Debate on the occasion of the submission of our government bill

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! We are here to debate the government's spring budget, which I have just submitted here in the Riksdag. I will return to it shortly.

Let me first say a few words about the economic environment in which the budget is presented and in which we find ourselves. During the past week, I visited Washington and met with finance ministers and central bank heads from large parts of the world. There, two themes were recurring. One was, naturally, Russia's war in and against Ukraine, both how it affects Ukrainians and how it impacts the world economy. The other, which constantly came up at every meeting, was how we can combat the very high inflation.

Mr. Speaker! The world economy is currently burdened by high inflation, rising interest rates, and great uncertainty. It is a troublesome economic situation and a tense geopolitical situation. Russia's war in Ukraine and increased tensions also between China and the Western world risk affecting world trade, inflation, and international trade negatively. All of this is important to keep in mind, for it is the global context in which Sweden, as a small economy, finds itself.

Here at home, the spring budget is now being presented in a situation where we also have record-high inflation. It hits people's finances hard, for some in a completely brutal way. The government's new forecast also confirms that Sweden is in a recession that is expected to persist well into 2025. It is an exceptional situation, and it will be difficult for a while ahead.

That we would face an economic winter was clear already last autumn when we presented the budget for this year. We accounted for this. By being restrained, we were able to balance the need to dampen inflation and at the same time prioritize important tasks.

We strengthened the resources for the judiciary and the police, made major investments in defense, and provided an addition to welfare through 12 billion kronor to municipalities and regions.

Through tough reprioritizations among the state's expenditures, we could also create room to support households in various ways. We lowered the fuel tax, increased the travel deduction, and ensured that those who are worst off receive an extended housing allowance.

The government has also presented large electricity subsidies, a good portion of which have already been paid out, to facilitate for households that have high electricity costs. I will also add that many compensations, for example guaranteed pension and student support, were increased on January 1.

We did all of this in the budget for 2023.

Mr. Speaker! In our government bill, I now present a clear plan in three parts. The first part is about fighting inflation while simultaneously supporting households, the second part is about strengthening the work line, and the third part is about eventually addressing structural reforms that will allow Swedish growth to increase much better and stronger than it has for a long time.

When it comes to fighting inflation, some may think I am repeating myself. Yes, I will do so until the day when inflation is dampened and has gone down, because there is nothing that would be so harmful for individual people, for wage earners or for the Swedish economy as inflation continues to increase. Anyone who believes otherwise is gravely mistaken. I know that there are parties in this chamber that have differing opinions, but I mean that restraint is now required.

We must take Sweden through this and dampen inflation, but we in here are not the only ones who have responsibility. The Riksbank has its share of the responsibility, and the parties have shown great responsibility during the wage movement.

The same responsibility also needs to be taken by companies, for example in the food industry, so that they do not, as they have previously, come forward with large price increases. The Government is following that development closely, and I will return to the food giants. We see that they are now starting to lower prices, but it must continue. Inflation must be dampened.

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to food prices, the government and the Sweden Democrats have jointly extended the tax reduction for agricultural diesel so that the costs of manufacturing and producing food also become lower.

Mr. Speaker! Right now, there are perhaps too many single mothers and fathers with low incomes. They turn over every krona to make the money stretch. It is incredibly tough. I know it. That is why we are now increasing but also extending the temporary housing allowance for economically vulnerable families with children. It is a targeted measure for those who have it the toughest.

As I said earlier, we have also strengthened the travel deduction and lowered the fuel tax. This is important for everyone who depends on the car to get to work or drop off their children at school, but it is also important for retirees who live in the countryside and who have no other alternative than to take the car when they go shopping.

Mr. Speaker! In these difficult economic times, I just want to say that it is fantastic to see all the forces in civil society who are currently doing everything they can to facilitate things for those who are having it the toughest. I have myself on several occasions visited Vid Din Sida here in Stockholm, which works with homeless pensioners, but there are many more. It is Stadsmissionen, it is Majblomman, and it is the Salvation Army and many more who are doing a lot right now to help the most vulnerable. In the supplementary budget, we support these organizations so that they can continue their work for people who have been affected by homelessness or social exclusion.

Mr. Speaker! That was the first part of the plan - to fight inflation.

The second part is about tackling the recession by strengthening the work line. When the economy now turns downward, those who are already unemployed today or those who now risk unemployment and who will become unemployed during these years are affected. As it looks now, unemployment will not rise that much, but it is already at an all too high level.

What we do in the budget is to ensure that adults who lack the right education can enter work faster, and we are increasing the places in vocational upper secondary adult education and at the university college. All of this is extremely important so that one can get an opportunity to get back into and onto the labor market.

The government's message is simultaneously clear: We will increase the incentives for work. We are taking the first steps toward a major benefit reform as we now investigate activity requirements. Those who receive subsistence support and have the capacity to work shall not be left in passivity but shall be fully active. This is important to come closer and not be forgotten.

But of course, the most important thing for someone who is unemployed is to get a job, to have a salary of one's own to live on, to be self-sufficient and to set the clock so that it rings in the morning, or in the evening for that part if one works at night, and to know that one has a job to go to.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, I want to give a message to all the pillars of society all over Sweden who are working: We will return with tax cuts on work. I know that you have had your real wages reduced. We lowered the tax on work last year, and we will continue to do so during the mandate period.

Mr. Speaker! The third part of the government's plan concerns the somewhat more long-term and about not losing focus on the long-term even though we are currently going to have to handle a very difficult time - to implement structural reforms that can actually get the Swedish growth moving again. That is why we are going to invest in research and development, increase the knowledge focus in schools and appoint a productivity commission that shall submit concrete proposals on how productivity in both the private and public sectors can grow. Why is it important? Well, because if we are to have a strong and, in the long run, increased prosperity, the growth in Sweden must be strengthened. We shall reduce companies' costs for administration, and we shall improve the 3:12 rules and promote entrepreneurship.

And not least, Mr. Speaker, it is required that Swedish companies are given access to clean, predictable and fossil-free electricity. It is important for the companies, but it is also very important for pressing down emissions. It is through nuclear power, wind power, solar power and hydropower - but more nuclear power - that we can transition our society with electrification and press down emissions.

Mr. Speaker! There is an area that is particularly concerning, and that is children with weapons in hand taking the lives of other children. It is a completely pitch-black development that none of us can accept. In the budget, we invest in preventing children from being drawn into crime. We increase the state grant to municipalities for foster home placements, and we direct more support to children with neuropsychiatric disabilities. It is needed. Fewer children should end up in crime. No children should end up in crime.

Mr. Speaker! Safety is our time's issue of freedom, not only for children and young people but for all of us. And that the home is still in 2023 the most dangerous place for women is completely unacceptable. And that children and young people are afraid to go home from their training or from their leisure activity is also not a development that we in the four coalition parties will accept.

We take this development seriously and make more investments, for example in the correctional services, both in this year's budget and in the supplementary budget. We also invest in Säpo. Why do we do that? Well, we see that authoritarian states, terrorists, and serious organized crime mean that Swedish internal security is also being pressured and threatened from several different sides. To protect our borders, we continue to strengthen the military defense and prepare Sweden for NATO membership so that we can defend ourselves and our freedom in the best possible way, namely together with others.

Mr. Speaker! Many municipalities and regions are also having a tough time right now. Even though the sector has made large profits in recent years, many are now being pressured by the brutally high inflation. The most important thing we can do for them, for households and for companies is to fight inflation. But in this year's budget, we also strengthened the sector with 12 billion kronor. Those are large supplements. And we will return in the budget bill with an assessment of the development next year. We see that many are struggling. But we will not and we cannot compensate for all cost increases due to inflation. But we see the sector, and we will return in the autumn.

Mr. Speaker! It will be tough for many for a time to come. But so that a brightening will soon arrive, the government is working with a clear plan where the right things are done in the right order. And I can promise that step by step, reform by reform, we shall get through this economic winter. Inflation shall be fought, and growth shall be strengthened. Sweden shall be a safe country and a country where diligence and effort pay off, where we have a welfare to rely on, where care is given in the right time and where children are equipped with the knowledge they need to manage to meet adult life. Sweden shall simply become a better country to live in.

Mr. Speaker! Finally: The government has responsibility, and the government takes responsibility for putting Sweden on the right course again.

(Applause)

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

TALMANNEN

It is not permitted to express opinions in the gallery.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden and the world are in a new economic situation. After years of good economic development, the entire economy was tested by the ravages of the pandemic. The decline was severe but short-lived, and the recovery was rapid.

Then came the war. The brutal and illegal invasion of Ukraine has redrawn the security policy map. But its economic consequences have had major consequences across the entire world and for Sweden. Now we stand on the brink of a recession. The cost-of-living crisis hits with full force against ordinary households, against healthcare and schools, against companies and jobs. The ripples in the world economy are felt in ordinary people's everyday lives. Many parents, especially single parents, report that they have difficulty putting nutritious food on the table. Children have to go to school hungry. The retirees who have built Sweden into the country we are so proud of have to stretch every single krona to afford the bills. Students have to turn down their dream education because they cannot make it work when the housing shortage and the cost-of-living crisis press from both sides.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that the economic pressure that many Swedes are now experiencing is unlike anything we have seen in decades. Inflation has eaten up several years of real wage increases. We have to go back to the 1950s to find a corresponding increase in food prices. For many, it is not about cutting back on a coffee in town or postponing a holiday trip, but it is about the fact that the money actually does not suffice to feed the whole family. It is a purely existential question that challenges our entire society. It erodes the sense of community. The trust that society can handle trials and that we are strong together is hollowed out when one sees that one's own private finances are left in the lurch while politics fails to deliver. A new economic reality requires a decisive political leadership in Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has fundamentally good conditions to weather this recession thanks to a responsible policy by previous governments. The national debt is low, public finances are very strong, the employment rate is high, and the proportion of people living on social benefits and grants has not been this low since SCB began measuring this. But it is not a law of nature. It can change quickly.

Many of us were present during the 90s crisis and during the financial crisis in 2007 and 2008. Strong public finances can be eroded quite quickly when politics fails to take control of the development. It is important that politics is responsible when times are tough. But it actually matters what one uses the economic space for. Fiscal policy has an important role to play. Elisabeth Svantesson and Oscar Sjöstedt cannot dodge this responsibility.

Mr. Speaker! Today, the government and the Sweden Democrats have presented their spring budget on the floor of the Riksdag. After the stomach-turning autumn budget with broken promises and misprioritizations, many of us expected the course to be corrected, that perhaps something would have been learned from the mistakes, and that reality would make itself felt within the government quarters. Everyone remembers the electricity support that was supposed to be in place by November 1 and paid out before Christmas. It is still characterized by almost total chaos.

It did not turn out so well with the fuel costs, where ordinary people had to settle for 14 öre despite having been promised fuel 9 kronor cheaper at the pump. And it was perhaps not entirely successful to lower the tax for high-income earners by 13 billion kronor while the school, healthcare, and elderly care do not manage the cost crisis. Everyone agreed that the situation could change and worsen.

Now we stand here. The situation has worsened, the recession has deepened, and households are on their knees. The government and the Sweden Democrats have been completely silent. We see that the light is on, but the question is whether anyone is home. Now we know why. There was no change of course.

The Minister for Finance often speaks about how we must support those who are struggling. But the fact is that this group grows with every passing day. For every additional percent that food prices rise, more parents find it difficult to put nutritious food on the table.

With this budget, it is the children who will take the hit for the crisis. It is the children who are affected when parents do not have enough wages for food and rent or to pay the tuition fee. It is the children who are affected when schools are forced to lay off teachers. The Government and Sverigedemokraterna will continue with the strategy of waiting and seeing while Swedish households experience the hardest economic pressure in several decades.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs a decisive political leadership in tough times, and when the government and the Sweden Democrats do not act to protect ordinary people, we Social Democrats have done so instead. We demanded that the whole country should receive a share of the electricity support. We demanded that the government should take the high food prices seriously and summon the food chains as well as give the authorities sharper mandates. We demanded that families with children should be informed about the temporary housing allowance.

The government has dragged its feet every time, but in the end, it has accepted several of our demands. What is worrying is that we have a government that does not seem to have any own idea or inclination toward a plan for how to meet this crisis. Therefore, we have demanded a clear strategy for how this economic situation shall be handled.

Firstly, we have demanded a plan for household finances. Swedish households need support to cope with the sharply rising prices of food, their interest costs, and their electricity bills. Fundamentally, it is about doing everything to combat inflation, but the government also needs to act to alleviate the effect of inflation and hold back the price increases.

A first step is to appoint a price commission, but the government must also design accurate and well-balanced support for households. It is not reasonable that high-income earners receive billion-kronor tax cuts or that a single electricity customer has received over 700,000 kronor in electricity support while ordinary single mothers are on their knees. That is why we proposed an increased child benefit, a special "thought discount" (tankrabatt), and greater accuracy in the electricity support. It is not the children who should bear the costs of the crisis.

Secondly, we have demanded a plan to secure the welfare. All around Sweden, everyday life continues. Childcare workers and educators meet the children at the gate every morning. Nursing assistants in elderly care provide care and give our elderly a dignified old age. Teachers toil and do their utmost so that every child can get a good start in life. These are society builders who every day toil to make our Sweden stronger and safer - so that Sweden becomes more like Sweden.

Now, however, the cuts are coming one after another like beads on a string. The number of colleagues is decreasing, and the conditions are becoming tougher. Inflation is not only eating up the space in households' wallets; it is also eating up the space for the municipalities and the regions.

In their autumn budget, the Finance Minister and Oscar Sjöstedt chose to underfund the welfare system. Now we know that it became a budget of cuts for schools, healthcare, and elderly care. It will mean fewer nurses, fewer teachers, and worse welfare. We believe that this is the wrong path to take. In tough times, the welfare system needs to be secured, and that is why we Social Democrats proposed a doubled support for the welfare system in our budget.

Now reality is knocking on the door: 17 of 21 regions have been forced to present budgets with planned deficits for 2023, and the situation is expected to worsen next year. In that situation, the government and the Sverigedemokraterna choose not to correct their mistakes. They let the nursing assistants, the teachers, and the childcare workers be the crash pads in the crisis.

Thirdly, we demand a plan for jobs and the recession. The recession and the increased costs are putting pressure on many companies. Unemployment is expected to increase. In their budget last autumn, the government and Sverigedemokraterna undermined the labor market policy through a billion-kronor cut while simultaneously heavily reducing the number of educational places. They scrapped the investment support for the construction of rental apartments. They did this when we were facing a recession at our doorstep.

Now, some of their mistakes have been realized and a small part is being put back that was cut from the education and labor market area. The government has no labor line. On the contrary, cuts are still being made on labor market training ahead of an economic upturn. People who become unemployed need to quickly enter education or a program for transition.

We also need to invest here and now so that Sweden can be built both stronger and greener after the crisis. If Swedish industry is to be able to maintain its position of strength and continue to grow, we must be at the forefront of the climate transition. The industries have already decided that they want to be at the forefront of saving the world from emissions, but above all, it means enormous business opportunities for industry: new jobs, more growth, and groundbreaking products.

The right-wing government, which leans entirely towards the climate deniers in the Sverigedemokraterna, is braking this development. They are slaughtering the climate policy, increasing emissions, and delaying the plans to expand offshore wind power, which could quickly deliver clean energy to both households and companies all over Sweden. This will cost Sweden dearly. Jobs and investments risk ending up somewhere else. We risk falling behind and becoming poorer.

Mr. Speaker! The cost-of-living crisis affects real people - mothers and fathers, children and grandmothers. Many who were doing well now see their household finances eroded in a way they could not have imagined. This anxiety eats into everyday life, and it does something to our society. It loosens our social cohesion.

We must meet this as a society. I love Sweden, but there are major societal problems to address. Those needs do not decrease during a crisis. Our defense capability must increase, and we must increase the pace of the climate transition. We must fight organized crime, and welfare must be built stronger for the sake of the children and for everyone who works in schools, healthcare, and elderly care. These are great challenges, but they are not insurmountable. We have accomplished such tasks before, but then we must build together.

This requires a political leadership that wants and has the strength to do so, and that the sense of community is the foundation. The government's and the Sweden Democrats' political agenda and their failures will not handle the cost crisis and the recession. Instead, they risk increasing the division and the gaps in Sweden.

There is another way to go. There is a political alternative that always stands on the side of ordinary people and that has the strength to take on major societal challenges while we handle the acute problems that are at the door. With the right politics, we can build Sweden stronger after the economic crisis.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Internal and external security are among the state's absolute core tasks. This applies, so to speak, always, but it applies clearly extra much in restless times like these, with war in the heart of Europe and shootings and explosions in the wake of organized crime here in Sweden.

For the Sweden Democrats, it has been important to take measures to strengthen internal and external security, that is to say defense and the justice system. Therefore, it is pleasing that the Tidö parties are now moving forward with concrete measures and additional resources to these important areas.

There will be increased appropriations to the state budget's expenditure area 6 Defence and society's crisis preparedness of 660 million kronor as well as increased procurement authorizations of a total of 16.7 billion kronor. This means that the Armed Forces will be able to place additional quite extensive orders for materiel already during the current year, which is obviously extremely important as the competition for defence materiel is high.

The investments we are making for the current year also mean that we are accounting for a Swedish NATO membership and the preparations that need to be made for it. It also enables reinforcements in both the leadership area and our combat aviation.

Mr. Speaker! The prison service as it looks today is underdimensioned. The roughly 8,000 places that exist are not sufficient. This would have been true regardless, but it becomes extra true because the police and other law enforcement agencies, as the Tidö Agreement is materialized, will receive more resources and more powers to be able to put more crooks and bandits behind bars.

Many different construction projects are currently underway across the country under the auspices of the Prison and Probation Service, and the agency will need to recruit very many new colleagues during the coming years. Therefore, we are allocating 300 million kronor to enable this continued expansion. The Swedish Security Service also receives increased funding, not least in order to be able to meet the threat from violent Islamism.

Mr. Speaker! Parallel to the upgrading of both defense and the justice system, we also need to do what we can to facilitate matters for households in this situation of high inflation and, not least, high food prices.

The temporary increase of the housing allowance should actually have expired already at the turn of the year, i.e., a couple of months ago, but we four coalition parties decided at that time that the situation did not allow for this without the measure being extended for a period of six months. To be honest, the situation is not particularly much better now. We therefore propose that this measure be extended for an additional six months, that is, for the remainder of the current year.

Not only will we extend the measure, but we will also strengthen it from 25 to 40 percent or from 1,325 kronor per month to 2,100 kronor per month. A good bit over one hundred thousand families with children will receive a boost to their finances with this measure. This is a reasonable measure insofar as it targets the households that have it the toughest, that is, families with children with low incomes. In a majority of cases, 62 percent, it concerns single mothers with small children.

But, Mr. Speaker, this type of measure does not solve inflation. Such measures can alleviate the effect of inflation, but they do not solve the underlying problem. If we are to bring down the prices of food or other goods, we need to bring down the prices at the production level as well, that is, the prices of input goods. It is about the electricity tax, the fuel tax, and the reduction obligation, because these three things drive up the prices of electricity and fuel and make practically all other goods and services more expensive.

The autumn budget negotiations have not really started yet, but one can rely on the fact that further tax cuts on fuels will be an absolute priority for me and the Sverigedemokraterna. If we get down the fuel prices through abolished reduction obligation and lowered fuel taxes, it will not only be cheaper for the individual car owner but cheaper in the entire production chain. It will result in lower costs for the farmer and for the agricultural industry, and then it can also lead to lower prices on food and groceries in the store. This is a wise economic policy in a situation with very high inflation.

When the electricity tax was introduced, it was at 1 öre per kilowatt-hour. Today it is at 49 öre, if you include the VAT. Then it is just a matter of counting backwards, Mr. Speaker. A typical villa household consumes in the magnitude of 20,000-25,000 kilowatt-hours per year. Without this electricity tax, the villa household would save in the magnitude of a thousand kronor a month. That would have made the electricity bill somewhat less dramatic for the individual household in a villa, small house, or terraced house. This also would have made it cheaper in the production sector.

We have previously lowered, or in practice completely abolished, the tax on so-called agricultural diesel. This measure also lowers the cost both in the production stage and, all things being equal, in the consumer stage, that is, when people go and shop for goods in the store.

At the same time as we lower costs in the production sector, we strengthen Sweden's competitiveness. It is obviously not long-term sustainable for Swedish farmers and Swedish food producers to have a completely different cost structure than the rest of the EU, given that the goal is for Sweden to have a high degree of self-sufficiency regarding just food. This is something that the Sverigedemokraterna, in any case, see as very desirable.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind of something. We in Sweden are rightly concerned about how we are to afford the electricity bill or manage the rent, but regardless of how concerned we are here at home, the situation is infinitely more strained just hundreds of miles from here. The Russian war crimes against Ukraine continue. The terror bombings of civilians, of hospitals, of playgrounds, and even of cemeteries continue. We in Sweden have done much in terms of direct military support to Ukraine, but we must be prepared to do much more.

(Applause)

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats and their supporting parties in the government are presenting today the economic spring bill in a situation where it hardly springs for the finances of most Swedes. This is a situation where the Swedish people should have been able to expect an active government that takes the gravity of the moment seriously, which tries to fulfill the duty to govern the realm with the inhabitants' common concerns before its eyes and which perhaps even strives to listen beyond the comfort zone constituted by its own, possessed circle of acquaintances.

But that is not how it looks. The half-year that has passed since the newly appointed government presented its meager shrug of the shoulders regarding the state budget has obviously been used for something other than formulating political answers to the real problems facing most people in our country.

What we see in Sweden now is sharply falling real wages for almost all wage earners. Prices are increasing rapidly, and they have increased most of all on that which is hardest to do anything about for households with small margins: food, electricity, and transport. In the wake of this, we see growing poverty, abandoned future plans, and economic stress that strains families and which could cast shadows far into the future.

What are the Sweden Democrats and the government doing in this situation? What triggers these crisis meetings, emergency measures, and reassessments? The short answer is: nothing. A longer way of expressing this nothing was what we heard from the Finance Minister here earlier – the lack of empathy and capacity for action was garnished with non-committal exclamations.

Mr. Speaker! When the state budget was presented in the autumn, the Left Party proposed a series of reforms, both temporary and permanent, which would have meant a great deal for how this spring unfolded for the everyday economy of ordinary people. We would have had halved public transport fares and significantly reduced fees for preschool and after-school activities. Nursing assistants, shop assistants, and industrial workers would have been spared the unjust period of unemployment benefits. Single parents could have had a supplement to the child allowance. The unemployment benefit, which is eroded when prices rise so sharply, could have provided better protection for those who have lost their jobs.

Also after the budget bill, we have presented proposals that would make life easier for people - from proposals for breakfast for children in school to proposals for a more reasonable pricing model for electricity that would ensure that Sweden's large electricity surplus, which was historically large just last year, would be felt by Swedish consumers and companies. We have submitted proposals for a better taxation of the electricity companies' excess profits and proposals for active measures to press down food prices.

From the side of the government and the Sweden Democrats, there has been a lack of own ideas but an increasing amount of noise against others. Inflation has become a kind of paradoxical shroud to hide behind. The message is therefore that the high inflation and its negative effects mean that one cannot and should not do anything to press down inflation and manage the effects of inflation. As a synopsis for some kind of absurdist pantomime, this would have been quite exciting, but as an economic-political guideline in a crisis situation, it is very poor.

It is quite hilariously funny that one from SD and the government speaks of the risk of fueling the inflation fire when it comes to things that would allow households with squeezed margins to fare better. But suddenly, the inflation fire is just a lovely little discount where one can pump out the same money in the form of tax cuts for those with the highest incomes, or when the electricity support is to be designed in a castle- and manor-friendly way. At the same time, Swedish prices on electricity, which would press down the consumer price index – and by definition also inflation – by around 1.5 percentage points, are dismissed. Also, public investments, which are urgently necessary in a number of areas and which would have little effect on the price picture, are dismissed by the government.

That is how a government coalition functions without contact with the Swedish reality - stuck in its inward-looking castle agreement. It becomes stupid, backward-looking, and detached from reality.

Mr. Speaker! We can perhaps remember just half a year ago. Ahead of the budget bill for 2023, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner pointed out that a supplement of around 20 billion was needed solely to cope with the demographic development. The government chose to spend money on other things. What was added was 8-10 billion too little.

The result was relatively easy to predict, and now we see it: there was a total deficit in the regions - that is, with those who manage healthcare - of 11 billion kronor.

By refusing to provide the necessary funds, SD and the government are therefore shifting the debt onto municipalities and regions. There is no real possibility of arranging this there, regardless of the political color of the municipal and regional government. It is the state that holds the money. It is the state - the government - that has ensured that the money is pumped away year after year through lowered and removed capital taxes, through income taxes that increasingly facilitate growing inequalities, and by installing thick and stable straws straight down into the coffers of commercial welfare profiteers. Upon this, the acute pressure from inflation is now being placed. The response from SD and the government is a shrug of the shoulders.

There is also an important regional political aspect here. In municipalities and regions with sparser populations, we already see higher tax rates without it guaranteeing better service, because the conditions are different. Over a long period, the marketization of public services has gone hand in hand with power and resources being sucked towards the center while responsibility is pushed out into the periphery. This is what the budget from SD and accompanying parties means for cohesion and justice in our country.

It means very concrete things in the core of what it means to be a modern welfare state - to be able to rely on healthcare, care, and education, not in an emergency or as a last resort when one has failed to manage something better on one's own, but in the form of the very best we can offer one another.

Then it is the professionals in the welfare sector who must be given the opportunity to perform their work. You cannot conjure this. It is not possible to streamline healthcare, school, and elderly care with consultant prose and inspirational lectures. Sufficiently many colleagues who have sufficiently good conditions to make life in the small and society in the large better are needed.

What do we have instead? Reports from Ivo about hospitals that have had to give patients pots to use as alarms in the corridors and a growing proportion who do not receive breast cancer treatment in time. This is the reality in one of the world's richest countries, where the very highest strata of high-income earners and capital accumulators live very well and undisturbed, yes, sometimes strengthened, by inflation crises and real wage falls.

What we can afford in the welfare state is a question of political priorities, of what kind of society we should have and what values should be realized in our systems. Should it be commercial customer logic or the magnificent value of being a human being and a citizen in the welfare state and being part of a collectively organized security, care, and tenderness?

These are values with a strong resonance among the Swedish people. But the politicians are now shying away from the responsibility to set everything right. Instead, they are actively working against it. That is what this economic policy entails, and it is precisely our country's great misfortune right now.

Mr. Speaker! For the failure of the household economy, electricity prices, regional disparities, the crisis in healthcare, the pressured elderly care, and the ongoing failure of the market school, the uniquely lousy climate policy, which according to the government itself leads to increased emissions, must also be blamed. It is not only irresponsible in relation to Sweden's international commitments and to future generations. It is also making Swedish business worse equipped for the future.

The SD leadership's cheering squad of trolls gains greater significance for energy and industrial policy than the need to work actively for greater electricity transmission capacity, more offshore wind power, and growing transition industries, whose products and services will face global competition.

The Swedish people will therefore have to pay dearly for the victory celebration following the palace agreement at Tidö.

What we see is what happens when government power rests with the Sweden Democrats and their contagious way of thinking regarding the media, society, and power. Then, in the encounter with reality, with the long-term problems that were ignored during the election campaign and the newer problems that are unfolding, we get, instead of political action, the bizarre charades that have been played out recently.

Does the family not have the means to put food on the table? Why not rejoice that the tax on the plastic bag the food could have been in might disappear next year?

Does the meager household budget make it impossible to go on vacation? The government calls a press conference to cast suspicion on asylum seekers.

Kick out welfare profiteers with the children's school money? Time for a move to abolish a human rights agency.

Have people started to suspect that the Sweden Democrats are completely ignoring election promises regarding pensions? Let us instead note that someone may have read a fairy tale in clothes Björn Söder dislikes.

Are nurses and doctors on their knees when the government refuses to chip in money? Yet another press conference about a referendum that no one really understands the point of. Is it as it seems, solely to sustain individual SD profiles' fantasies about dawn raids? Or is the Finance Minister perhaps going to find healthcare staff who have gone and hidden themselves? It is very unclear.

But it is clear that most in Sweden stand as losers when the Moderates' long-standing class contempt merges with the Sweden Democrats' authoritarian and xenophobic affect.

The Swedish economy needs something other than this pathetic spring budget. The Swedish people deserve better than this blue-brown coalition.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Let me, like many others, remind that while we struggle with our arguments and our rhetoric for the Swedish economy, others struggle for all of our existence in Europe as free and democratic nations, and they must always be honored in such contexts.

Mr. Speaker! Back to the debate. It is a government's task to govern. It is not a government's task to passively watch as the Swedish economy slides downhill like few other economies in Europe or even the Western world. For many families, the household budget has been depleted by a tenth and the food budget by a fifth. Interest rates have doubled, Sweden's GDP is expected to shrink this year and unemployment is expected to rise to over 8 percent - I will return to that. To Matmissionens stores, it is not only new unemployed people who come as customers but also working parents of small children who can no longer afford it.

Mr. Speaker! This is such a moment in time when a government is tested on whether it is up to the task. But instead, the Finance Minister now comes with a new budget that is even more hollow than the previous one. In his budget, the Finance Minister has presented hundreds of initiatives, large and small, important and real, for example, increased resources for the defense and the correctional services. But the 50 million for Arbetsförmedlingen, approximately 140 kronor per unemployed person, are somewhat incomprehensible. Are they to save jobs in some way? Furthermore, it is minus on the total.

But to meet the economic crisis, the municipalities' crisis, and the climate crisis, they have nothing. It is as the Americans used to say, "Where's the beef?" when they talk about a sandwich without any filling. No, there probably won't be any beef in this budget with this emergency policy. Not a single initiative is about strengthening Swedish small businesses' ability to create jobs, not a single one is about protecting those who live in the Swedish countryside, and not a single one is about saving the climate policy, which experts warn is about to crash.

Svenskt Näringsliv and LO, the neoliberals at Timbro and the socialists at Katalys, the economists and the families with children at the kitchen table, they all wonder: What is the government doing? Please, get Sweden in order - as Ulf Kristersson said on every election poster.

Instead, one has, like a deer, stopped in the middle of the road, paralyzed by the spotlight of inflation. One has no ideas and no results, just a Prime Minister post and a Finance Minister post for the Moderaterna and a long, impossible shopping list from SD, which everyone has to pay for with tax increases on the most important thing of all, jobs.

How can a government that calls itself bourgeois and that some ministers want to call liberal raise the a-kassan to increase the tax on labor and thereby place SD's economic theories before the work line? It is neither bourgeois nor liberal, but simply sad and catastrophic.

Centerpartiet will always safeguard the engine of the Swedish economy and safeguard small and growing companies - those who build Sweden's prosperity. We will safeguard the families all over Sweden who are most vulnerable and for whom the small school and the smaller health center matter the most. We will safeguard competition against oligopolies and monopolies, private as well as state-owned. We would, especially in these expensive times and if we had had the opportunity, reduce monopoly fees and regulations because it benefits the country.

The government does not need to listen to the Center Party, but listen to the experts! They say that there is much that can be done to help instead of hindering the Riksbank in the fight against inflation. Start with the very simplest: Lower the costs. If you have a cost crisis, lower the costs. Lower taxes where this lowers inflation, not raises it. Lower the tax on labor. Lower the fees. Prioritize.

Reduced tax on hiring, i.e., reduced employer contributions, is pointed out by experts as a measure that can strengthen jobs and at the same time lower inflation. Konjunkturinstitutet says in an analysis from December 4 that the only fiscal instrument that has a negative effect on inflation is a reduction of the employer contribution.

The reason why inflation becomes lower when employer contributions are reduced is that a reduction in employer contributions reduces companies' costs, which means they have the opportunity to lower prices.

The government laughs in its bench, but lost jobs for young people are nothing to laugh at.

What is the government doing in this situation? Well, on April 1, they shock-increased the employer contributions for young people by 6 billion kronor, and this just as young people are once again facing a very tough labor market and just as companies need to lower their costs.

Sweden's municipalities and regions, which already have significantly reduced resources, receive a 1.2 billion SEK tax shock with the Tidö policy because they employ young people – something the government cynically tries to hide with 150 million SEK in grants for summer jobs.

Retail, which is to begin lowering the price of a regular grocery bag, gets 1 billion in increased costs, corresponding to thousands of lost jobs for young people in the store or in the warehouse.

Let me stop for a second at unemployment. We often think that all other countries, unlike Sweden, have high inflation and high unemployment.

But what does it look like? Germany has 2.9 percent unemployment, the Netherlands 3.5, Denmark 5.2, Belgium 5.8, France 7 and Sweden 7.6 on the way towards just over 8.

Sweden is one of the very few countries that simultaneously has high inflation and high unemployment - because we have costs that are too high. Sweden is also the only country with many vacancies - 150,000 in the business sector and 50,000 in public administration - while at the same time we have 335,000 unemployed.

Adult education needs to be expanded to fill the competence gap. In that regard, the government - thanks for that - has brought back some of the resources that you cut for vocational adult education. You still have not returned resources to the trade schools for young people, which you closed down. But you cannot take billions away from vocational education and put back millions.

It is not only that jobs are threatened and food costs are rising, but the children's qualified teachers in schools are also threatened. In a situation where there is an acute shortage of teachers, many schools in many municipalities are already being forced to lay off their qualified teachers. Many small village schools in rural municipalities may be forced to close.

I have spoken with many those responsible for elderly care in rural municipalities. They are forced to cut back on home care to what they call an absolute minimum. At the same time, KD speaks warmly about the elderly. 24 billion will be missing for municipalities and regions as early as next year, SKR warns. What is the point of not giving them notice now, if you in the government still intend to give the money later? Should they start dismissing people just because you cannot agree on what you should say and are sitting and talking about the plastic bag tax instead? We in the Center Party already wanted to give 4 billion in general state grants to municipalities and regions this autumn. You could start by giving back the 1.2 billion you took in increased tax.

There are families in the countryside who are dependent on the car and who believed in the government's promise of 10 kronor per liter. It is still, if the Finance Minister was not aware of it, a question of a price of a bit over 20 kronor per liter of diesel. There will be no major reductions with you. Why did you give that money to those who commute in the big city with their SUV and fill up to the max with slightly cheaper gasoline instead of taking the commuter train, bus, or tram? Why did you not give that money to the families who are dependent on the car in the countryside?

I can take Gotland as an example – there, the entire island has been hit by a cost shock due to the fuel for the ferries, but the government is unable to allocate the millions of the billions you have given to car owners in the large cities that are needed to secure Gotland's lifeline to the mainland.

I will return in my next speech to the climate policy – Sweden's pride, as it once was. But during the last half year, the Finance Minister and others in the government have allowed SD to stagger forward like a kind of power-drunk elephant in a china shop and smash climate effort after climate effort.

Mr. Speaker! It is an economic crisis. It is an energy crisis. There is a risk of a welfare crisis in the municipalities. You, the Tidögänget, are the government. Do something! Do not come with yet another contentless, ineffective, hollow budget like this one!

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Today, the government presented a spring proposal showing how we are leading Sweden out of a difficult economic situation step by step. We have also received a spring amendment budget where the prioritization of support to the most vulnerable shines most clearly.

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats take responsibility. We are pushing for targeted support to be given to the most vulnerable households while we work out measures that make Sweden strong again and successively restore people's real wages, as well as paving the way for a Sweden with accessible, better, equal welfare.

In these tough economic times, many Swedes are being pressured. At the same time, the political room for maneuver is heavily limited by the high inflation. It is therefore important that one prioritizes correctly and supports in different ways those who have the hardest time making ends meet and managing their lives.

Mr. Speaker! It is pleasing that the largest investment made in the autumn budget is an extension and increase of the temporary supplementary grant for families with children receiving housing allowance, for it is not least families with children and single parents who are hit hard by the economic situation. The Christian Democrats are a family party and have therefore prioritized that this substantial increase now takes place. The financial support is increased from 1,325 kronor to 2,100 kronor per month. Six out of ten are single women.

Mr. Speaker! Another measure included in the autumn budget that I want to point out is the investment in strengthening foster care. It is important because the shortage of places in foster homes and therapeutic families must be addressed. These are places that should be able to provide children and young people with a safe environment with the right to both support and help.

Support is often a prerequisite for being able to break destructive patterns and norms. Today, instead, many who are in Sis-homes risk getting stuck there, even though they would benefit from being placed in a family where they can be met with love in the home and regain trust in adults. Simply more family homes are needed that welcome children who, for various reasons, cannot or should not live with their parents. With the Christian Democrats in government, the family will be the building block and the best interests of the child will be put first.

In the serious situation we find ourselves in now, I still think it can be nice to say here in the chamber that it is nice that there is a majority for these submitted proposals. A quick glance at how the comments have looked this morning and how they have looked over the last few weeks shows, to say the least, a lack of cohesion when it comes to the opposition's opportunities to unite around anything. Vänsterpartiet wants to raise the costs for companies. Centerpartiet says at the same time that they want to lower the employer contributions. Miljöpartiet wants to shut down nuclear power. Socialdemokraterna have very recently reconsidered and now see that nuclear power is an important part of the energy mix.

Mr. Speaker! Against this, there is a cooperation that is now step by step realizing the ambitious agenda that shall put Sweden in order, strengthen the economy, increase safety, reduce crime, and cut the healthcare queues. The costs of driving a car shall be reduced. Agriculture and forestry shall be facilitated. It shall become possible for more to live and reside in what we call the heartland.

Sweden is fundamentally a good country to live in. The extensive problems that Sweden has to deal with will take time to solve. But we see the people behind the gloomy figures, and our priority to solve this is about political courage, prioritization, determination, and not least a great deal of will.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! When the country's school lunches are now being assembled, the demand for food will have been greater than usual, just as every Monday during the last half-year. Children who do not know if there will be food at home will eat more in school on Mondays and Fridays to ensure there is enough for everyone during the weekend. At the same time, the queues for civil society's food distribution are long, and parents are forced to say no to children who want to be in the same football team as their friends.

In one of the world's richest countries, many families are forced to turn over every krona at the end of each month. Some say that it must be so, for the sake of inflation. We have heard it from the government's representatives here today, but I and Miljöpartiet say that Sweden cannot afford to have it this way.

When the price of bread, meat, milk, cheese, and eggs skyrockets, it digs deep holes in households' wallets. Sharply rising electricity prices on top of that make everyday life almost impossible to manage for many Swedes. Putin's reckless invasion of Ukraine has put the entire world in a uniquely difficult economic situation. This is a reality that can only be met with real distribution policy. But this government does not deliver that.

During the election campaign, many right-wing parties threw themselves into demands for a subsidy ban. Last week, the Minister for Employment declared that it is fat to be unemployed. It shows with all desirable clarity how far from reality this government is. In the spring budget bill, the government base is trying to plug some of the holes with smaller measures, such as a temporary increase of the housing allowance for families with children. That is good policy in itself, but it is far from enough.

As long as people living in economic vulnerability are constantly questioned, equality will always be too far away. As is usual in the right's world of ideas, tougher measures and cuts only affect poor people. The wealthy will, of course, get to keep their subsidies. The travel deduction is just one example: those funds go for the most part to subsidizing car travel for executives in Danderyd. For the single mother living on social assistance or for the one who has long been excluded by a broken system, a harsh reality remains.

It is not only the households that are struggling. In recent days, the alarms from municipalities and regions have been heard ever more clearly. The government's passivity is leading to a steel bath for healthcare, schools, and elderly care. Just as for households, municipalities and regions will now see rapidly rising prices on almost everything, which leads to an unreasonable situation. And just as it is regarding the households' situation, the government stands helpless.

In the autumn when the government presented its budget for 2023, it was obvious that they were not doing enough to maintain the common welfare. On the other hand, the tax for high-income earners was lowered because it is adjusted for inflation. Thus, high-income earners are compensated for inflation while schools are forced to make cuts because they are not compensated for increased costs. We have known from before that it costs society very much when the welfare is put on a starvation diet.

One could clearly have done it in a different way. Miljöpartiet proposed that the tax should not be lowered for high-income earners and that the grant to municipalities and regions should be increased. I believe that many Swedes agree that it is more important to have more teachers in schools, a better working environment, and more people working in healthcare and elderly care than that high-income earners get a tax cut.

Mr. Speaker! An economic crisis can put much in society to the test, but it does not halt the climate crisis. It does not matter where in the world we look – the climate catastrophe is now becoming clear everywhere: here at home with both floods and droughts, in large parts of Europe with heatwaves that claim lives, and in East Africa with a brutal drought that for years has relentlessly affected both people and animals. We see island nations that are actually fighting for their survival and wars and conflicts spreading in the wake of the drought.

We see now that climate change is not a future issue - climate change is happening here and now, and it is the world's poor who pay the highest price. But in that respect, the government presents nothing.

During 2023, the government has also taken more than 1 billion too much from the aid for asylum costs in Sweden. These are funds that the Finance Minister should have announced in this spring budget would be returned to the aid. Instead, we now get further cuts as loans to Ukraine are to be financed via the aid budget. I want to emphasize that we fully stand behind the support for Ukraine, but we do not think that the support should be paid for by the world's most vulnerable.

In an uncertain world, Sweden's role in the world should instead be strengthened. But the government is now doing the opposite. It chooses to meet global challenges with reduced aid and turns a blind eye to the consequences that come with it. What is gladly reduced to anonymous projects in the government's talking points is, after all, schooling for girls and support for grassroots movements for freedom and democracy.

Mr. Speaker! A government that claims to take responsibility for Sweden must demonstrate that it is capable of taking responsibility for the climate. Ulf Kristersson's government has shown the exact opposite since day one, and now even this budget bill can be added to the list of wasted opportunities.

When it comes to the climate, it is not what the spring budget contains that is the biggest problem, but what it does not contain. For there are plenty of proposals for measures that would be possible for the government to present here and now. A powerful investment in climate adaptation could be one of them, a rapid and efficient expansion of wind power another. A government that claims to take responsibility for Sweden must also show that it takes responsibility for a just transition that can take place here and now.

But the time we live in teaches us time and again that we cannot take anything for granted. It has taught us that the difference between war and peace can change from one day to the next and that the one who had an orderly life one day can, the next day, be left without both work and housing.

The time we live in also teaches us that things do not just happen – it is politics that makes them happen. It has often been said that politics is about will, and I believe that is something we need to return to in this chamber time and again. The government is not a victim of circumstances beyond its control, because it is the one that holds the power. It chooses how it wants to make the investments that can still be made. And it has chosen tax cuts over welfare.

I and Miljöpartiet know that it is possible to build a better world, a world where no children are forced to grow up in poverty, where no adults are relegated to a life of economic insecurity and where our prosperity does not come at the expense of the world's poor - where the government does not put spokes in the wheels of the transition but instead leads it, with a renewable future, as a leading green industrial nation where there are both jobs, welfare and faith in the future. I hope that we will see more proposals leading in that direction and not the opposite in the future.

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

Carl B Hamilton (L)

Mr. Speaker! Perhaps to some's surprise, I shall begin by highlighting a legendary LO economist named Gösta Rehn. He had a few fixed points and hobby horses in his economic-political existence. The most important message that Rehn constantly returned to was: Hate inflation!

Inflation raises all prices, not just some selected ones, not just on food, gasoline or energy, but all. Keeping inflation down, Gösta Rehn meant, was more important for people with small incomes and with a weak position on the labor market. To hate inflation, Rehn also saw as more important for the worker than for the capital owner, to use a slightly old-fashioned and easily understandable language.

I think it is very important to note that this view actually also reflects itself in the basic tone of the government's budget proposal - hate inflation.

The parties in the Swedish labor market have recently concluded an important two-year wage agreement at 7.4 percent, which for a very large part of the labor market is certainly an important contribution – let's hope at least – to the fight against inflation. I have no closer knowledge of how the negotiators put it all together and succeeded in establishing this norming mark for a large part of the labor market. But I know that the agreement on the mark and the contract is probably very good and important for the Swedish economy, for the companies, and also for the wage earners, at least in the long run.

Now all of us others, those of us who do not belong to the parties, from the gallery, can see how it goes with the anchoring of the agreement among members and companies. It is no bold guess that it would be good for the anchoring process, and thus for Sweden, if shareholders and companies think very carefully in this strained macroeconomic situation and choose restraint when it comes to dividend payments and similar benefits.

When politicians propose fiscal reforms, it is also extremely important in the current situation in Sweden that these reforms, public expenditures, and measures are designed so that they are accurate. The Finance Minister was also touching upon that. They must, among other things, reach those who have the greatest need. Single women with children have the greatest need for assistance; that has been raised here several times. Regarding environmental problems, the reforms must hit the cause of carbon emissions as closely as possible.

Let me specifically mention the energy issue, a Swedish sore point for decades. I see in the media that Opec is currently, and again, threatening reduced supply. This would naturally drive up prices further for oil and gasoline. That would not be good for consumers. Possibly it is good for carbon emissions, but it is hardly particularly credible as a measure today. There are many potential oil and gas producers in the world who can step in and increase their supply. Foreign trade and the possibility of import and export are therefore better than nationalistic talk about Swedish prices.

To meet the challenges at home and in the long term, the Minister and my party colleague Romina Pourmokhtari have presented several proposals to increase the fossil-free supply and promote stability in the supply of Swedish energy, for example by removing bans and blinkers against nuclear power and speeding up permit processes for new wind power. But also a reliable foreign trade with different types of energy is an obvious public interest.

Mr. Speaker! I would not be a Liberal if I did not, in conclusion, also say something brief about the school, our heart issue. Everyone, regardless of whether they are ahead in school or need extra support, should be given a schooling that develops and challenges. It is crucial for the individual but also for the development of our entire country. When politicians want to mold all students into the same shape and invest in screens instead of real schoolbooks, the Liberals instead invest in a knowledge school for everyone, regardless of whether one attends a top class or needs extra resources due to a diagnosis.

More money for SFI and language support for Ukrainians is a matter of course with this basic view.

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Just as I said in my first contribution, we find ourselves in an exceptional economic situation. We have high inflation. At the same time, we have a recession. It is a situation that Sweden has not found itself in for many, many decades.

At the same time, we – the Riksdag and the government, but also the entire Swedish people – have not had a completely smooth path ahead of us in recent years, Mr. Speaker. Together, we have for several years now been faced with quite difficult problems to manage: a migration crisis, a pandemic, a war in our vicinity, record-high energy prices, high inflation, great uncertainty in the financial system, and now also a recession.

This is not an easy journey, Mr. Speaker, but just as we have overcome great challenges before, we will also manage this time. There are many of us here in the chamber who, for example, had an excellent cooperation during the pandemic. That is a strength, and I also look forward to taking part in the opposition's budget proposals when they arrive in a couple of weeks.

At the same time, I am becoming concerned when I listen to several of the opposition parties. They are not taking inflation seriously. Therefore, I am nevertheless relieved that the government's budget will pass in the Riksdag because it has a majority behind it. We have a clear plan for how we are to combat inflation and simultaneously support households and how we are to re-establish the work principle but also get Swedish growth moving again and set Sweden on the right course.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! We have discussed how Sweden is on the brink of a recession. We have discussed the high Swedish inflation. We have spoken about how Swedish households are under severe pressure. We have spoken about how the queues for the aid organizations' food distributions are growing. I think it is obvious to everyone during the discussion and debate, except possibly the Finance Minister, that the policy that has been pursued until now has not really helped or has been insufficient.

In several issues that truly had significance for price developments, the government has been quite late or last and worst in a European perspective. This concerns the support for families with children, food prices and the electricity support, and one declined crisis talks regarding household finances.

Will the government present a plan to manage the economic situation so that it is not the children and the single parents who pay the price for the crisis?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Mikael Damberg for the question.

It is exactly what the government is doing. With the children before our eyes, we presented a budget this autumn that is restrained so that prices do not continue to rise and so that their parents do not have to struggle.

Sweden is not the only country in the world that has inflation right now. Together with many other finance ministers, we discussed the very question last week: How are we to press down inflation? Yes, by holding back but still supporting the most vulnerable.

That is why we are also currently both increasing and extending the important housing allowance for families with children. That is why we have a large electricity subsidy that is completely unique in Swedish history. That is why we ensure that the school is strengthened. We strengthen the children with preventative work so that they do not end up in crime.

What we do, we do so that children in Sweden will have a better future. If inflation continues to increase, the children will be hit even harder.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now we have heard the Minister for Finance say several times that there is a plan to meet the economic situation. The fact is that if the spring budget is an example of that plan, we have big problems, because reality speaks a different language.

Very many people will feel disappointed, not least those who work in schools all over Sweden who now see warnings and cuts in school activities. We see hardworking single mothers who cannot afford to buy nutritious food for their children. We see that construction comes to a complete standstill. We see that vocational training for electricians is being shut down. Ordinary people find it difficult to pay the electricity bill when the electricity support has failed.

If this was the plan, is the Minister for Finance then satisfied with the result? Did it turn out as you had intended?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! None of us have said that this is an easy journey. It is not in Sweden, and it is not anywhere else. But it matters to do things at the right time and in the right order, and that is exactly what we are doing.

I am becoming a bit concerned about Mikael Damberg's attitude towards inflation. When I listened to his ten minutes ago, I heard about a multitude of different things that are now to be piled on and which will drive up expenditures and unfunded, will increase inflation. But if it is to be financed, there is only one answer, which is important for everyone listening to know: Taxes will be raised for ordinary wage earners.

You included this in your budget last autumn. I assume it will also be included in your next budget. There is no other way to finance this, if one takes responsibility for inflation.

I can promise Mikael Damberg and everyone here in the chamber that we take responsibility. We take responsibility for the children and for the families. We will fight inflation every day and support households so that they can manage this, but we will also re-establish the work principle and focus on strengthened growth.

(Applause)

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! One of the main components of the high inflation is, as is well known, electricity prices. For Sweden's part, we have a strange situation. Our surplus production and exports, which we have had for twelve consecutive years, hit a record last year. Still, electricity prices were extremely high for Swedish households and companies.

This is an area where the government completely refuses to act for a more reasonable pricing model, where demand and prices on the continent do not determine the prices for Swedish consumers. In fact, Elisabeth Svantesson and the government actively oppose steps in that direction even as the presiding country in the EU, despite a very bombastic rhetoric on energy issues and despite calculations pointing out that Sweden prices, as we have called it, would lower the inflation rate by around one and a half percentage points.

Can the Minister for Finance explain why she insists on talking a lot about inflation but just as stubbornly refuses to push forward political proposals that would press it down?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I want to start by giving Vänsterpartiet and Ali Esbati a compliment for having your own clear voice in this debate. It is you who are setting the tone in the opposition right now. You have a very clear economic policy.

However, I do not share Ali Esbat's view. Having Sweden prices on a European market would not work. I also do not believe that having a price ceiling à la Venezuela would work. It is a left-wing policy that does not work in reality.

What can and should work is that we have a good energy system here in Sweden. That is why we, our four parties, will invest in more nuclear power to push down prices but also, of course, already now provide support for more electricity production in various ways, both for private individuals and for others. That is what can influence and press prices, not that we shut ourselves in, have our own market for electricity or, for that part, have a price cap à la Venezuela.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is regrettable that the Minister for Finance seems to be more concerned about the economic development in Venezuela than about that in Sweden and for that which she is responsible for. But the point is that we are not proposing a model where Sweden is not part of the European electricity market, but a model where we have an electricity price area intended for export. We would export approximately the same amount at the same price. The difference is that the prices set in Europe would not apply to Swedish consumers and companies.

I hear again that the Minister for Finance seems to be very actively disinterested in a development that could lead to lower prices in Sweden and where the overproduction we have in Sweden would benefit Swedish consumers and Swedish actors. It is quite expected in light of what we have seen recently, but it is very regrettable.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is completely obvious that we do not share the view on whether Sweden would function. I can only promise and confirm that I care enormously much about the price developments in Sweden. That is also why we, the government together with the Sweden Democrats, are now doing everything we can to combat inflation in different ways. In that case, it matters what budgets one presents. It matters whether one here in the Riksdag presents budgets that, over the next three years, would increase expenditures by approximately 200 billion, which would drive up inflation. That is a proposal that Ali Esbati has.

We are restrained, and we focus on what is important: supporting households. Much of the prices that the Swedish electricity customers have had are being paid back through the enormously large electricity support. In total, it is 55 billion that will come during this year. Some has already been paid out. It will make a difference. That is how we work to facilitate for households in a difficult time.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! The question I have for the Minister for Finance I believe is quite simple. Now that we have a crisis consisting of a cost crisis, an economic crisis, and soon also an unemployment crisis, why does the Minister for Finance prioritize lowering the tax on plastic bags over lowering the tax on employing young people?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the question. We have not decided on any proposal to lower the tax on plastic bags. It is a proposal that is to be referred. This is not really comparable.

I listened to Martin Ådahl for ten minutes. Sometimes hopeful tones come from the Center Party. That was not the case today, I can say. I know that the Center Party and Martin Ådahl are often wise at heart. Therefore, I was surprised when I heard the long list of everything that the Center Party thinks the government should do now. Lowering employer contributions for young people can absolutely be conceivable in the future. But then remember that it costs 10 billion per year and add everything else that Martin Ådahl just mentioned that we should do. If one takes inflation seriously and listens to the National Institute of Economic Research, which Martin Ådahl also refers to, one must be able to show how one takes responsibility for the financing in a time when inflation must be dampened.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for Finance for reminding us that the government has increased the tax on employing young and vulnerable people for small businesses by 10 billion kronor. It is good to hear this directly from the government itself.

But I don't think I really got an answer to the question of why you prioritize lowering the tax on plastic bags - whatever one thinks about that matter - over lowering the tax on employing young people in an economic crisis. Konjunkturinstitutet has been clear that this is a measure that lowers inflation and does not raise it. We are very careful that all the things we propose are things that, by lowering costs, lower inflation and do not raise it.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am surprised once again. I know that Martin Ådahl is an economist and has worked at the Riksbank. He should have a slightly better grasp of inflation and what affects it in different directions. If one makes large, broad, and unfunded tax cuts or otherwise drives up expenditures, it will raise inflation. That is the worst thing we can do for every small business owner in Sweden. What is important right now is to dampen inflation.

Small business owners are sometimes deceived into believing that the Center Party is the party that always stands up for them. I can tell all small business owners listening to this that the reduction obligation will be increased if Martin Ådahl is allowed to decide. That is an important part. Nor is it the case that Martin Ådahl, during the years he supported a Social Democratic government, pushed through fantastic security reforms for companies, which for many years have been affected by burglaries and other things. It was eight lost years with a Social Democratic government. Now we are reversing the development. The first thing we do is to fight inflation.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The government's attitude towards the climate crisis seems quite simple. It simply does not care. It does not care about those who want to be able to take the train. It does not care about the jobs in the green transition. It also does not care about the species that are dying out or about the alarm reports from its own climate policy council or the IPCC. If we don't do it, we don't do it – so said the Finance Minister in the autumn regarding reaching the climate goals. Unlike much other thing that this government says, this unfortunately also seems to correspond with what is being done, that is, as little as possible.

I know that Elisabeth Svantesson is not a climate denier. But it is also time for her government to stop acting like such. The climate crisis is becoming increasingly acute, but the government is delivering no policy. I want to ask the Minister for Finance: What do you actually intend to do about the climate crisis and to ensure that we reach our emission targets on time?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Janine Alm Ericson for her question.

It is interesting with the Green Party members - if one does not have exactly the environmental and climate policy that Miljöpartiet has, one does nothing. Despite the fact that we presented a very restrained budget in the autumn, we presented the second highest climate and environmental budget ever. Our climate and environmental budget was larger than the one presented when Miljöpartiet held the climate and environmental minister post. But Janine Alm Ericson says that we do nothing.

It may be because we partially do other things than what Janine Alm Ericson wants. We invest in nuclear power and carbon capture. We invest in saving the ocean. We do very many things with our climate budget.

An important matter is charging infrastructure. It doesn't matter how many electric cars are sold if no one can charge their car from north to south.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Finance, for an answer that provides no new information!

It is not only Miljöpartiet that says the government is taking insufficient measures for the climate crisis. It is also the Climate Policy Council's criticism, so let's have that clear for ourselves. More of the same, as we have heard before, shows that it will not go fast enough to reach the goals.

When it comes to saving the sea, we have just today learned that the government does not intend to move forward with a proposition on better conditions in the seas. How we are then to achieve that instead of a completely dead Baltic Sea, I look forward to hearing more about.

You write in our government bill that you will follow the developments in municipalities and regions. There we already see major warnings and cuts. You also say that you want to lower the tax.

We know how it usually goes for right-wing politicians when they choose between tax cuts and welfare. I want to ask: How will it be this time? Will the Finance Minister manage to prioritize welfare over large tax cuts?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for a wise question. We allocated a third of our reform space in the autumn to precisely municipalities and regions because we see that the needs are great. They remain very great. That is the answer to that question.

In the three budgets that I have seen through here in the Riksdag, two in opposition and one now in the majority, we have always strengthened welfare. Janine Alm Ericson and everyone else can feel reassured about that.

There is still something about the Green Party's climate and environmental policy. They would like to keep the plastic bag tax, but they want to abolish all nuclear power. I think a bit the opposite. I believe that nuclear power is more important. We will see how it goes with the plastic bag tax.

If we are to seriously reduce emissions, we need more nuclear power, more wind power, more solar power, and maintain our hydropower. That is how we can transition and press down the emissions. Together with the Swedish business community, which is incredibly successful, and I am proud of those who lead the way – we shall press down the emissions. We will also return with a climate action report during the year.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Today's debate on the government's and the Sweden Democrats' proposal for the spring budget clearly shows that it became a lost budget. No measure in the spring budget reflects the seriousness we find ourselves in. The Tidö parties seem to be more preoccupied with debating the plastic bag tax than discussing the reality that characterizes society outside this chamber.

Food prices have increased faster in Sweden than in our neighboring countries. More families with children are finding it increasingly difficult to cover the bills, the electricity support is still significantly delayed, and for many pensioners, the situation is becoming increasingly acute.

The labor market policy, the education policy, and the climate policy are being slaughtered in the middle of entering a recession, while the major social problems are being pushed into the future.

Politics, and particularly economic policy, has a key role to play. When Elisabeth Svantesson and Oscar Sjöstedt sit on the sidelines and let the cost crisis hit ordinary families with children, healthcare, and schools with full force, it is ordinary people who pay the price.

There was an alternative. I saw it in the budget last time. You chose 13 billion kronor in tax cuts for those with the highest incomes instead of improving the situation for families with children and securing the funding for the welfare system. That means it is now 17 out of 21 healthcare regions that are planning deficits. That is the reality.

We are now half a term into the mandate period. It is time for those who have been given the trust to govern our country to shoulder that responsibility and do the heavy lifting. Deliver a plan to protect household finances! Secure the welfare and safeguard jobs during the recession! Do not let the children pay the price for the crisis!

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! After the Social Democrats introduced a so-called capacity tax that only affected nuclear power, that tax has been increased on a number of occasions.

When the then Finance Minister Magdalena Andersson raised the tax for the last time, Svenska kraftnät warned of the consequences of this tax and that a closure of Ringhals 1 and 2 would significantly increase the risk of power shortages in southern Sweden.

The Konjunkturinstitutet stated that the tax will have effects on production decisions, investment willingness, future electricity prices and, in the long run, the industry's competitiveness. Vattenfall itself states that if it had not been for this nuclear power tax, they would never have made a decision on a premature decommissioning of Ringhals 1 and 2.

On 22 January 2020, the Social Democrats voted through a premature decommissioning of just Ringhals. My question to Mikael Damberg is: Does Mikael Damberg regret it?

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! There are so many inaccuracies in the statement that it is difficult to answer.

The effects tax has been adjusted several times by both Social Democratic and Moderate-led governments. But we have also reached an energy agreement in broad consensus, not least with the Moderates, where the energy tax was also lowered.

Vattenfall has on several occasions been very clear that it has made its decisions for commercial reasons. It was too expensive to renovate the old nuclear power plants. The price level did not justify those investments. We made no decisions to shut down nuclear power in Sweden.

The Social Democrats are an industrial party. We believe in Swedish industry. Energy policy is the very basis for a successful industrial and export nation. We will always seek long-term solutions to secure Swedish energy policy for both households and companies. We have shown this historically, and we will show it in the future.

Unfortunately, the government does not seem to understand that cross-bloc agreements are needed to provide long-term perspective and investment willingness to Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I read somewhat earlier from the referral responses. Svenska kraftnät warned of the consequences. Konjunkturinstitutet warned of the consequences. Vattenfall's production manager stated that without this tax, Ringhals 1 and 2 could have continued to be operational. You have voted through a shutdown in this chamber.

What is it that is incorrect? It is not incorrect. I am describing exactly what has happened during the previous one to two parliamentary terms. You have, with surgical precision, made nuclear power unprofitable with the help of targeted taxes. It is not incorrect.

It was the Social Democrats who introduced it, and it is the Social Democrats who have raised it, in any case more times. Today we know that we would have had 30-45 percent lower electricity prices in southern and central Sweden if Ringhals 1 and 2 were still running. It is not me who made that up.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I might quote the Moderaterna, who after the energy agreement stated: With the energy agreement that we signed, nuclear power was saved in Sweden. It was not I who said it. It was the Moderaterna who said it.

The problem for the government and Oscar Sjöstedt is that the Sweden Democrats seem to be the greatest threat to the industry's energy supply in the coming years. They are driving up increased costs for offshore wind power. They say that they will oppose the expansion of wind power in Sweden in the coming years. They say that they would preferably like to tear down the wind power that already exists.

That is done precisely in a situation where the industry faces billion-dollar investments in our country that can reduce our emissions, increase the number of jobs and growth in our country, and secure jobs for the future. In that situation, the government chooses to lean on the Sverigedemokraterna. It is dangerous for Swedish energy policy in the long term.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is no secret, or at least it should not be, that there are certain differences of opinion within the government base, even though we agree on the main direction.

It is quite natural. No party has a majority on its own. Therefore, several parties must work together, cooperate, negotiate, and thus form a majority. That is exactly what the Tidö parties have done. Step by step, we are working through the content of the agreement that we have concluded. The question I ask myself after today's debate is: What is the alternative? There are four opposition parties who think that absolutely everything is bad. But what is their alternative?

You agree to raise the tax on fuels so that it becomes more expensive for ordinary people to fuel their cars. You agree that Sweden shall continue with the experiment with the reduction obligation. It would drive up diesel prices to such levels that the entire farming industry would be wiped out. Agriculture would become unprofitable, which would lead to us having even higher food prices - or perhaps more likely to the entire Swedish agriculture being wiped out so that we are forced to import food instead of producing it ourselves.

Just as we touched upon in the exchange, you were at least as recently in the previous parliamentary term in agreement, and voted through, a premature decommissioning of nuclear power. This led to dramatically increased electricity prices.

So this is what you agree on. What else do you agree on? You do not agree on the direction of the migration policy and on crime fighting. You do not agree on the need to upgrade the Armed Forces or on the tax policy. So what else do you agree on?

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! We find ourselves in a very tough economic situation. Oscar Sjöstedt and his party now have total influence over the government's economic policy. Every comma in the budget that the Finance Minister has presented has been approved by Oscar Sjöstedt. It also means that everything that is not included in the budget - that which has been omitted - has also been omitted with Oscar Sjöstedt's blessing.

No party has put forward such extravagant election promises as the Sweden Democrats did in the last election. Everything was supposed to become cheaper, and it was supposed to happen quickly. Now we stand here with the results in hand. Two budgets have been negotiated by Oscar Sjöstedt, and for ordinary people, it is probably a rather big disappointment. Single mothers, who often work in the welfare sector, do not always have the means to put nutritious food on the table. In practice, you are imposing a massive cutback budget on welfare, while the cost crisis hits with full force.

My question is: When will you realize how severely this tough economic situation hits Swedish families with children and Swedish welfare?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Last autumn, we four coalition parties decided to extend the temporary increase of the housing allowance. Now, in connection with the spring budget that has been tabled in the Riksdag, we are making a decision to extend it once more and also to strengthen the housing allowance.

Since Mikael Damberg is addressing the issue of single mothers, I can say that it happens to be the case that 62 percent of those who receive housing allowance happen to be just single mothers.

Mikael Damberg speaks about cuts in welfare. We allocated 12 billion kronor to municipalities and regions in the autumn. And we absolutely must not close that door, rather it is very possible that more money will be needed next autumn. We really must not rule that out. As things stand now, I believe that quite a lot points to that being the case. But 12 billion kronor cannot be called a cut. They are enormous supplements.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats seem to be incredibly satisfied with the housing allowance, which nine out of ten families with children do not see a penny of. You are incredibly satisfied with the cost crisis that is hitting the welfare system. You speak of there being no savings there, when it is 17 out of 21 healthcare regions that are forced to operate on deficit budgets. There are cuts in schools and in elderly care, and you are doing nothing.

You could have increased the child allowance, as we had proposed. You could have supported electricity customers with an electricity bill emergency. You could have acted to keep down the price increases on food. You could have backed down from cuts in welfare all around Sweden.

But you chose something else. After following the debate, one can conclude that you apparently prioritize abolishing the plastic bag tax, which the Liberals were involved in introducing. Honestly: Aren't there more important issues to allocate money to – teachers, nursing assistants, and healthcare assistants – and to actually ensure that single mothers can afford to put food on the table?

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I believe we can keep several balls in the air at the same time. One can remove unnecessary, counterproductive and strange elements in the tax system while simultaneously doing other things.

When it comes to the housing allowance, it seems to Mikael Damberg all of a sudden that it is no longer important now that we are doing it – because it is we who are doing it. When we had a debate in SVT, it was very important, because then I did not have this news to give. Then we were not completely finished with the product. But now we are finished; now we have finished negotiating and placed the product on the Riksdag's table. And then it sounds like that which was very important a month ago is not important at all anymore.

It is 111,000 households with children - 111,000 families with children - who will receive an improved economic standard. But now it is suddenly not important at all.

At the same time, the child allowance, as is well known, is not income-based and is not means-tested. This means that one can earn exactly as much money as one wants and be as wealthy as one wants, and one still receives child allowance. Why would that be such an effective measure? The housing allowance, on the other hand, is income-based.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! Before the election and during the election campaign, the Sweden Democrats often spoke about strengthening the sickness insurance and abolishing parts of the waiting period deduction. Now after the election, it sounds, as we have had to get used to, completely different. When SD themselves are part of the government, it has become obvious that this was just talk.

During the previous parliamentary term, the Left Party (Vänsterpartiet) saw several improvements to the sickness insurance passed. Now, SD and the right-wing government have given directives to an inquiry where these improvements are being questioned. It is now to be, as it stands, reviewed the unjustifiably long sick leaves, which in plain language means more terminations of sick leave.

Furthermore, SD has allowed the Moderates to bury the broad investigation that the Left Party pushed through to abolish the karen deduction in an internal project at the Ministry of Social Affairs.

My question to Oscar Sjöstedt is: Why do the Sweden Democrats contribute to deteriorations in the health insurance?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! That is absolutely not in line with my view of what has happened at all. On the contrary, bad proposals have disappeared.

The Sweden Democrats' starting point on the issue is approximately the same as it has been for a longer period. We do not, therefore, advocate that the karen deduction should be removed entirely, but there should be certain special rules for certain specific types of occupational groups. This applies, for example, to people who work in preschools or healthcare. These are the Sweden Democrats' starting points, and they are the starting points that we take with us into the negotiations that we have with the three government parties.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! I note that Oscar Sjöstedt argues that what is happening in reality is not in line with his picture of what is happening in reality. It is a broader problem, but my question concerned the health insurance and several aspects of it.

It is therefore partly about taking a step back regarding the abolition of the karens deduction, and partly about now changing the directives in the investigation that had been commissioned to instead have the aim of making it even more difficult for people who are on sick leave to receive support.

We know that there is, and has been, a major problem with execution insurance. It has partially improved, but there has been a very great need to change the regulatory framework. The Sweden Democrats have previously sounded as if they have understood this and support it. But now, they have, in fact, backed down.

It is this my question is about: two concrete areas where it is clear that the Sweden Democrats are failing to deliver on what they themselves have said. It would be nice to get Oscar Sjöstedt's comments on that.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! As I said, things have happened in a positive direction when it comes to the issue of the quarantine deduction. Even Ali Esbat's party had a role to play in that issue, and definitely also the Sweden Democrats. But our line is quite clear and distinct: We shall have different rules for different professional groups, as I mentioned.

In other respects, we can observe that both the sickness benefit and the sickness allowance have been indexed upwards in parity with inflation. But apparently, it is okay for you when certain things are indexed upwards automatically in the state budget but not when other things do. We can, however, observe that both sickness benefit and sickness allowance have been indexed upwards in parity with inflation.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I have two questions for Oscar Sjöstedt. Oscar Sjöstedt and others in the debate have said – and it is a view I truly share – that it is still very tough for Sweden's farmers. They are now also starting to see falling settlement prices, that is to say, falling prices for their production, again.

Why is the six-month extension of the reduction of the diesel tax, which the Centerpartiet was involved in negotiating, the only proposal for the Swedish countryside and Swedish farmers that you are presenting in this budget?

The second question is: Does Oscar Sjöstedt agree that if money is to be spent on lowering fuel prices for people who are dependent on the car, it is more important to do so for people in rural areas who are truly dependent on the car than to use more than half of the resources spent on this to make it cheaper to fill up for people who commute back and forth to large cities where there are trams, buses, and commuter trains – perhaps not commuter trains in Stockholm right now, but in any case collective transport?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! If I understood correctly, Martin Ådahl is misinformed, but now I shall make him correctly informed. The tax on agricultural diesel is, in our agreement, reduced during the entire current budget period. It applies for the current year, it applies for the entire of 2024, and it also applies for the entire of 2025. Then a new budget period begins. We perhaps should not call that thing with six months fake news; it may simply be that Martin Ådahl is just misinformed. But now Martin Ådahl has been duly correctly informed.

The fuel tax we are talking about is primarily a point tax. It is levied and set at a level. It cannot be determined by where you live, where your car lives, or where you choose to refuel. That type of proposal is not realistic. If you want to lower the fuel tax, you lower the fuel tax; then it doesn't matter if you live in upper Jukkasjärvi, on Gotland, or in central Stockholm.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is sometimes difficult to keep up with the twists and turns in these debates, especially when it concerns the Sweden Democrats who have very different messages before and after the election, not least to people in the countryside.

The attentive noted, however, that we did not hear any other proposal in the budget to help Sweden's farmers in the cost crisis or to specifically help people in rural areas other than that the proposal submitted by C was extended. That is well and good; we would naturally have done that as well and thereby further strengthened competitiveness.

But the attentive and engaged also noted that people in the countryside who are dependent on the car and could have received 3 kronor in reduced fuel price with a regular discount check - I do not know if Oscar Sjöstedt has been to Swedish gas stations, but it is quite common there - do not get it. Instead, they want to distribute more than half of the money to those who are not dependent on the car and commute back and forth to the big cities. That is the message the Sverigedemokraterna have to give.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We have had this up before as well. I noted at that time that the Center Party's proposal with different types of prices depending on where in the country one is located is unrealistic. It is not feasible. Therefore, I do not intend to take it seriously either. Had it been a realistic, feasible proposal, I would have taken it seriously. I do not intend to do so now, because it is unrealistic.

Do you want to lower the tax, or do you not want to lower the tax? That is the question at hand. The Sweden Democrats are clear: We want to lower the tax.

Tax on agricultural diesel at the EU's absolute minimum level during the entire budget period is quite good news for farmers and food producers. Furthermore, this will kick in - or rather, stop kicking in, I should say - with the reduction obligation until the next turn of the year. It will make it cheaper for the farmers. It will make it cheaper for the food producers. It will make it cheaper for the farming industry - my god how much cheaper it will make it for the farming industry!

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Aside from portraying Miljöpartiet and our policy as the root of all evil and blaming most of it on immigration, the Sverigedemokraterna spent the election campaign promising everything to everyone. Petrol and diesel were to become 10 kronor cheaper. There would be no problem at all in solving the electricity bill. Welfare would be strengthened throughout the country.

Now the Sweden Democrats could deliver on their election promises. However, the concern for welfare and households seems to have blown away, and instead of major investments in school, healthcare, and elderly care, we only see a move to lower the tax on plastic bags. How can it be a priority in this situation to negotiate to lower the tax and the price of plastic bags instead of strengthening healthcare and welfare?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I think that measures in the small were also needed. Both large and small were needed.

When it comes to welfare, we made historically large additions in the autumn – 12 billion kronor to the municipal sector, to municipalities and regions, which trickle straight down into preschool, school, upper secondary school, elderly care and healthcare. They were enormous additions.

Do we need to do more in the autumn? It is a bit too early to say. We do not know exactly. New forecasts are coming all the time. But in the forecasts that are currently available, quite a lot indicates that we will need to do more in the form of supplements to the municipal sector. At least I believe so. It can of course change, but that is what I believe with the information we have in front of us now.

I hardly have time to go into the fuel taxes. We have started lowering them. We are going to lower them more.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Oscar Sjöstedt!

It is the case that one has a certain amount of bargaining capital when entering a budget negotiation with several parties. We also see now that the supplements the government presented in the autumn were large but not sufficient. Municipalities and regions need more money - actually already this year, but they have really asked to be informed about how it looks next year. There, you come with nothing.

But now I have another question. I saw at one point that the Sweden Democrats, just like the Green Party, said that they do not think the unfair tax gap for those born in 1957 should remain. Then I wonder: Why did Oscar Sjöstedt not negotiate away that injustice? It would have made a very big difference in many pensioners' finances.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Let us start from the beginning. Which parties voted yes to the proposal that caused this tax gap that Janine Alm Ericson points out and which is an injustice? Which parties voted yes, and which parties voted no? The Green Party voted yes. The Sweden Democrats voted no. Let us start at that end. Who is guilty? Who is the villain in the drama? It is not the Sweden Democrats. We voted no.

This is a question concerning the 57s, who are affected by an injustice. We can state that it is an injustice. I have no information from the government base's side here today, but we will have information in the autumn.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! Politics is about acting and prioritizing. Household costs are skyrocketing now. Families with children are particularly vulnerable. Vänsterpartiet has presented a long series of proposals for the most disadvantaged households, but investments that reach more broadly are also needed.

We know that the summer holidays will be extra demanding for many families with children when school and preschool are closed. The costs for food and activities increase. Therefore, we believe that an extra crisis child benefit is needed. The proposal that we have presented is cost-calculated for half a year, from July 1 to the turn of the year.

Vänsterpartiet is therefore proposing an increased child allowance of 400 SEK per month as a crisis measure. Since the last increase of the child allowance, its real value has already decreased by approximately 200 SEK. What we propose implies a compensation for this plus an extra increase because prices have now increased even more.

We want to finance this by pausing the rutbidrag. It is not a reasonable prioritization, especially not in these times of crisis. It is more important that the state helps families with children than pays for cleaning and shoe-shining for the well-off, primarily in the Stockholm area.

In addition to the general increase, we propose a single-parent supplement of 500 kronor per month per child and an increased multi-child supplement for the third and fourth child.

These are quick, easily administered measures that would become a proper reinforcement of the economy, primarily for households where the risk of severe economic problems that affect the children's future is greatest.

We see nothing resembling this in what the government has come up with. And we have heard that there are no such plans. It is therefore appropriate to mention that, for example, the two reinforcements I mentioned, in addition to the general increase of the child allowance, would cost around 2 billion. This can be compared to the government giving 10 or 13 billion in tax cuts to those with the highest incomes and that the Finance Minister's party wanted to also give well-off companies 100 billion a month during the pandemic.

Politics is, as has been said, about acting and about prioritizing.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I intend to devote this second speech to climate policy, which has been Sweden's pride and sold our industrial products in the world and shall become the future for our mines, our steel, our cars and trucks, our battery factories and our bioplastic. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are now dependent on Sweden remaining an international role model for saving the climate.

The Minister for Finance has, unfortunately, allowed SD to stumble forward there like an elephant in a china shop. The Liberals have had to follow behind with a worried expression and have had to promise to pay for this climate-crushing party at some point in the future.

The sale of electric cars has plummeted since the government removed the climate bonus. And as the only country in Europe, Sweden is doing nothing while the biogas industry is being crushed by a tax shock. The experts at the Climate Policy Council reject the government. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency rejects the government. Sweden's leading industrial leaders deplore the government's climate and energy policy.

Households were promised lower electricity bills in November. If you live in northern Sweden, you are still waiting. And if you are a small business owner, you are still waiting, unless you accidentally received the money from Försäkringskassan.

What is being done in the spring budget to prepare Sweden for the next Russian winter and help residents in rural areas afford heat pumps, insulation, and solar cells? What is being done to accelerate the expansion of wind power, which according to alarm reports has stalled? Nothing is being done. We are kindly asked to wait twelve years for Ebba Busch to have built her first nuclear power plant.

You who lurk for SD and let them crush Sweden's climate policy and who remain silent when they want to dismantle wind turbines and stop bioenergy should know that you will face the Center Party every day in this chamber. You liberals who insist that you weigh so heavily and so green in this government should know that we will scrutinize your words. We will stand up for Sweden as a climate role model, and we will stand up for the Swedish green industry.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! This difficult economic situation with record-high inflation and a recession at the same time hits many hard. It is not only the families with children who are having a tough time. It affects broader groups than that.

Some of them turn today to Stadsmissionen, the Salvation Army and similar organizations in civil society. These are organizations that have made and are making great efforts for those who have it toughest.

One advantage is that we all now, hopefully, see the strength and the commitment that exists in the voluntarily working sectors of civil society. It is a strength and a commitment that cannot be replaced by political decisions. But politics can support that work. And that is done in the government's spring budget. It is a decisive difference, I think, compared to the previous government which abolished the gift tax deduction, which over 700,000 Swedes used.

I have a background as a priest and for many years, twelve of the years before I ended up here in the Riksdag, I have dedicated myself to working within that very sector. The lion's share of my time I have spent, together with others, trying to make a real difference. Sometimes I have described it as that the work I did there and then in the parish was on a micro level. To enter politics and end up in the Swedish Riksdag is about doing the same thing on a macro level.

I am very proud that the government is now stepping forward and supporting these organizations with 50 million kronor. They are making a real difference because they have it so difficult that they have to seek out these activities.

(Applause)

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Christian Democrats are a party that is happy to speak about healthcare. Against that background, I want to trouble Hans Eklind with approximately the same question as I asked when the autumn budget was to be adopted.

It was obvious then that there would be problems out in the regions with the de facto cut budget that the Christian Democrats were involved in submitting. We now see growing problems and growing deficits for healthcare.

Hans Eklind spoke about a national plan that would solve many of the problems rather than through added resources. Now we have a deficit of 11 billion in the regions, nurses leaving their jobs due to unsustainable working conditions, a shortage of doctors within psychiatry, criticism from Ivo, and patients lying in the corridors. I would like to know how Hans Eklind himself thinks it is going with the priorities that the Kristdemokraterna have contributed to.

I would also like to hear something from Hans Eklind regarding the issue of those born in 1957. Are there any plans to rectify that injustice? It is not addressed in this budget.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! There were many questions to answer in one minute. Thank you for the questions, Ali Esbati! Each and every one of them is relevant.

We Christian Democrats went to the election on the promise that care shall become both better and more equal. The government has allocated a number of funds, but above all in the budget bill. We had the debate about that a number of months ago. There are now funds set aside to increase the number of care beds and shorten the care queues.

But it is also about national healthcare coordination, which I believe is incredibly important. We hope that the government will, within the next few weeks, be finished appointing that investigation, to show how the first steps towards a nationalization of healthcare can be taken. It is incredibly central that the zip code should never, ever determine what type of care one receives when one needs help from healthcare.

The proposals have already been planted. It is underway. I hope that it will make a real difference. That is what we did last time we were in charge of the Ministry of Social Affairs.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! I understand that answer as Hans Eklind still believing that some kind of investigation, which is to be started later, will compensate for the enormous lack of resources that exists in healthcare. We are seeing the effects of it now. Furthermore, it has deepened during this half-year, and there is nothing to indicate that it will decrease in scope and severity.

I believe it is a message that is difficult and unpleasant to receive for those who toil in healthcare every day. It is nurses and doctors who try to make the whole thing work and do a fantastic job.

Since we have high competence in Swedish healthcare, the results are very good when one receives care. But we know that the staff is insufficient. It has gone so far that many nurses, who have completed their education, quit because they cannot endure the working conditions. But to them, Hans Eklind has very little to say here.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! On the contrary, we have very much to say. We have not only spoken about it; we have also ensured to deliver a first budget proposal where we strengthen. We are investing 12 billion kronor to both municipalities and regions. A third of the reform space is used precisely to strengthen municipalities and regions.

However, we must not stop there and believe that the solution to the healthcare system's problems is spelled money. We have acknowledged that resources are needed. But I also believe that we must fundamentally reorganize how healthcare is structured. If one benchmarks against other countries, it is not seen that Sweden invests unusually little in healthcare and therefore has long care queues. It is, for example, not why Swedish doctors, despite the fact that we have plenty of doctors, meet their patients to a lesser extent than doctors do in other comparable countries.

For that reason we have said: Let us see to removing the healthcare queues, but we shall not refrain from doing the most necessary thing, namely reorganizing something that was introduced in the 1860s. It is time to redo it.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The budget that the government and the Sweden Democrats have now presented is yet another lost chance for the climate. The Tidö parties leave Sweden completely without protection in several different crises.

Without investments from the government, schools and healthcare around Sweden will be forced to cut back. The weakest students will not manage in school, and the queues to healthcare will become ever longer.

Without a reorganization of the environmental policy, emissions and species extinction will increase. It is the fish in the Baltic Sea that are dying. It is extinct species that we will never get back, and it is increased risks and costs that will hit us all hard.

What do we see from the government? No proposals for emission reductions. No proposals for adaptations to a more extreme climate with more flooding.

The Minister for Finance said in our exchange that they are making investments. It is true that there were investments in the autumn budget. But we see, just like the Climate Policy Council, that it is too little and too late.

If the government really wants to give Sweden and all of us who live here a brighter future, they should invest more now in emission reductions and adaptations. It benefits jobs. It benefits households and welfare. In short, it benefits the people.

This budget is a foregone conclusion, and it is sad to see. The politicians who claim to take responsibility for Sweden must be able to deliver better than this.

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

Carl B Hamilton (L)

Mr. Speaker! In the midst of the problems with inflation and unemployment, we know that many employers are searching high and low for labor. The jobs are there and the opportunities are there as long as one has the right competence. It is competence that it depends on. Precisely for that reason, the government's and the Liberals' major investment in vocational training is important – for example, for more nursing assistants, battery technicians, and childcare workers. The work line implies a simultaneous education line.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I understand that many now want to go home and stop debating this empty budget. But we must still ask a question to Carl B Hamilton, even though I know he is not responsible for this. His representative said: Lower employer contributions, especially for small businesses, is an important election promise, the most important. It is prioritized in the budget negotiations and crucial for small businesses and for jobs. Especially small businesses must get a tax cut.

Now my question is: How could the enormously heavy liberal input in the government end with that instead one raised the employer contributions by 6 billion for the small businesses, which were so important for the jobs and, I guess, for the crisis management? And as the Finance Minister carefully explained, it will be 10 billion going forward?

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

Carl B Hamilton (L)

Mr. Speaker! To be honest: I was actually not present in all these different turns in the past. I was away from the Riksdag for eight years and from politics even a bit longer, so I am not suitable and suggest that the questioner rather turn to an economic historian.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I am happy to engage in economic history, but this was precisely before the election. It perhaps does not quite qualify as economic history but rather as an election promise, a very strong and intense election promise from the member's immediate predecessor.

This time I actually do not intend to yield. That small businesses have the opportunity to hire young people in a situation where unemployment is supposed to rise according to your own forecasts is indeed crucial for us to be able to turn the economy around. This is actually one of the few measures pointed out by the member's colleagues – professors and economic experts. This is pointed out as an area where we can actually do something powerful without increasing inflation.

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

Carl B Hamilton (L)

Mr. Speaker! It is about turning this situation around - with the economic crisis, with high inflation and high unemployment among those who do not have high skills. I know that it is a matter close to the heart for Martin Ådahl, but this is still an exaggeration of the importance of changing the employer contribution for young people. I think the member goes far too far in his description of how the electoral situation for politicians and governments is. It is completely unreasonable, I would say, to place the entire emphasis of his party on these groups and this tax. There is much else to tackle, Martin Ådahl, if you really want to make a difference.

(Applause)

The debate on the occasion of the submission of our government bill is hereby concluded.

The bill was tabled.

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