so that these families too can, if not become richer, at least make ends meet?

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

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Märta Stenevi, for the question!

Just as was raised in the previous debate, there is a clearer dividing line between previous red-green governments and the current Moderate-led government when it comes to how we focus our tax cuts. While previous governments abolished the wealth tax, we are lowering the tax for, among other things, childcare workers. We are raising the broad job tax deduction precisely so that it should be more profitable to work and so that people can actually afford to pay for, for example, food and rent.

I would say that this is the foundation of Moderate politics. A childcare worker working full-time should not be dependent on benefits; the point is that the childcare worker should actually be able to manage on their own, on their own salary – on their earned money. Therefore, the answer to the question is: No, I do not think the solution is higher benefits, but I believe the solution is lower taxes for ordinary, honest people who go to work. They should be able to afford to pay the rent, and they should be able to afford to pay for food.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the announcement. I interpret it as that no extension of the temporary supplement will be made, which is an incredibly concerning announcement for all those families consisting of a mother or a father who works full-time but who, due to the inflation and the cost increases that have occurred, do not manage their costs.

On a childcare worker's salary, the job tax credit provides approximately 100 kronor a month. At the same time, over 600 kronor a month disappear. They disappear in the middle of summer, at the same time as no school lunch is served, at the same time as one cannot afford to go on vacation, and at the same time as one has to take care of the children. Those with the lowest incomes from work are those who lose the most from the government's budget.

It would have been welcome to receive the news today that the temporary supplement to the housing allowance is extended so that even these families can get a chance to make ends meet. But I must at least thank the member for the news that one continues to make the rich richer and leaves the single parents with low incomes in the lurch, Madam Speaker.

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

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! As I began my speech by saying: A lot has happened in two and a half years. We no longer have the galloping inflation that we had under the previous government. We have achieved a better fiscal situation.

Now, the situation is that the government rules over much but not over the rest of the world. We are in a tough global situation. I would like to say that the fact that we over these two and a half years have gotten the economy in order means that we have a society that now has resources and opportunities. This government is not closing any doors to further support households. I state that the best way to support households is to lower taxes and make it more profitable to work, but precisely because we have such good public finances, we can also take other measures.

What we will do in the budget remains to be communicated, but I can still calmly state that Sweden is in a better situation today than it was two and a half years ago.

We have fought inflation, and we have also been able to allocate resources to strengthen household economies. That is priority one. For us, it is the tax cuts for ordinary people that are important, not those for high-income earners. It was the previous government that abolished the wealth tax – not this government. We are lowering taxes for ordinary people.

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

Jennie Nilsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, David Josefsson, for your speech! I must however state that David Josefsson describes a reality that I believe few will recognize themselves in. I can also state, given the exchange of remarks just now, that David Josefsson and the Moderaterna do not see that taxes are distribution policy and that the tax policy they pursue very unilaterally and clearly benefits those with the high incomes – mostly those with the very highest incomes – and disadvantages everyone with small incomes, most of all those who have the very smallest incomes.

But it was not for this that I requested the floor, but I reacted to something that David Josefsson said in his speech, which I otherwise agree with. He said that time literally is money when it comes to housing policy. That is true. There are a number of things that need to be done to speed up construction processes, secure planned land, and so on. But politics is part of that.

It has now almost been three years of this government's four-year period. The government has not succeeded in delivering any concrete proposal to ensure that the time for construction becomes shorter. My question to David Josefsson then is: Does the government not also have a responsibility to ensure that time is money?

A clear example is that we have an investigation that arrived as early as last autumn, which concerns handling the mortgage ceiling and the amortization requirement. It arrived last autumn and has still not been sent for consultation, almost half a year later. My question to David Josefsson is: When will this investigation be sent for consultation?

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

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Jennie Nilsson, for the question!

The message from the government is that the referral will be sent out before the summer.

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

Jennie Nilsson (S)

Madam Speaker! It is becoming even more precarious. David Josefsson and the government have just proven that the time for politics in this context is fluid.

The first announcement was that the investigation would be sent out for consultation when it was ready. Then the announcement became that it would be sent out for consultation during the first quarter of this year. Now that we have passed the first quarter, the announcement is that it will be sent out for consultation before the summer. This means that one cannot trust what the government says.

I will give another example. We will have to see if one is prepared to take their responsibility there and ensure that they deliver on what they have said.

A rather long-awaited, albeit late, proposal for a Norrland support was submitted in the budget. We decided on it before Christmas, and it took effect from January 1. But so far, I have not seen any memorandum regarding what this grant can be used for or by whom.

The message in the documents we now have on the table before today's debate is that the question of how the support should be designed is being prepared in the Government Offices, and it is soon Easter.

My question to David Josefsson is: Okay, you did not manage to deliver when it comes to amortization requirements and the mortgage ceiling, but will you deliver on what you have nevertheless decided on? When will the decision be announced on how one can use the Norrland support?

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

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Jennie Nilsson, for the questions! One can observe that it is here that the view on housing policy also differs between the Social Democrats and the Moderates.

The Social Democrats see housing policy and construction policy at best as a form of economic regulator. Suddenly it is a recession and construction slows down. Then one must quickly rush through various reforms.

But we see that the big problem is that the housing market in Sweden actually does not function. It has not functioned for 30 years, to quote Hyresgästföreningen. Then the problem is not that it does not function in a recession, because it does not function in either a recession or a boom. This is what international assessors state. This is what the Productivity Commission states.

I am very clear in saying that we should not rush things to save Sweden from a recession or take Keynesian measures to get construction started. We can conduct an active fiscal policy in certain areas. But just when it comes to housing policy and construction policy, the industry says: No, do not rush things! Do not do short-sighted things, and do not change the regulatory framework from one day to the next!

We need long-term rules of the game. We need structural reforms that get things in order. Then, it must be allowed to take time sometimes. We must, for example, have proper preparatory documents when it comes to the credit restrictions, so that we get clear regulatory frameworks. This is so that households and property developers know what applies today, tomorrow, and in the coming years. In that case, it is more important, I would say, that we get a good product that can go out for consultation before the summer than that we quickly deliver it just because it happens to be a recession.

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! Today is the day to talk about housing policy again here in the chamber. One could wish that the government, not just the Riksdag, also had an occasion like this, that is, an occasion where housing policy was at the center, even if only for a short while. That is because it would be needed.

The government would need to sit down and talk about housing policy. Above all, one should talk about what one actually has not achieved during the years in power – three years – for that is a lot. Vänsterpartiet is far from alone in this criticism.

Nor even in today's report can we see any proposals on how the government intends to produce more housing. We see no initiatives that could get housing construction started in general. We truly see no reforms that in any way can benefit low-income earners' opportunities to get their own home.

Nor neither can it be understood how the government is to put a stop to the continued increase in the number of evictions. There is no one other than the government itself who believes that regulatory simplifications, an increased rot deduction, the sell-off of cheap rental apartments, and larger profits for homeowners who rent out their housing in second hand can solve these issues or other acute problems that today's struggling Sweden grapples with.

Madam Speaker! New construction continues to be absent, and rents continue to rise in a very provocative way year after year. It is the same thing with food prices: month by month, food becomes more and more expensive. It is enough to take a glance at the news from the past week on the subject of housing policy to see how the crisis continues.

Here are some headlines: "Inflation rises again." Rent increases are the second largest reason for that. Overall, rents increased by 6.3 percent last year and contributed 0.5 percentage points to the inflation figures in February. But do not forget that the increased food prices affect everyone. The rent increases only affect the country's tenants, that is, the most vulnerable households.

The next headline reads: ”Four years after the conversion, the association's finances are bleeding – now tenants are being pressured to move.” In a Stockholm suburb, the conversion consultant urged the housing cooperative to ”use the heavy hand to evict tenants.” Several tenants have now been evicted, including families with children.

Here is another quote from the past week: ”The housing developers' optimism is dampened.”

Madam Speaker! Injustices and difficulties are evident in both headlines and in reality. Last year, over 2,000 construction companies went bankrupt. That is the highest figure in over 20 years. At the same time, unemployment among Byggnads members was at a historic 10.7 percent in February.

No one but the government itself believes in the only measure they have presented, namely an increased root allowance. Several critics point out that last year's adjustment of the allowance, when the ceiling was raised from 50,000 to 75,000, has essentially left no mark at all in the industry. Now that the allowance is to be raised again – moving from 30 to 50 percent deduction of the labor cost – the criticism is even louder.

Kommunal calls the reform completely tone-deaf and points out that their members need help filling the pantry, not rebuilding it. Byggnads likens the government's proposal to trying to feed a starving elephant one peanut at a time. They emphasize that the proposal will not lead to a single new home being built. The employer side, Byggföretagen, says in a press release that the increase of rot will not reverse the crisis in housing construction.

Madam Speaker! It is difficult to understand why the government chooses to spend so many billions on – to quote the Chairman of Byggnads again – renovation of kitchens and construction of swimming pools in a time when the housing shortage is acute and we know that more and more people cannot afford to live at all.

The squeeze on families with children continues to increase. Pensioners can no longer afford to pay for food and rent. If one, in such a situation, believes that ordinary households can afford renovations of villas and condominiums, I would argue that one has completely lost all connection to reality. How can this be the only priority that the government makes which is directed towards the construction sector?

Madam Speaker! One can weigh the cost of the root contribution against the cost of the now discontinued support for the construction of rental apartments with low rents. The difference is not so great. I am aware that the government has major ideological deadlocks regarding state support for construction, at least if it concerns support for housing that ordinary wage earners can also afford to pay for – rental apartments. But Vänsterpartiet is far from alone in demanding some form of state support that can stabilize the extreme fluctuations in housing construction that we have seen in recent years. Even the head of analysis at Byggfakta says that "some kind of state intervention that can actually stabilize production" is needed.

Byggfakta presented a report a couple of years ago on the industry's view on the abolition of the investment support. Almost 80 percent believed that the abolished support would lead to reduced housing construction and wanted to keep it in some form.

Sweden still suffers from a large housing deficit. Most are therefore in agreement that the state must intervene forcefully to support housing construction. In neighboring countries, such as Finland, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, France, and Germany, it is a given to invest in construction in the form of subsidies in one way or another.

That the state subsidizes pool construction gives nothing to society as a whole. There are many other alternatives that can lead to a better future when it comes to both housing construction and unemployment in the construction industry. It could, for example, be credit guarantees, favorable construction loans, investment support, and a state construction company with the task of primarily building affordable rental apartments. The alternatives are many.

The industry is requesting a cross-bloc agreement regarding some form of expanded and long-term support for the construction of rental apartments.

I urge the government to swallow its pride and look at different alternatives. Let us together find long-term solutions so that the industry knows there is something stable to lean on!

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet wants a national strategy to be developed to ensure everyone's right to a home at an affordable cost. We want to see a new housing supply law that covers both the state and the municipalities. At the same time, the municipalities' statutory housing supply responsibility must be clarified. Higher requirements must be placed on municipalities to release ready-to-build land, but the municipalities should also be given economic incentives to build more based on actual needs. For those who do not build according to the specified goals, a fine should be introduced.

Madam Speaker! One of the municipalities' most important tools for housing provision is public housing. This applies in particular to the possibility of conducting a social housing policy and ensuring that there is a varied supply of housing in the municipality itself. Vänsterpartiet therefore considers that it should be mandatory for all municipalities to have at least one municipal or regional public housing company.

The sale of public housing must be stopped. We therefore want to investigate how a long-term ban on the sale of assets within public housing companies can be ensured. Furthermore, all municipalities should have a housing brokerage under municipal or regional management that, through transparent and fair rules, mediates rental housing after the purchase period. Requirements should be introduced so that even private property owners must allocate at least 80 percent of their vacant housing stock to such a brokerage.

Madam Speaker! The Left Party wants to change the law so that it will no longer be possible for the municipalities to transfer large sums from profits in public utilities to the municipalities' other activities. The profit shall go back to the company and benefit the tenants. Public utility tenants pay tax, just like other municipal residents. It is not reasonable that just these citizens should additionally finance swimming pools and other things for other municipal residents with their rent payments.

Madam Speaker! When it comes to the unlawful transfers of value occurring from profits from various public utilities, we want to immediately introduce sanction possibilities against this nonsense. Unlawful transfers of value shall be repaid to the housing companies.

Finally, we want the concept of business principles to be removed from the allbolag. It is high time that Sweden takes that fight against the EU if it should become necessary. Therefore, I move for approval of the Vänsterpartiet's reservation 13.

Madam Speaker! For a couple of decades, emissions in Sweden have decreased every year, but now we face a different reality. The national policy leads to increased emissions, and according to the Climate Policy Council, Sweden has lost its leadership in climate work. But, Madam Speaker, the green transition of society is a must. For increased housing construction and for a green transition, a state housing policy is required where one dares to invest in the future – both financially and with new thinking.

Housing and premises account for around one-third of the country's energy consumption. The construction sector accounts for 35 percent of all waste within the EU. And in Sweden, the sector accounts for over 20 percent of carbon dioxide emissions. To solve the equation, a state housing policy for climate-efficient housing is required. We must build more, but we must also build correctly. The same applies to the renovation of the existing housing stock. We must renovate more, but we must do it in the right way. Vänsterpartiet wants to convert the root contribution into a green renovation support, and for rental apartments in multi-family buildings, we want to reintroduce the renovation and energy efficiency support.

In addition, the reuse of building materials must increase. Lower energy consumption means lower environmental impact, and more recycling promotes a sustainable society. The industry itself has expressed high ambitions regarding reducing its climate impact through a higher proportion of reused products. Sweden can become a leader in sustainable construction and simultaneously create more jobs if we develop a more circular construction. But then the state must begin to contribute with reforms that can increase the proportion of reused building materials.

Madam Speaker! The government's policy brings to mind 19th-century Sweden. It is a Sweden where poverty is now so palpable that more and more people cannot even afford food and housing, a Sweden where the most vulnerable are constantly suspected and subjected to repressive policies, a Sweden where we reformulate the laws so that we can once again build housing that shuts out people with disabilities, and a Sweden that is becoming increasingly divided and where only the rich receive privileges and political power.

Is it really this backward-looking Sweden that the population wants? I do not hope so. I hope and believe that an awakening has already occurred and that it will show at the next parliamentary election. Politics must function and prioritize in other ways than what is the case today. Politics shall have as its goal to create better and more just regulations and conditions that better reflect housing as a human right.

It is the policy that I and the Left Party want to pursue as we lead Sweden forward into a better future.

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

Mikael Eskilandersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin by commenting on the repair deduction. Given what was presented in the rostrum, I wonder if Malcolm Momodou Jallow has misunderstood or if he is deliberately misinterpreting the proposal, but the repair deduction has never been about building housing. Nor has anyone ever claimed that. The repair deduction is a market policy measure intended to improve employment in the industry and keep black labor out. For this, it is very effective, and contrary to what Malcolm claimed in the rostrum, it has been welcomed by the industry.

I requested the floor because I have read that Vänsterpartiet is conducting a government school. Vänsterpartiet obviously has every right to do so, but one becomes a bit curious about how Malcolm Momodou Jallow, whom I assume is preparing to enter as housing minister in this upcoming government, will manage to put together his government basis.

Previous Social Democratic governments have given away the housing minister role, even though the Green Party almost seemed to want to waive that role. They have passed the title between one another like a relay baton, in principle without accomplishing anything at all in the housing area. How is one to reconcile the large differences that exist between the Social Democrats' view on free rent setting in new production and the Centre Party's market rents? The Left Party, together with the Sweden Democrats, actually brought down the previous government precisely based on the free rent setting in new production.

How does Malcolm Momodou Jallow intend to act as housing minister in such a coming government?

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! I am pleased to hear that the Tidö parties have already given up and assume that they will lose the next election. I am pleased that the government has self-awareness. That is good!

It feels good that you already know that the Swedish people have grown tired of your passivity and bad politics. People have grown tired of how you have dragged society a hundred years back to something that resembles 19th-century Sweden. People do not have food to eat! They borrow money to pay the rent! You conduct a repressive policy where you undermine the entire democracy that we have built up over a hundred years.

People are tired, and it pleases me that you have the self-awareness that the Tidö era is over and that the red-greens will take over. Then we build Sweden as we have always done. Then we build Sweden into the welfare state that we have been, the society that the whole world has looked at and considered to be one of the best countries to live in.

That is no longer the case. But you only have one year left, and I hope you have other plans, because then we will take over.

When it comes to the rotavdrag, I mentioned in my speech that Kommunal calls the reform completely tone-deaf. Byggnads likens the proposal to a giant hungry elephant that the government is trying to feed one peanut at a time. The employer side, Byggföretagen, says in a press release that the increase of the rotavdrag will not turn the crisis for housing construction around.

All of these people cannot be wrong. You claim that you are carrying out this reform specifically for this group. But they do not see this as a good reform. 2,000 construction companies have gone bankrupt, and 600,000 people are unemployed. Then people are supposed to get a tax deduction, but one cannot use the tax deduction if no houses are being built.

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

Mikael Eskilandersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I note that Malcolm seems to have forgotten the fact that the surge in food prices and the enormous inflation that we experienced largely began before the sitting government took office.

I received no answer on how a new government would act in all the issues for which Malcolm Momodou Jallow has stood in the rostrum and clearly declared the Left Party's will. It is, I can note, very few of the things that the Left Party wants that the Center Party also wants. On the contrary, there is a very large difference. I find it difficult to see that the Center Party would agree to the bans on illegal value transfers that Malcolm just stood and spoke about, that they would agree to a stop on free rent setting in new production, or that they would agree to other parts of the Left Party's proposal that worsen for property rights.

It is above all the view on property rights that differs enormously between Centerpartiet and Vänsterpartiet. How is one supposed to reconcile that in a government basis? The voters probably want answers to that; I am not at all sure that the voters will go and vote for a government basis that is unable to describe to the voters what they are getting. It becomes a lottery as to whose proposal actually gets through. And as always when it concerns lotteries where Socialdemokraterna are involved, it is mostly a lottery of nitpicks for the voters.

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! I want to turn to all the voters and to the Swedish people: The government, with the Sweden Democrats at the forefront, has betrayed every promise they made when they turned to you and said that you should vote for them, because they wanted to lead Sweden to something better.

Sweden has become worse in every sector in comparison with all other EU countries. Sweden has become significantly worse. You feel that today in your wallets. If you are not a millionaire, you are not better off. Then life is significantly worse. Every week children are evicted from their homes. People lack money and cannot buy food to eat themselves full.

If you say this to people outside Sweden, they won't believe it.

We have long queues in healthcare. The municipalities are on their knees. You have simply undermined everything that has been built up over more than a hundred years. And now you continue with new repressive measures every week, for example the issue of misconduct. You are undermining freedom of speech and democracy. Racism has been normalized. Everything you put forward is about immigration and immigrants. It is the only thing you have to come up with.

The people have realized that you have betrayed and lied to them. Many of those who voted for the Sverigedemokraterna are tenants. You have betrayed every single tenant who has voted for the Sverigedemokraterna!

Before the next election, you voters will know what you are going to vote for, and it is not the Sweden Democrats and the Tidö parties, because they have betrayed you.

(THIRD DEPUTY SPEAKER: I remind you that we use both first and last names when we address each other in the chamber.)

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

David Josefsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Even though Malcolm Momodou Jallow and I may not share a single policy opinion on how the problems in the housing market should be solved, we share a burning commitment to the issues. Malcolm Momodou Jallow's commitment and uncompromising stance regarding housing policy cannot be underestimated, nor can his debating spirit and will to fight. The criticism is at times just as harsh toward the former red-green government as it is toward the Tidö parties.

Johnny Cash sang in the song A B oy N amed Sue:

Well, I tell you, I’ve fought tougher men But I really can’t remember when

A free paraphrase could be that I have debated tougher opponents than Malcolm Momodou Jallow, but I actually cannot remember when. But, Madam Speaker, politics is not just about political passion and rhetorical skill. It is also about willingness to compromise, ability to cooperate, and delivery.

Ledamoten is the Civil Affairs Committee's current chairman, and it is therefore a low probability that he could become the Left Party's first housing minister if a red-green government were formed. Equally low is the probability, however, that such a government would be led by the Social Democrats and also consist of, or at least be supported by, the Center Party.

My question is therefore similar to the one that Member Mikael Eskilandersson asked and which Malcolm never answered, perhaps because he has no answers. The question is what housing policy he envisions that he, as Housing Minister, could actually push through. Which issues is he prepared to compromise away with the Social Democrats and the other red-green parties? What mandate does Malcolm Momodou Jallow see that he should seek from the Social Democrats, the Green Party, and the Centre Party if he were to be appointed Housing Minister?

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Madam Speaker! Once again, David Josefsson: It is gratifying to know that you have already given up and imagine that we will lead this country. We will do so – one can be one hundred percent sure of that. The voters have grown tired of this government and of a repressive and poor policy that affects every single person who lives in this country, unless one is a millionaire or a billionaire. You have shown your cards now. People have understood; they have woken up.

When it comes to non-compromise, there are certain things that I do not compromise on. I think, as a housing policy spokesperson, that housing is a human right, just as when we talk about healthcare and education or the school. No one would want to see a child wait one or two years to get a home. Then all of Sweden would say: No, that is not acceptable. But today, people can wait for one, two, three, or five years before they get a home. It is not acceptable. For me, this is a human right and something that I will never compromise on.

I will never compromise on human rights and racism. That is why I am tough when I speak with the Tidö parties, because I know that you are pursuing a racist policy and undermining human rights. You make it impossible for people to have a bearable housing situation. Pensioners who have worked their entire lives are homeless today. Children are being evicted from their homes. This is something I cannot compromise on.

But as I said, the industry is requesting a cross-sectoral agreement on some form of expanded and long-term support for the construction of rental apartments. I urge the government to swallow its pride and sit down with us so that we can find a way to finance the construction of housing that people can afford.

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

David Josefsson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Malcolm Momodou Jallow, for the answer!

I can begin by stating that none of the Tidö parties have a leading representative who has shared grossly anti-Semitic content on social media this week – just so we can leave that.

My question to Malcolm Momodou Jallow was which housing policy issues he is prepared to compromise on with the other red-green parties. Malcolm Momodou Jallow listed a number of issues where he does not intend to compromise with the other parties. It was also an answer – but it was not an answer.

We in the Tidö parties have absolutely not given up on the election, on the contrary. This debate shows, along with very many others, very clearly one thing. It shows that there is a Tidö cooperation where we have common problem areas and common solutions and methodically work to make Sweden richer, freer, and safer. On the other side, we have four red-green parties that are actually not in agreement on anything. In this motion report, there is not a single reservation that is common to the four parties.

But it is still, I believe, important for the voters to find out what one is prepared to compromise on. Malcolm Momodou Jallow could very well become the first Left Party housing minister. Then my question again is which issues he is prepared to compromise on. Will he be able to push through his policy to stop conversions, run state-owned construction companies and force private companies to join the municipal housing queues together with the Social Democrats, the Green Party and the Center Party? Does the Left Party at all consider that they stand close to the Center Party when it comes to, for example, the view on conversions or regulatory simplifications or on lifting the coastal protection?

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

Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, David Josefsson, for the congratulations, or what I should say, for me becoming the first Left Party housing minister in the next government! I will remember this when I arrive at Rosenbad.

This government is so out of touch with reality that it is astonishing. David Josefsson mentioned one thing that I intended to address, namely that it is not his party that has anyone who has shared anything antisemitic. I knew this would come up, and I have answers to that.

David Josefsson, who comes from Moderaterna, cannot lecture me or any Vänsterpartiet member when it comes to racism or antisemitism, because David Josefsson and Moderaterna cooperate with a party, Sverigedemokraterna, which is Nazi – which was founded on and still has a Nazi ideology. We know that Nazism killed 6 million Jews, so if there is anyone who is antisemitic, it is the Nazis. David Josefsson shakes hands with Nazis and works with Nazis every single day. Is he supposed to stand here and tell me about antisemitism? No, not a chance in the world.

Speaking of self-awareness, it is something that David Josefsson and the Moderaterna themselves must have. Go back and look at what your party leader, the Prime Minister, said about the Sverigedemokraterna just a few years ago! I have it on film. To turn your coat and cooperate with Nazis and then stand here and point at me and Vänsterpartiet and say that we are antisemitic is, for me, detached from reality. I will never accept that.

I am a proud anti-racist. Throughout my entire life I have been, and I will continue to be, just like every single Left Party member.

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: I must remind everyone that the subject of the debate is housing policy, so that everyone remembers that.)

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It is expensive to live in Sweden. You know that who struggle with the rent every month. You young people know it who dream of your own home but get stuck in long housing queues, and you older people who perhaps live on in a house that has become too large and too difficult to maintain – but there are no good alternatives to move to.

We in the Christian Democrats want to change exactly this. For us, housing policy is about security – about people, regardless of whether they are young, in the middle of life, or elderly, being able to find a home that suits their specific life situation and finances.

That is why we want to see a housing market where more people get the opportunity to own their own home. We have proposed starter loans and housing savings for young people who want to buy their first home, something that already exists in many other countries. We propose a raised mortgage ceiling and reduced amortization requirements – all to increase mobility in the housing market but also so that young people have greater opportunities to buy their first home. Owning one's home is socially, economically, and ecologically best.

More must be built, faster and more efficiently. It should not require years of bureaucracy to be able to put the shovel in the ground. We want to simplify the rules and remove unnecessary obstacles to building. We want to set frameworks for what is required in terms of investigations and what fees may contain, and set an upper limit on how long the process at the municipalities may take. For those who engage in construction, it is important to know what applies and that it is something predictable when it ends and what the costs look like.

Rental apartments must exist, with reasonable rents. There must be an opportunity to build rental apartments where there is a need for them. There must also be a strong connection to how work is done regarding safety in areas that are on the list of areas of exclusion.

Detached houses and terraced houses must be prioritized. For families with children who dream of their own garden and for elderly people who want to live in their own owned home, those options must exist. The government has done some, but municipalities must do more to let these types of housing move higher up in the priority when they plan.

We Christian Democrats want a Sweden where it is possible for more people to find a home to thrive in without having to move a hundred miles away, without ruining themselves and without getting stuck in a system that does not work. We believe that it is about freedom and security. It is about us putting the human being first.

Boverket is tasked with analyzing the development of the construction and housing market twice a year and producing forecasts for housing construction. Boverket's latest forecast was published in December 2024. In the forecast, Boverket assesses that approximately 31,000 dwellings were started during 2024, of which nearly 29,000 through new construction and 2,000 through renovation. These are roughly the same levels as 2023. For 2025, Boverket assesses that construction turns upward slightly and that the number of started dwellings will be 35,000.

Boverket's forecasts show that we have reached the bottom and are on the way up when it comes to the number of housing units being built. Now it is important to continue with the reforms on the housing market so that we can push for regulatory simplifications and more parts that become exempt from building permits, push for reviewing that cost increases are justified, and push so that municipalities plan and build based on the needs that actually exist.

The CEO of Mäklarsamfundet states as follows: The month's development shows a stable but cautious market. Despite small price movements, activity is high. Many transactions are being completed, but in an uneasy world, it is becoming increasingly important for households to make long-term and secure decisions regarding their housing.

This tells me that the government's work to reform the housing market is important to strengthen the existing trend. I can mention some of the processes the government is currently undertaking as examples of what the government is doing.

There is a mission to work for increased construction of small houses through a new owner-occupied housing movement. I had the pleasure of speaking with them today. I think they are doing a good job and hope that you will take note of it.

There is an investigation on private rental and the adjustment of presumptive rents that we believe can help get the construction of rental apartments started.

There is a mandate to act as a coordinator for the divestment of state-owned land for housing construction. The land is extremely important for us to be able to build more homes. The state should not hold onto too much land that could be used for housing construction.

The Productivity Commission shall analyze which factors affect productivity growth and identify obstacles to productivity growth in Sweden and opportunities to increase it. I believe that we sometimes forget that productivity in the housing market is quite low. We must find ways to increase it.

There is an investigation into a new regulatory framework for building permits, which we have talked about in previous debates. It is finished now.

We can also use the investigation on owner-occupied apartments and rent-to-buy.

I believe that many of these reforms will make the housing market stand stronger in the next recession. The only thing we can be sure of is that a new recession is coming. Then we must know that we stand strong.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! A short while ago, we heard a representative from a government party other than Larry Söders say that one prioritizes ordinary people in their budget and how important it is that ordinary people get a better life. We also heard that the government governs much but not everything.

As I see it, the government does not, above all, rule over its budget and its spring amendment budget. Ordinary people should, to the highest degree, be the mothers and fathers who work in health and social care and support their children on their own. Still, it is the case that the government's budget means that they lose many hundreds of kronor every month starting in the middle of the summer.

I therefore have the same question for Larry Söder and the Kristdemokraterna as I previously had for his colleague in the government: Will the government – the government that the Kristdemokraterna are in – extend the temporary supplement to the housing allowance so that single parents with low incomes have the opportunity to live on their wages, support their children, and put food on the table?

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Families with children are having a very difficult time today. We must admit that the increases that have occurred due to inflation and other factors mean that many families with children are having problems. The Christian Democrats protect the children, that children should have a secure upbringing, and that we as adults should be able to ensure that they have a secure upbringing. One should, of course, be able to have a secure home, but one should also be able to eat until full, go to school with clean clothes, and have leisure time where one can participate in sports like other children.

There is a reason why the increased housing allowance has been included in the government's policy before. The housing allowance is accurate and reaches those who are struggling. We believe that it is a very good way to use the money to meet those who have it hardest. One could, of course, increase the child allowance or something else, but that would be less accurate. The housing allowance is significantly more accurate.

We keep fighting. We think it would be good, but what the outcome will be we will see when the year-end budget is presented.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for what I perceive as a very sincere commitment to this group.

I can only say that I hope that the Christian Democrats get their line through in the budget negotiations and that a clear announcement can be made quite soon to the parents who are struggling now. I am convinced that they also dream of living in a small house, but it is very far from their reality. Right now, it is about avoiding going to the neighbor to borrow the last 300 kronor for the rent. Right now, it is about being able to eat something other than porridge for lunch and about managing when a child loses a shoe on the way home from school. I believe this happens to most teenagers at some point, but it means total failure in the finances for these families.

These families derive no joy from the rotavdrag, as they have no owned home that they can use it on. They receive extremely little from the job tax credit while simultaneously losing an enormous amount because the government chose to remove the temporary supplement.

I allow myself, at least for a short moment, to be hopeful that the Christian Democrats have listened to the massive criticism that has come against the announcement in the autumn budget. I hope that this means that all these fantastic and incredible parents receive a good announcement and do not need to have such a bad feeling in their stomachs because of their finances as they do today.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Mr. Speaker! For me, it is about children feeling safe. When do children feel safe? Well, when the parents are secure and have an economic situation that actually allows them to provide security for the children.

I am a bit sad that the cheers for the temporary housing allowance are only coming now when it is being discussed, instead of when it arrived. It was very important even when it arrived, and it has, in any case, existed in two rounds.

The problem with what has happened is that the municipalities have not always kept up all the way. This has been included in the social assistance norm in some municipalities. One must therefore make a specific decision in the municipality for this to exceed the social assistance norm. This means that those who have received social assistance have sometimes not been able to access the extra money, which instead has ended up with the municipalities. It hurts the heart, because the increase in the housing allowance actually came so that we could make things easier for families with children. I hope that this is looked at if it continues, so that it can be made to work.

The commitment to families with children is sincere. I believe that children fare best by being with their parents and by being with secure parents. Parents become secure when they have a stable economic situation. If we can help with that, it is always something.

(Applause)

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

Jennie Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Let me begin with a fact regarding the previous exchange. The temporarily increased housing allowance was introduced by the Social Democratic-led government during the pandemic. It was then extended by the current government in a couple of rounds. But now it expires in the middle of the summer and in the middle of a cost crisis when rent and food are more expensive than ever.

But it was not this that I intended to respond to. I appreciated large parts of Larry Söder's speech, but it also became an illustration of that the Tidö cooperation ultimately means that no matter how fine ambitions a single party may have, in this case Larry Söder's, there will be no delivery. For that reason, I ask the same question that I asked his colleague earlier in the debate, but I can content myself with raising what Larry Söder himself took up in his speech, namely the investigation on changed mortgage ceilings and amortization requirements. Why has it not yet been sent for consultation, and when can we expect to treat this product here in the chamber?

The next question concerns something Larry Söder also raised in his speech: the start-up loans. The proposal was finished even before the election, and during the election campaign, I believe all parties said they supported it. But it has not yet been sent to the Riksdag for a decision. Why not? Can we expect that it will be done and if so, when?

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I am a Member of Parliament for the Christian Democrats and represent my party's housing policy. This means that we may have different approaches to housing policy than the other three parties in the Tidö cooperation and fight for them. But it would be presumptuous of us Christian Democrats to believe that we would get 100 percent of our housing policy implemented, as it is a cooperation between the parties.

When it comes to the amortization requirement and the mortgage ceiling, we are quite in agreement that it is the right way to go. We believe that one could do this in a good way. The Government Offices must, however, be able to deliver different things, and priorities exist. I believe a proposal will come, but exactly when I dare not answer.

The Christian Democrats' policy is firm. We believe that the mortgage ceiling should be raised and the reinforced amortization requirement lowered, for the reasons I stated from the rostrum.

The parties' policies are constantly evolving. As a result, new things enter the Tidö parties' discussions, and then different turns may be taken. I am happy and proud of the cooperation we have had in the housing policy area. I cannot speak for the entire Tidö cooperation, but in the Committee on Civil Affairs, we have four parties with the same direction on housing policy. We may not always have the same solutions and priorities, and then it can grate a little bit. But I believe that we will reach our goals with much before the election, and the voters will therefore be able to see major changes.

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

Jennie Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Larry Söders' answer suddenly makes me understand the questions asked by the Moderaterna and Sverigedemokraterna in previous exchanges. Obviously, it is a great challenge to deliver where one claims to share the problem picture and direction, because one has different priorities. I do not mean to mock it, for I believe that is the case in all collaborations. Negotiations are about give and take. What is odd in this context is that parts of the government base are now trying to make a thing of someone else needing to negotiate and give and take when one demonstrably does not succeed particularly well with it oneself.

An interpretation of Larry Söder's answer to my question about why nothing is happening with the mortgage ceiling and amortization requirements is that it is the fault of the Moderaterna and Sverigedemokraterna. It was still uplifting to have it confirmed.

Larry Söder is welcome to answer my question regarding when the proposal on start loans will come, as I noted that he did not do so. Perhaps he did not have time; the speaking time is, after all, limited.

I also have a question about something that I believe is close to Larry Söder's heart, namely the housing allowance. Since a previous exchange of remarks dealt with the increased housing allowance, I will leave that aside. Instead, I ask about the BUMS investigation's proposal regarding monthly reporting. I believe that the last or possibly the time before last we had a budget debate here in the chamber, Larry Söder said that this would be introduced during 2024. But after checking, I can state that it has not been done. When will this proposal be implemented?

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We are four parties cooperating, and obviously not everyone has the same starting points. I believe, however, that we have the same goal, which is that we must review the major reforms within housing policy and not patch and repair, but jointly find ways forward that ensure Sweden is better equipped for the next recession.

The problem has been that governments during every recession have poured money into housing policy so that more housing should be built, but have not addressed the underlying problem, that is to say that the housing market as such is dysfunctional. We do, however, have this direction. One can always discuss in what order things should be done and at what pace, but the work in the Committee on Civil Affairs nevertheless shows that the Tidö parties have worked together.

One can always wish for more delivery. But the Tidö parties have an agreement that entails an agreement on delivery in a number of areas, and within our area, it is, for example, BID that is to be delivered, that is, cooperation for safer areas. This requires solid work and that we agree on how, when, and at what pace.

I am, however, just as concerned as my Tidö party colleagues about how the other side will reach an agreement, given that the parties there do not have the same starting points at all. It is much more difficult.

A comrade from my home municipality was part of the January agreement, and there they tried to find things that were hardest for the other parties to agree on instead of finding the lowest common denominator, which the Tidö parties do.

I believe that the other side also faces challenges if a government is to be formed.

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

Jennie Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Housing and the Tidö parties often and gladly describe that they started the mandate period with a head start in the housing policy area. In some sense, that is true. They terminated the Sweden negotiation and abolished the investment support, with the consequence that they broke entered agreements and contributed to worsening the then-beginning construction crisis. Approximately 2,000 projected and fully planned homes were discarded, which likely contributed significantly to the acute construction crisis we are now facing.

Since then, not much has happened, and the question is whether it is due to ignorance, unwillingness, or inability. The government's and the Sweden Democrats' housing policy so far can be summarized in the following way: A number of investigations have been commissioned.

Two bills were announced to come to the Riksdag for a decision during the spring, but only one has arrived so far: Relief in the building requirements for student housing. The other, regarding a new regulatory framework for building permits, we are still waiting for, and time is running out to manage the processing and decision during this half-year.

Another and perhaps more important investigation was submitted in the autumn with its report Regulation of household debts, where changes to the mortgage ceiling and the amortization requirement are proposed. For no clear reason, it has not yet been sent out for consultation, and the finished proposal on start-up loans, which all parties in the election campaign said they supported, seems to have been hidden away in a bureaucratic drawer.

The government's recent and, by all appearances, newly awakened, but nonetheless welcome, announcement in the budget for this year regarding a Norrland support for locations with large industrial establishments, which was to take effect on January 1, is still – as of today, April 9 – being prepared in the Government Offices. There are no announcements regarding exactly what it entails, who can apply for it, or what it can be applied for, which was also confirmed in the exchange of remarks a short while ago.

And in the supplementary budget, which is intended to adjust for inevitabilities and such things that could not be foreseen when the regular budget was decided just before Christmas, the government announced this week that they now, not five in twelve but five over twelve, propose an increase of the deduction for renovation to 50 percent and construction loans of 500 million kronor which shall be administered by Norrlandsfonden.

These are trimmed versions, with half the effect, of proposals that we Social Democrats have had for a long time and which the Tidö parties have voted down on repeated occasions. They are inevitabilities, absolutely, but hardly difficult to foresee.

The promise to implement the BUMS inquiry's proposal regarding monthly reporting of housing supplements during 2024, which would help, among others, students and people with insecure employment to be able to and dare to use a housing allowance that they are fundamentally entitled to, has not yet been fulfilled. And we are receiving no answers in the exchanges of remarks.

Furthermore, one chooses to abolish the increased housing allowance, which was introduced by the Social Democratic government during the pandemic to support those in the toughest situations, such as families with children and pensioners. This choice is made despite the fact that we have a cost crisis and despite the fact that food and rent are more expensive than ever. Here, I can only hope that the indications we perhaps received in the recent exchange of remarks mean that the government intends to rethink and come with proposals that ensure the housing allowance is not abolished in the middle of the summer.

Mr. Speaker! It could have been amusing and even gratifying for me as an opposition politician to behold and be able to point out the failure that the government's and the Sweden Democrats' housing policy constitutes, but that is not the case. Instead, I am deeply concerned, because it has consequences both here and now and in the long term. The reality that forms the backdrop for what we politicians are expected to handle is that we have the deepest construction crisis since the 90s.

Last year, construction of just over 28,000 homes began. That is just over half of the 52,000 homes that need to be built annually. As a clear consequence of this, nearly 5,000 companies within the construction sector have gone bankrupt during this parliamentary term. In 2024, the highest number of bankruptcies since 1993 was recorded.

Construction unemployment is now over 10 percent and is rising constantly. Just from September last year until February this year, an additional 2,500 people have been registered in the construction fund. This excludes everyone who has moved to another job, most likely outside the construction sector, and everyone who is not in the fund.

We have also seen waves of layoffs, the opposite of which we have not seen again since the 1990s crisis, within the timber house industry and the GS-facket's area. Records were broken on records in tedious layoff figures during the previous year.

Architects had the highest unemployment within the Sacoförbunden last autumn. It is a clear indication that the right-wing parties' housing policy is not working. And if one wants further evidence, one can note that not even the government's and the Sverigedemokraternas only housing policy priority, namely modest investments in increased small house construction, has yielded any visible result, probably because it was misdirected and the sum was negligible. Only 5,500 small houses were started during 2024. It is a record-low figure, resembling the bottom figures of the 90s crisis.

The result of the pursued policy means that the construction crisis and housing shortage are driving the recession and threatening jobs and growth broadly, which in turn affects GDP negatively by as much as 1 percent, according to several assessors. It may sound like a little with 1 percent, but it corresponds in rough terms to 60 billion kronor. It is 60 billion that could have been distributed and invested in school, healthcare, civil defense, community life, or pensions. The needs are endless, and the holes to fill are many. Instead, the Tidö parties are making Sweden and the Swedish people poorer.

Mr. Speaker! This is obviously not sufficient, and we Social Democrats have presented a number of proposals to achieve a different development.

We have previously submitted proposals to introduce a production support targeted at student housing and at locations with large corporate establishments.

We propose state construction credits, where the state steps in and shares the risk in a challenging and difficult economic situation.

We want to see a state-owned real estate company that can act as a countercyclical buffer and be a long-term and stable actor in segregated areas of exclusion.

We have proposed a green renovation deduction and funds for energy efficiency in multi-family housing, because it is good for jobs, for the climate, and for households' wallets.

We also want the government to appoint a housing commission with the aim of handling the acute construction crisis here and now, but also – equally importantly – to create conditions for long-term stable construction and stable rules of the game over time.

We also consider that the municipalities' responsibility for housing provision needs to be clarified in some respects. The vast majority of municipalities take their responsibility, but municipalities that do not and who thereby delegate their housing provision responsibility to the neighboring municipality – for example, by not taking their responsibility for construction, not utilizing the possibility of priority bookings or social contracts in housing placement, or through so-called social dumping – should also not be able to count on state support when it comes to other initiatives.

The municipalities' responsibility for women and children who are subjected to violence also needs to be reviewed and clarified, partly by ensuring priority for public housing in all of Sweden's municipalities, and partly by reviewing the possibilities of introducing a national housing queue for women and children subjected to violence.

Physical, psychological and sexual violence is often accompanied by economic violence. There is therefore also a need to find concessions in the income requirements and remove the requirement of being debt-free in order to be granted an apartment as a victim of violence.

Mr. Speaker! This was a summary of what the report contains and what we want and propose. We naturally stand behind all our reservations, but for the sake of time, I move for approval of only reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Helene Odenjung (L)

Mr. Speaker! A well-functioning housing market across the entire country with access to housing in varying forms of tenure is an important prerequisite for people's security and quality of life, and for a competitive economy and growth. More people should be able to realize their housing dreams, and people should be able to move to where the jobs are.

More housing needs to be built across the country. People's needs and demand should be guiding for how the housing stock develops. At the same time, the existing building stock needs to be utilized more efficiently.

It is important that more people have the opportunity to own their home. Increased home ownership means that more people feel responsibility for their home and their living environment. Increased home ownership and a mix of tenure forms are important factors for achieving a positive development in residential areas characterized by exclusion.

If you recognize these formulations, you have probably read the government's budget bill very carefully, as they are taken directly from it.

It was mentioned earlier in the debate here that it takes between eight and ten years from idea to housewarming party when one plans housing. There are many who dream of their own home. People want to move out from home. People want to move in together. People are forced to move apart. But the alternatives are not always that many, and despite the long planning required and despite dialogues with citizens and future neighbors, protests often arise just when the excavators begin to arrive. It is perhaps not so strange, as people have had time to move away from there since the dialogue was held.

It is a major problem that today's planning process for both residential construction and other construction takes too long. This is partly due to an excessive regulatory burden in the handling itself, and partly due to the many and lengthy appeals.

To shorten the process from approval to construction start, the Liberals consider, among other things, that the requirement for a commencement order in the Planning and Building Act should be removed. Long appeal processes contribute to less construction being built. There should therefore be a significant potential to review the rules for appeals without this leading to restrictions of the fundamental and self-evident right to appeal decisions that one is actually affected by.

Mr. Speaker! We also need to review and simplify the building regulations. According to the EU's statistical office Eurostat, Swedish construction prices are, by and large, the highest in all of Europe. Even in relation to comparable countries, Swedish construction prices are significantly higher. Finland has the same climate and urban structure as Sweden, but in Finland, the costs to build are 19 percent lower.

The Liberals therefore believe that we need to continue to review how we can create opportunities for cheaper production and more cost-effective processes. We want to go further than abolishing the municipal special requirements. We want it to be possible that a house type only needs to be tested against the building code once in order to then be pre-approved. In this way, construction costs can be effectively lowered and the processing time in building permit cases shortened.

A major simplification study is needed with a focus on the fact that not all groups need the same rules. For a student, certain areas can be smaller, and for families in the middle of life, the rules for the expansion of a villa may need to be simplified. The guideline for a simplification study is that building rules shall guarantee that all homes are safe, but that consumers shall have more to say in other respects.

We need a new home ownership movement. During the 20th century's home ownership movement, it was liberals who pushed for ordinary wage earners to have the opportunity to buy their own home. Much has of course changed since then, but not people's longing for their own house. Seven out of ten Swedes say that they want to own their own home.

We want half of the housing in areas that are currently vulnerable to consist of owned forms of housing. Those who have the least in their wallets are actually those who often have the most expensive form of housing: the rental apartment. Characteristic of vulnerable and particularly vulnerable areas is the lack of privately owned housing. This means that those who want to own their home often leave the area, while the housing cost in general becomes higher for those living in vulnerable areas. Through conversions and new production, the proportion that owns their home can increase. A well-balanced goal in several areas could be that the proportion of rental apartments within a ten-year period shall decrease to half of the housing stock.

Mr. Speaker! The Liberals advocate for a new form of housing. We call it housing for those in need.

The general housing policy that has been pursued since the housing social investigation in the 1940s is, in reality, not purely general. The municipalities have had to pay the bill for the specific interventions that have been required to save people from living on the streets. In recent years, we have seen how social contracts have emerged as an unspoken Swedish model for social housing.

Liberalerna propose a model for social housing that works for Sweden – need-based housing that complements rental apartments, condominiums, and owner-occupied homes and which is allocated based on the social situation in which the applicant finds themselves. Our proposal means that the municipalities shall allocate a significant proportion of the rental apartments in the municipal allocation systems through a needs assessment based on economic situation, risk of homelessness, extreme overcrowding, medical needs, and vulnerability to violence.

The system will be built up over the long term by creating a flow from newly produced and existing housing to housing for those in need without being based on state subsidies. Instead, we use the resource that the existing stock represents and establish a rental guarantee and indexed rent to counteract cost increases for the municipal companies.

We also need a change of the utility value system and a freer rent setting. The Swedish rent regulation is described by the OECD as one of the strictest among the organization's member countries. We thus distinguish ourselves from our Nordic neighboring countries. In Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland, market rents prevail in all or parts of the rental market. The Swedish rent regulation has received criticism from the EU Commission, OECD, IMF, the World Bank, and the Fiscal Policy Council. Repeated times, Sweden has received criticism highlighting the problems in the Swedish housing market and advocating, among other things, for a more flexible rent setting.

The Liberals have long worked for free rent setting in new production and for the rent setting in the existing stock to reflect consumers' demand and individual choices to a greater extent. Changes in the application of the use-value system shall be combined with rules that provide tenants with long-term predictable conditions and a protection against sudden increases in the rent for the existing housing.

Within the utility value system, location needs to have a significantly greater impact. It is reasonable that a centrally located apartment has a higher rent than a less centrally located apartment. Free rent setting for new production should be introduced, and in the existing stock, the quality and location of the apartments should have a greater impact on the rent setting. It is a central part of the development towards a freer and more well-functioning housing market.

Mr. Speaker! Several major reforms have been investigated and are ready to be dealt with in the Riksdag during the spring, so we will have every reason to discuss several of these issues again.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Earlier we heard David Josefsson from the Moderates say, at best, no to an extension of the temporary supplement to the housing allowance.

Larry Söder expressed that the Kristdemokraterna want to see an extension.

My very concrete question is whether the Liberals will ensure that the temporary supplement to the housing allowance is extended so that families with children who are already living on the margin do not have to lose an additional 500–600 kronor a month this summer.

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

Helene Odenjung (L)

Mr. Speaker! Märta Stenevi asks the question, and I would like to agree that the temporary housing allowance was and is very accurate.

It was introduced during a period of very high inflation, we must be aware of that, and the government has succeeded in pushing it back. But I want to emphasize that we both hear and see the need to have opportunities for targeted interventions. We rule nothing out in order to be able to help vulnerable households.

But I also want to point out what Larry Söder said here earlier. Many municipalities did not do it correctly but deducted it from the social assistance. Then it lost its entire function.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! It does not lose its entire function because it does not lose the function for those who do not have social assistance, to begin with. It is a bit of a strange argument. There is a very large group who work and have income from wages but who do not manage on the wages. They need this supplement to the housing allowance because prices have increased so much.

Mr. Speaker! It is also the case that although the inflation rate has fallen, prices have still not gone back. Above all, food prices have not gone back. I would actually not want to see the member go out to these families and explain to them that they no longer need their housing supplement because the inflation rate is now down to 2–3 percent. I do not think this would be well received.

On the contrary, I believe that instead it would be extremely important to have a conversation from the perspective that one actually understands exactly how difficult people have it in Sweden today, and that this also – and to a very large extent – affects people who have full-time jobs but who actually cannot manage on their wages.

I want to once again issue an appeal to the government. I can also point out that one has a fairly strong tool to negotiate with if one sits in the government. It is, after all, possible to leave a government that falls if one does not stay in it. It is a fantastic pressure tool when one, for example, wants to help families who cannot put food on the table.

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

Helene Odenjung (L)

Mr. Speaker! I assume that the government has reviewed the possibilities available and considered both one and the other. We have, of course, stated where we stand on this issue. I believe that the debate regarding which measures will benefit both families with children and others is next week.

And that leaving governments, I have understood that the Green Party is good at.

(cont. § 13)

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