Debate on the occasion of the submission of our government bill

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! He was shot, murdered, in front of his own twelve-year-old son. They were on their way to the swimming hall, but they never arrived. Father Mikael's life ended right then and there. For loved ones, life continues, but it will never be the same again. Wednesday's tragic, brutal event is one of many stories about what Sweden has become. But, Madam Speaker, Sweden shall not be like this.

We in the four coalition parties have decided to reverse the very negative development that we have seen in Sweden for many years now. Sweden has become more dangerous. Gang wars where innocent people die, infiltration, terror threats - the list can be long.

When we now present the spring budget in the economic spring bill, it is a fact that Sweden has become more dangerous, and we see that this is one of two major tasks we have to handle in the years ahead.

Sweden has also, Madam Speaker, become poorer. After years of skyrocketing inflation, high unemployment, low growth and reduced purchasing power, Sweden and the Swedes have become poorer – and more dangerous.

It is against this background that this spring bill and the economic-political situation, in both the short and long term, should be seen. Reversing this development requires priorities, investments and responsibility. For me, Madam Speaker, the task ahead is very clear: to build Sweden richer and safer again.

Madam Speaker! Combating inflation has so far been the most important and most prioritized part of the economic policy, for simple reasons. Inflation makes Sweden and the Swedes poorer. A combination of restrained fiscal policy, tightening monetary policy, and a responsible wage movement is now yielding results.

In the work to combat inflation, we have supported Swedish households, and we continue to do so. In this budget, we are now extending the enhanced housing allowance to the most vulnerable families with children. It is a precise measure for those who have the smallest margins.

For all the hard-working people who have lost purchasing power and seen their real wages decrease, we already lowered the tax on work in this year's budget. Additionally, the tax was lowered for everyone who has worked, the country's pensioners. And with a significantly lowered reduction obligation and a fuel tax cut, we have begun the task of strengthening households' purchasing power again in the years ahead.

Madam Speaker! We are now seeing a brightening in the economy; inflation is going down. The assessment is that the inflation target will be reached this year. Even though there are great uncertainties, our assessment is that there is now room to begin switching over to more normal cyclical policy and investing in Sweden.

We are investing in healthcare. To improve the economic conditions and avoid large layoffs of healthcare workers, we are injecting an additional 6 billion kronor into healthcare. This is in addition to the 6 billion that we injected in the autumn budget. In total, healthcare is therefore strengthened by 12 billion this year. These are historical levels and are important and necessary for both patients and employees.

We are investing in education. Sweden's schools also receive supplements this year to ensure that children and students receive the education and support they are entitled to. This is also in addition to the large supplements that the schools received in this year's budget.

The recession means, Madam Speaker, that unemployment is expected to increase by around 40,000 people this year. Here too, we are investing in education for adults. Unemployment shall, of course, be met with support from Arbetsförmedlingen but also with educational measures so that people can be better equipped for the labor market that lies ahead of them. Therefore, the government and the Sverigedemokraterna are in agreement to invest in more places within yrkesvux so that the skills supply can be improved and more people can transition and enter employment faster.

Madam Speaker! At the same time, the structural problems in the Swedish labor market need to be addressed. This is, among other things, about increasing the incentives to move from benefits to work and self-sufficiency. If the economy is to grow, which we want, more people must be able to support themselves. Therefore, we continue the work of re-establishing the work principle through lowered taxes in this year's budget and a benefits reform. More people also need to move to where the jobs are.

Madam Speaker! In order for Sweden to become wealthier, economic policy must now be steered towards that which yields increased productivity and thus higher growth. I see this as completely central now that the fight against inflation is nearly over. I will briefly mention a few things that will become important in the years ahead.

The first thing I have already mentioned: investments in education. We have begun that journey, from preschool all the way to excellent research. It is hard-working people and their skills that have been crucial for Sweden's growth journey backwards in time, and so it will be also moving forward.

The second is investments in infrastructure so that those who need to take the train to work will arrive on time and those who need to use the Swedish roads will know that they are of high quality.

The third thing needed for increased growth is access to more clean electricity so that emissions decrease while companies can grow. In that way, we can strengthen Swedish competitiveness. The coalition parties are working on a roadmap for more nuclear power, and it is truly an important part of all this.

The fourth [point] needed to achieve more growth is about facilitating entrepreneurship and investments. Red tape shall be reduced, and the government has established a simplification council.

This leads me to the final, more general point – it is about the tax system. Taxes should encourage enterprise, entrepreneurship, hard work and higher education.

Madam Speaker! Making the economy grow significantly more than it has during the last decade will be absolutely crucial for us to meet future demographic challenges, but also for us to be able to make all the investments in safety and security that are required, and furthermore, to meet investments in the climate transition.

This leads me to the second major task that the government has. We need investments in precisely safety and security. Already now, defense is the second largest expenditure area in the budget. This year, military defense has 27 billion more than last year and 44 billion more than 2022.

This year we reach the NATO goal that defense expenditures shall be 2 percent of GDP. It is not all NATO countries that do so, but we will continue to arm the defense and make Sweden safer and more secure. In the spring budget, we will ensure that the defense appropriation is supplemented with additional funds to also strengthen the endurance in our defense here and now.

But then we have this with making Sweden safer, which is still one of the absolutely most important tasks a government, regardless of color, has. Sweden shall be a country where one feels safe: without safety, no freedom.

To make Sweden safer, Madam Speaker, we have engaged the highest gear from day one. At the turn of the year, the penalty for serious weapons offenses was doubled. It has become easier to use security guards. We have obtained sharper internal immigration control. We have introduced stay bans, so that a person can be prohibited from staying in a public place. We have introduced a stricter obligation to repay for those convicted. We are concentrating forces against the criminal economy both with a new payment authority and with better information exchange between authorities and large resource additions to the relevant authorities that choke the criminal economy. We are conducting a population count, and we have strengthened rights for children and adults in protected housing. The list can be made long.

Madam Speaker! With this budget, we further strengthen the criminal justice system with 1.4 billion to accelerate the construction of more prisons and prison places. The State Board of Institutions, which works with the care of children, receives more resources because they perform a very important task and are in a tough situation. The courts also receive increased resources to be able to conduct their operations at the pace that the government's and the Sverigedemokraternas ambition increase in the field of justice actually requires. This is important, but we are far from finished.

Not least, our parties continue to fight the criminal economy. It is that which feeds the gangs, and it is the money that is the cause of much of the evil we see. Therefore, several authorities, for example Skatteverket, Tullverket, and Kronofogden, are now receiving new resources to be able to carry out even more controls and work even harder to choke off the taps to the gangs. Step by step and budget by budget, we are building a safer Sweden.

Finally, Madam Speaker: Even though we see signs of recovery in the economy, it is still a troublesome economic situation. Many people are struggling with the consequences of the high inflation. That inflation is going down does not mean that the price level is falling.

The Government and the Sweden Democrats are working methodically according to a plan to take Sweden through this economic situation. Step by step, we now see that the fight against inflation is soon over, and we are taking further steps to strengthen the work line and strengthen growth. With an eye on inflation, we also see how we will be able to meet the consequences of precisely that high inflation in the future. Furthermore, we are able to direct our gaze decades into the future and not just see here and now. It is about actually seeing what it is that makes Sweden both richer and safer in a year, in five years, in 15 years, and in 25 years.

Madam Speaker! I am pleased that today, as we lay this budget before the Riksdag, there is a majority for our budget. It creates stability, and I want to thank all the involved parties - Sverigedemokraterna, Liberalerna, and Kristdemokraterna - for good cooperation. We have completed the task. We received a mandate from the voters. They placed a difficult task in our hands - to make Sweden both safer and wealthier - and we take that task most seriously.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Our country is in a recession. Sweden is becoming poorer, and Sweden is becoming more dangerous.

The strange spring budget that the government has placed on the Riksdag's table today confirms that the government is incapable of understanding what everyday life looks like for ordinary people all around Sweden. I believe that people would have expected the government and the Sverigedemokraterna to deliver a solution today to stop the acute healthcare crisis we have in Sweden.

I believe that the Swedish people expected measures here and now to unite the country and stop the gang violence, not least after last week's shooting in Skärholmen. I believe that people expected support for households to get through the tough cost crisis and measures to counter the growing construction crisis and boost growth. But it is not this we see in the spring budget.

In the government's spring budget, one sees instead a tangle of proposals to solve the government's own problems. It is money for cycling races, for airports and for agency cooperation, and it is supplements for the Government Offices. Some of this is certainly very good, but at the same time, resources are being cut for the Swedish Crime Prevention Council - while violence is escalating in Sweden. The tensions and shootings continue, despite promises to the contrary. Everyone is now looking for concrete solutions to the crisis. In that situation, the government is cutting the agency that has knowledge of which solutions actually work.

I do not think there is anyone who thinks we need to do less to prevent violence. In fact, there are no new measures that can make a difference here and now in the budget that is on the table today. Given the recent developments, I believe many who agree with me would have expected something else from the budget.

After having taken note of the government's proposal, I ask myself how the government and the Sweden Democrats at all perceive how things look in the country: In what reality does one live in the government? It is obviously not in the same reality as the rest of us.

The spring budget was a chance for the government to change course for Sweden and tackle major problems. Sweden faces great challenges, and one should take the side of the Swedish people. But I can state that this is not a budget for the Swedish people.

Madam Speaker! The government and the Sweden Democrats have put Sweden into an acute national healthcare crisis. The regions are budgeting for billion-kronor deficits during 2024 and warn that thousands of services will disappear. Waiting times will become longer, and the staff is stressed and pressured. At the same time, the fees for healthcare are being raised. This is because the government has prioritized tax cuts for the very richest before providing essential resources for Swedish healthcare.

This is a healthcare crisis that hits Sweden and the Swedish people very hard. It is a reality that cannot be ignored, but that is exactly what the government is doing. First, the government chooses to underfund the welfare. When the regions then testify and warn that there will be cuts in the billions, when the Prime Minister sits on TV and ducks and remains silent about how to handle this, and when it finally becomes so embarrassing that one is forced to do something else – then one promises on TV that no one will have to be laid off in Swedish healthcare.

In the spring budget, it becomes painfully clear that Ulf Kristersson and the government are breaking that promise. The cuts, the layoffs, and the savings remain. In Värmland, the work to reduce the workforce continues. In Östergötland, employees still risk being laid off. In Skåne, the cut plans remain, and the staff within healthcare cannot count on things getting better in the future.

In today's budget, the SD government announces that municipalities and regions may receive fewer resources in the years ahead with reduced appropriations for 2025 and 2026. The government provides short-term contributions but rolls back the long-term financing. It is perhaps not so strange that the government's spring budget did not stop the healthcare crisis.

Budget after budget, the Finance Minister and Oscar Sjöstedt have chosen to opt out of the Swedes' welfare. In reality, it means fewer colleagues and tougher conditions for everyone who works in healthcare and carries the welfare on their shoulders. Ultimately, it is the patients and the staff who are affected when the government fails to take in how reality looks.

Madam Speaker! Households are also being pressed very hard by the cost crisis. Even though the inflation rate is now slowing down, the cost level is still very high. Food prices are sky-high, rents have increased, and interest costs have skyrocketed.

The increased costs, which have also been higher in Sweden than in other countries, have erased ten years of real wage increases. It is noticeable in the wallets of Swedish families. It is noticeable by that every third household struggles to make ends meet every month. It is noticeable when every second single parent with a lower income cannot afford to put nutritious food on the table. In that case, it is not strange that Bris warns that children today are worried about their families' finances.

For very many Swedes, there is very little left of the month when the salary has already been eaten up by cost increases. It is the Swedish people who have to take the hit when the government ignores what reality looks like. It is the nursing assistant, the bus driver, and the teaching assistant who have to step back when the government takes the side of the banks.

We Social Democrats have in previous budgets proposed several measures to support families through the crisis. We have proposed an extra child and study grant for Sweden's families with children. We have proposed increased maintenance support for single parents. We have proposed that the extra housing allowance should be made permanent for the most vulnerable parents.

We have proposed a tax on the banks' excess profits, where the revenues would go back to households and welfare. But there was no bank tax this time either.

The fact is that the Sweden Democrats and the government cannot even imagine using the state-owned bank SBAB to lower costs, increase competition, and ease the pressure on households. I think that is weak. Instead, the government watches as bank profits increase exponentially at the expense of households.

Madam Speaker! That it is such a tough economic situation, that we have a recession and that households are pressured by high costs also means that Sweden is predicted to have the lowest growth in the EU in 2024. Then unemployment rises, and the number of bankruptcies increases. It is a gloomy picture. I remind that it is real people who are affected when the government fails to take responsibility for Sweden.

What then is the government's answer to increase growth in the country? I note that the Sweden Democrats and the governing parties today are writing a debate article about exactly that which is not in place in the spring budget, namely growth policy.

The fact is that Sweden is becoming poorer right now. Sweden belongs to the bottom of the EU's swamp in the area of growth. But the government writes debate articles instead of presenting budget proposals. Why is that?

One of the areas that is worst affected, and which is dragging down Swedish growth, is housing construction. Sweden is facing the worst housing crisis since the 90s. Every day, seven construction companies go bankrupt. Every day, another seven companies go bankrupt.

The Minister for Finance stated at the press conference this morning that this is one of the reasons for the recession. If the Minister for Finance knows that, why is the Minister for Finance not acting to mitigate the recession? That is what one could have expected. The entire housing industry is waiting for new announcements from the government, but nothing came this time either.

We Social Democrats have presented a long series of proposals to speed up construction in Sweden and to ensure that the construction workers are not affected.

The SD-government instead delivers a triple blow against Swedish construction workers. First, they let the construction industry fall freely, and the construction workers who build our country lose their jobs. Then, they are going to lower the a-kassa and ensure that those who wear themselves out at work are written out of the insurance. Thanks for the blow, Åkesson!

Madam Speaker! In a situation where Sweden is becoming poorer and more dangerous, our country needs a policy rooted in reality that increases cohesion. The government had the chance in today's budget, but the budget that the Finance Minister presented today will not stop the cuts in healthcare, will not increase housing construction, will not help Swedish families with children through the cost crisis, and will not stop the violence on the streets.

I think it is bad for Sweden, and it affects ordinary people. It is real people who are affected when the government fails to take responsibility for Sweden. It is 40,000 more unemployed. It is mothers, fathers, children and grandmothers who struggle every day for Sweden to function and who feel the crisis in their wallets. The political leadership must see and understand this.

There are many problems to solve in our country. We must lift Sweden out of the economic crisis, break up the gangs, get the school in order and shorten the queues in healthcare. These are great challenges, but they are not insurmountable. We have accomplished these tasks before. But it requires clear leadership that sets the direction for Sweden.

We Social Democrats have time and again presented proposals and solutions rooted in reality. They could have taken Sweden out of the crisis. These are proposals that the government would gladly have used in today's budget. These proposals could have made a difference for ordinary people. But the budget that we are debating today, Madam Speaker, unfortunately does not.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! On the whole, we have won the battle against inflation. It may seem a bit hasty and somewhat premature to say that, but I feel sufficiently confident to make that analysis. Inflation will remain at the target level during the coming years, according to the latest forecasts.

It has been a tough period. I have previously compared this to a steel bath, and I believe that is an image that many can agree with. We have to go back almost 35 years before we find similar inflation figures here in Sweden, but now we have steered this to safety.

Fighting inflation has been priority one as we within the Tidö parties have collaborated on economic policy. There actually haven't been any alternatives. The alternative of opening the money taps, borrowing money and increasing the national debt - the economic policy would not have worked. The economic policy would have worsened the situation. It would have increased inflation.

The economic policy that we have pursued has worked, even though it has been difficult, painful and tough. We are basically on land. Now we can look forward. Now we are going to solve the problems that we have.

For example, the regions' economic situation is worrying. It is the Tidö parties' view that they need help in the form of financial support. 6 billion kronor is allocated in connection with this bill just to support the regions financially.

The purpose itself, the reason for the motion, is of course that no individual region should have to lay off staff within healthcare, at least not for economic reasons. At the same time, it applies to the regions to prioritize correctly and to increase efficiency.

The regions have, nota bene, their own right of taxation – we must remember that for all its importance. But my inclination to take this type of measure, that is, to provide funds from the state to the regions, does not increase when one reads about regions that close an emergency room in order to save money while simultaneously spending as much or more money on art in the hospitals.

34 billion kronor have been provided by the Tidö parties - for welfare and for the municipal sector. It is the responsibility of the municipalities and regions to prioritize correctly with these supplements - to focus on core activities, to stop doing the wrong things and to continue doing the right things.

Madam Speaker! In the economic situation we have gone through, there has also been a need for the state to take responsibility for the socioeconomically weaker households, that is to say, those households that have been relatively most affected by the high inflation we have had.

The poor elderly have seen their guarantee pension increase. The unemployed have received a strengthened unemployment insurance. The ceiling will be at 34,000 kronor per month. The families with children who receive housing allowance have received an increased one. Just over 100,000 families with children with tight margins have received up to 2,100 kronor per month in strengthened housing allowance through a so-called supplementary allowance. It has been a temporary allowance, but it will be extended. It will therefore apply throughout the entire year and not cease at the mid-year point, as it would have done if we had done nothing.

Madam Speaker! In line with previous budget propositions during this parliamentary term, we see a significant supplement to the Prison and Probation Service. We are talking about almost 1.4 billion kronor. That supplement is the result of the very large reorganization of Swedish justice policy that we are in the process of implementing. Here we see a clear ideological dividing line between the Tidö parties on one hand and the opposition parties on the other.

More shall be locked up, and more shall sit locked up longer. The era of platitude politics is finally over.

Madam Speaker! After the First World War, a very major decision regarding disarmament was made in this chamber in 1927. That was, of course, followed by a rearmament in the late 30s and early 40s. And that was followed by a massive disarmament after the fall of the wall and the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, when one—again naively, as it would turn out—envisioned eternal peace.

I can state that this chamber has historically made incredibly poor decisions, regardless of who has sat in government. But that was then, and now is now. Now we arm ourselves. We have done a lot - but not enough. The threat comes, as usual, from the dictatorship to the east, from the terrorist state Russia.

Now we continue the work of upgrading our Swedish armed forces so that we can both defend our land and help Ukraine in their defense struggle. The needs of the civil defense are also addressed in the bill. It is about strengthening healthcare during high alert, supporting municipalities in resisting IT attacks, arranging shelters, purchasing power plants, generators, water purification – all such things that we take for granted when there is peace and quiet but that might not work when there is not peace and quiet.

Madam Speaker! In an article in Dagens industri about two weeks ago, we could read about the company Northvolt and how much money is being provided from the public sector, that is, in practice from the taxpayers. The review shows that it concerns 88 billion kronor in grants from, among others, Energimyndigheten, Vinnova, Tillväxtverket and Naturvårdsverket but also loans from the European Investment Bank, which in various ways are guaranteed by our own national debt. Even the pension savers have, through the various AP-funds, been forced into Northvolt. "The upside is private but the downside is public," as it is expressed in the article.

It is not the taxpayers' task to finance companies, but it is the companies' task to find customers who want to buy their products in order to thereby create profitability. This waste and recklessness with the taxpayers' money irritates me enormously and must come to an end. We cannot have it this way. It also cannot be only the Sverigedemokraterna who have respect for the taxpayers' money. It must not work that way!

(Applause)

In this speech, Eric Westroth (SD) agreed.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! Sweden has been a strong country. Investments in infrastructure and housing created jobs and growth. The welfare was built up, and in the world's most equal country, we showed respect for those who built the country.

That that time is long past has been highlighted in a flash during the current economic crisis. Sweden tops the league when it comes to wealth concentration. Healthcare is in free fall. The chaos on the railway threatens growth. The construction crash is a fact, unemployment is rising, and food prices and housing costs have exploded. At the same time, wage earners are hit by the largest real wage cut since the 30s.

It is this reality we find ourselves in.

Madam Speaker! The Government and SD are gaslighting their entire population in the midst of an economic crisis. When you look up "gaslighting" on Wikipedia, you can read this: "Gaslighting is a form of manipulation and deception, where information is distorted, misrepresented, or omitted, or where false information is presented with the intention of making victims doubt their own memories, perceptions, and mental health."

Madam Speaker! I shall lead by example and substantiate my claim with some examples from reality.

The government did not even cough up a third of what was required to prevent welfare from being hit by automatic cuts. But also now, at the government's budget amendment press conference, the Finance Minister said that the historical cuts in welfare are actually a historical investment.

Healthcare is the worst affected. Ivo directs criticism towards all 27 hospitals that they have audited. Healthcare staff are sounding the alarm and sounding the alarm. People are dying in the emergency room, and patient safety is being compromised. What does the Minister for Health say then? Well, she says that the healthcare crisis is due to the regions having too many communicators. She claims this together with 111 fake accounts on Twitter. Perhaps one of them, snurre73, does not know that 90 percent of the regions' costs are healthcare and that 21 out of 21 regions are having a really tough time, with threatened patient safety as a result. When it looks like that, no one other than the state can bear the blame. But the fact that snurre73 does not know this does not mean that the Minister for Health should not know it.

Madam Speaker! Not even the world's best gaslighter could conjure away the wave of self-inflicted harm that hit Swedish healthcare. Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson therefore said, at the best possible time of broadcast, that the government and the coalition partners will present a budget that will ensure that people are not laid off in Swedish healthcare. But hardly had he relaxed from the TV sofa before he and other government representatives allowed it to be announced that what he had actually said, and what we all heard, was not what he really said.

When the government came with its announcement regarding the funds for healthcare, weren't the layoff notices withdrawn? The Prime Minister had said that no one should be let go. However, all layoff notices and hiring freezes remain in place because the investment is, in fact, a historic cut and the greatest deterioration for healthcare in living memory.

The government has systematized gaslighting.

Madam Speaker! My daughter Ellen painstakingly carved her name into the facade of my parents' log house. When she was caught in the act – her signature was indeed etched into the wood – she looked at us with an accusing expression and exclaimed without the slightest hesitation in her voice that she had not done that.

When it happened, I thought of my own youth. I wasn't any better. At the age of 15, I once stood in peace and enjoyed a cigarette in the Domus parking lot in Sandviken. Suddenly, my mother stood in front of me. "But Ida, you're standing here smoking!" she said, stating a bit angrily. With the smoke still trickling out of my mouth, I replied: "Get off, I'm not doing that at all!"

To simply flatly deny what is in black and white is the gaslighter's primary strategy. When it concerns children and young people, it can be charming, but when it comes to the one who has power over others' lives, yes, even the power over an entire country, it is simply pathetic.

Madam Speaker! All facts and all researchers and experts have reached the hardly surprising conclusion that the government will fail to reach the decided climate goals. But the Minister for Climate has a report of their own with their own diagrams and their own statistics, and presto, in a parallel universe, the climate goals have been achieved.

Åkesson is not worse. To the question in SVT's Agenda regarding the promise that a government that worsens the unemployment insurance (a-kassan) would never receive the Sweden Democrats' support, Åkesson answers that the fact that nursing assistants and construction workers will now receive a significantly reduced compensation is actually not any worsening.

Billström argues, in contrast to the EU, the UN and the entire international community, that Israel's ongoing genocide in Palestine is in fact a proportionate defense.

There is no problem with competition in the banking market. That is what the Minister for Finance says, while the major banks are presenting record profits.

Madam Speaker! I could stand here all day, but I will summarize the essence of it all with a few lines from the artist Ronny Eriksson's song:

Full of power-drunk, they run amok, the sense and the morality—write it in the journal that I must be crazy, the government is wise.

Enough with the lies and the mind games. When a gaslighter is questioned, there are a few common examples of actions used to try to regain control.

Firstly, they change the subject when they are questioned. We recognize that. As soon as things get heated, whether it concerns the market school or the pensions, it is not the government's responsibility that is up for discussion, but instead we are to discuss immigration. Whatever subject comes up, it always ends with immigration.

Secondly, they deflect with a "but-you-do-too" attitude. It is inflation's fault that healthcare is collapsing, the communicators, the Social Democratic lotteries, and of course – drumroll – last but not least, it is the immigrants.

For the third time, they say that you are the problem and not them. You just have to shop cheaper, Åkesson advises the citizens when food prices have increased by 25 percent.

Madam Speaker! There are, fortunately, counter-strategies against gaslighting. Here is what it says on a psychology forum.

First of all, one must set boundaries. Do not let the person, or in this case the government, get away with their behavior. Check.

Secondly, one should get others' perspectives on the matter; daily reports and alarms from the staff in healthcare. Check.

For the third, one should use deep breathing when it becomes too much. That, Madam Speaker, we have indeed tried many times.

And finally, the relationship must be terminated. It will happen by the 2026 election campaign at the latest. So check on that as well.

Vänsterpartiet has experience of being in destructive relations. We know what we are talking about. What we say, we mean. If we promise something, we do it too. We said that we would stop market rents, and we did. We demanded a strengthened health insurance, and when our mandate was needed for a Prime Minister to be able to take office, the largest increase in pensions in modern times was implemented.

Today we give the message that if we had governed, we would have taken the responsibility required for the crisis in healthcare and allocated the money that is needed. The accountability needs to be clarified. Cuts must not be able to be described as investments, and therefore transparency must increase so that citizens can hold those in power accountable. With a floor on income where the actual calculation for welfare costs is visible, we can ensure the public commitment. The reform space, as it is called, is not something that magically appears every year. It is actually money taken from welfare. It is a democracy we live in. If one wants to lower taxes for those with the highest income and pursue right-wing politics, one should be allowed to do so. But one must also stand for it.

Madam Speaker! It is not strange that people lose faith in politics when they are fed fake news by the country's authorities. People sit at home on the TV sofa and hear the Finance Minister say that the long-awaited investments in healthcare are now coming, but when one seeks care, one does not get the help one needs.

When the voters cannot trust their representatives, we are in a bad position. Mists of uncertainty stand in the way of a sincere debate, and they must be dispersed. A real discussion is absolutely necessary.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! We who debate the state budget are used to being in the world of the big numbers. It is about billions, hundreds of millions, the USA, China, and the world economy. I will conclude my speech with perhaps the greatest issue of all, namely the climate – where the government risks spoiling a historical opportunity for the Swedish people and for our business sector to become a part of the future's green economy.

Today in Sweden, it is in the very smallest, in the little, where everything begins; in a pedestrian tunnel in Skärholmen, where a father who stood up for what is right was murdered in front of his twelve-year-old son by cold-blooded murderers, who were reported to be minors. All our thoughts go to a family in mourning.

When I stood in the pedestrian tunnel the following day for a while when no cameras were there, when it was quiet and still, I was filled, like so many others, with despair. We cannot continue to use this as a punching bag in our debates, while we fail to do anything fundamental to turn this around. We risk losing a generation of young people when the police are unable to be present and protect as they wish, when the school is choked of resources, just when it is needed more than ever, when youth unemployment increases and when segregation grows.

We say that we must do everything. The government says that it must do everything. But then we really must do everything. And we do not do that today.

The policy is half-baked and limping. Yes, we need harsher punishments, not least for possession and handling of the illegal weapons that end up in children's hands. Courts and the correctional services must be strengthened, and above all, we need more police. Then many more of them must be on site in everyday life and patrolling the street. It should not be as it is now, where one in ten of the newly recruited police officers goes out into outer service among the public.

There must be many more places in the exit programs for those who want to leave the criminal life. Unfortunately, the money is finished. There must be many more field assistants who, together with the police, can own the street.

It is easy to talk about "juice-and-bun" politics, as Jimmie Åkesson does, when we talk about money for civil society, field assistants, social workers, and counselors. But it is not a matter of juice and buns when, as a night-walking mother at 23:40 on a Saturday, you meet a lit teenager in a dark alley. It is not a matter of juice and buns when, as a social secretary, you have the conversation with a single mother who has discovered a revolver hidden under her son's bed. It is not juice and buns, but it is courage, sweat, and tears. Those who disparage the other efforts of society undermine the police's work.

The policy will become particularly lopsided and faltering if we do not manage to strengthen the school. It is still an utterly incredible situation where we see so many young people drifting. Precisely in that situation, thousands of qualified teachers, counselors, and other school staff are to be laid off because inflation has created a temporary cost crisis. Just when so many young people's futures are at stake, the school is weakened instead of being strengthened. After having poured billions into cheaper gasoline, 670 million into cheaper plastic bags, and 970 million into cheaper snus, the Tidö government puts 500 million in this budget to save the school from mass layoffs – despite the fact that municipalities, economists, and teachers' unions have warned that billions, not millions, were needed.

This affects so many small schools in the Swedish countryside. You know that countryside that is not talked about so much anymore from the government's side. I will come to that in my next speech. But even when I spoke with those who work against gang violence in Skärholmen, the first thing everyone said, in unison, was that we must invest in the school. It is not possible to lay people off right now. The school must stand strong and shine like a temple in the middle of the village, lift up these areas and give hope back. It is just as half-hearted and limping not to invest in young people's jobs. What will young people say when so few of them get jobs, when so many do not see their parents go to work?

How can this government, in this situation, raise the tax on summer jobs and extra jobs for 15-17-year-olds by 5,000 kronor a month? How can one stand by passively with one of Europe's highest unemployment rates?

Many believe that all countries have had high inflation and high unemployment, but almost all other Western countries have had high inflation but falling unemployment. According to the government, unemployment will rise with 40,000 new unemployed people ahead. So one shakes their head and says: Oh dear, that was bad.

But nothing is being done! How can the government's only answer be to raise the ceilings in the unemployment insurance fund and give more subsidies? Where did the integration go, which the Moderates, the Liberals and the Christian Democrats spoke so loudly and broadly about before the election?

We will disagree, but let us agree on one thing, namely that we should join forces around youth unemployment, lack of jobs and the future. If we prioritize jobs, we must look at the companies, not least the small businesses. It could be the Icabutiken where young people get jobs, and it creates normality in a suburb that so acutely needs it. It could be a question of a shop that needs to be protected against gangs and also receive lower costs.

It is not Elisabeth Svantesson or the Tidö parties who are creating new jobs in Sweden, in the countryside or in vulnerable areas. Nor is it the Social Democrats who are creating jobs in Sweden. It is the small and growing companies. Four out of five jobs in the last decades have been created by them, and not so long ago, one party after another had stood here and sung the praises of the companies and promised to reduce their burden and obligations.

But today we have a blue government that pursues an old-fashioned social democratic, red policy.

Instead of lowering the tax on hiring, one has raised the tax on hiring young people for small businesses with over 9 billion - including 2 billion that fall on the municipalities - only to then, in this budget, generously return 155 million to municipal summer jobs.

Instead of lowering the costs for small businesses, one has reintroduced the responsibility for sick pay - a new billion-dollar burden. One prioritizes raising the unemployment insurance with the same money.

See what Elisabeth Svantesson's policy line meant: higher taxes and increased unemployment insurance. Ronald Reagan said: I did not leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me. You are about to leave the bourgeois side, former alliance friends. Centerpartiet remains as the small businesses' last and only friend in the Riksdag.

The growth policy, corporate policy, and the work line are not the only things you have negotiated away in the Tidö Agreement. It is now clear that emissions during the remainder of the mandate period will rise by 15 percent per year. Climate policy has gone from being Sweden's pride and green brand in the world, which sold our products and initiatives, to being a pitch-black hole.

The Tidö parties have abolished the reduction obligation and replaced it with - nothing. More could have bought electric cars if the Tidö parties had not simultaneously abolished the climate bonus for electric cars and replaced it with - nothing. Someone might even have bought a gas car if the tax exemption for biogas had not been removed and replaced with - nothing.

Instead of making it cheaper for more people to buy used or new electric cars, electric hybrids, gas cars, or ethanol cars and free themselves from the fossil, and instead of using resources for popular discounts to avoid fossil, you are pushing people economically back to buying new gasoline and diesel cars. The share of electric cars in new sales has decreased dramatically from more than one in three to just over one in five. Full back and gas to the floor - where does it end other than in the ditch?

This government has, since taking office, spent as much on cheap petrol and diesel for people commuting in large cities as on the police, the school, and the countryside combined.

We stand in 2024 up to our necks in the oil of dictatorship states because you have sold out everything concrete in climate policy to a party that does not even believe in the climate issue. You have sold out a generation of dreams and exchanged concrete work for a mass of empty Pourmokhtariprat about goals that SD has already seen that you will never reach with your policy.

There is talk about structural reforms, but they are not being implemented. There is talk about the work line, but it is countered in practice with higher taxes. There is talk about the climate, but nothing concrete happens other than emissions skyrocketing. Regarding the countryside, there is no longer even any talk; it has been forgotten now.

The economic policy is half-hearted and limping because there is a lack of a vision for our future, for our security, for the countryside, for the climate and for the jobs.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! Many of us are pleased that the inflation figures are now falling, step by step. This has been and is the government's primary priority in economic policy. A combination of restrained fiscal policy, tightening monetary policy, and a responsible collective bargaining movement is now yielding results.

At the same time, we know that events in our global environment can break this positive development. On the night to Sunday, we saw how the religious dictatorship in Iran attacked the Middle East's only democracy, Israel, for the first time. We must continue to be careful not to see the work of bringing down inflation as finished.

Madam Speaker! The Minister for Finance raised the heinous murder of the father Mikael, who was shot in front of his twelve-year-old son. Everyone has been shaken by this, and this government does not rest but takes a number of different measures to ensure that criminals are behind bars.

If we seriously intend to be able to take action against the criminal networks that are now plaguing our society, we must choke off the flow of money, because it begins and ends with money. And it really is not about any small amounts - calculations have been made that the criminal economy turns over somewhere between 100 and 150 billion kronor annually. That is four times the Police Authority's budget.

These figures are an estimate, because there is, as we all understand, a large dark figure when it comes to this. But it is crystal clear that there are good opportunities for criminals to earn large sums of money in Sweden, large sums of money that lure more and more young people to join the gangs.

Madam Speaker! I would therefore, among other things, like to highlight the reinforcements being made in the supplementary budget by Skatteverket, Kronofogdemyndigheten, and Tullverket.

The Swedish Tax Agency needs to strengthen, among other things, its tax crime investigations in its work to combat the criminal economy.

The Swedish Enforcement Authority is also being strengthened. This authority is an important link in the work to prevent and combat crime.

The Swedish Customs is an authority that is on the front line in the work against the gangs' economy. It is the customs and all customs officers in Sweden who are to ensure that drugs and weapons do not enter our country. It is often from abroad that the gangs' goods of sale come from.

The statistics show how effective Tullverket is. Last year, they seized twice as much narcotics as the year before. But we need to further strengthen the customs' tools so that more seizures can be made and the amount of drugs and weapons coming in can be reduced.

At the same time, customs officers are often in an all too vulnerable position. It is important that the staff feel safe at their workplace and feel that they can carry out their task safely - hence the reinforcement.

Madam Speaker! The single largest adjustment being made is that the government is now adding 6 billion SEK to the regions. These 6 billion reinforce the 3 billion that we included in sector grants in the budget bill for 2024 and the additional 3 billion that go to the regions from the reinforcement made to the general government grant in the autumn budget. We are therefore talking about supporting the regions with a total of 12 billion SEK during 2024.

In this spring budget amendment, funds are also allocated to the Chancellery, as the government is now creating an efficiency delegation for health and medical care to support the regions in the implementation of structural measures that can streamline these operations.

As a Christian Democrat, I see this as very important. We must try to get as much as possible out of our tax money and ensure that funds are used with a focus on patient-facing services so that more patients receive care in a timely manner.

(Applause)

In this speech, Camilla Brodin (KD) agreed.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Last week, a man was brutally murdered in front of his son because he had had enough of the gangs' everyday tyranny in his residential area. He paid with his life. My thoughts go to his son, his family, all his friends, and everyone who today lives in fear that gang violence will hit them. It is like a poison that eats its way into the body of society, which strikes mercilessly and must be fought.

In this budget, the government presents proposals that are intended to sound powerful, and certainly, the gangs' finances need to be choked and more money should go to the correctional services, the courts, and Sis. But fundamentally, the government does far too little of what we know actually works – that which is long-term and important for us to be able to break the development that we are instead seeing escalate before our eyes. We know that it works to invest in school and social services and to ensure that all children have food on the table, a safe home, and a meaningful leisure time – so simple actually, but for the government so difficult. Every year, thousands of children leave school without passing grades. How can we continue to let that happen? How can the government, in the midst of burning gang wars, not provide the money that is required in schools?

At the same time as violence on the street strikes fear in entire residential areas, violence in the home continues to claim lives. During the month of March, a woman was murdered every week. This is completely unacceptable in a constitutional state like Sweden. We want all residents to feel safe, on the street but also in the home. The blame must always lie where it belongs, i.e., with the person who commits both physical as well as psychological and economic violence. But the responsibility to both prevent and provide a way out for the one who is subjected to it must be our collective responsibility.

A common thread in the economic policy pursued by the Sweden Democrats and the government is that it is constantly a bit too little and a bit too late. What we see in this budget appears as an inadequate fire-fighting effort, for after having presented a budget of cuts for welfare and left Sweden in a healthcare crisis with the budget they presented in the autumn, they are now doing too little too late.

Despite the Prime Minister's promise that no one will have to be laid off in healthcare, the layoffs continue. Patients are forced into long queues, relatives live with constant anxiety, and healthcare staff are forced to run faster and faster and are expected to perform miracles. Now, the government is admittedly allocating 6 billion to healthcare across the country, but the Finance Minister knows just as well as I do that it is not enough to cover the needs that exist. All around the country, healthcare will still be forced to make staff reductions, which will lead to longer queues, more anxiety, and even worse working conditions. In the long run, this creates a completely unsustainable situation that puts our entire social contract at stake. If we cannot trust society when we are sick, what kind of society do we have then?

In today's Sweden, the gaps are increasing, and assets are extremely unequally distributed - much more so than in our Nordic neighboring countries. So we cannot have that, because we can only build a strong society together.

Madam Speaker! Sweden and the rest of Europe have suffered a fossil cost shock as a result of Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Inflation skyrocketed when Putin used oil prices as a weapon. The costs spread from sector to sector, and today most things are significantly more expensive than they were a few years ago, which is felt in household wallets. The developments in the Middle East risk making it even worse.

No government in the world could have conjured away the fossil cost shock once Putin had made his decision. But much more could have been done to manage it in a fair way. It is remarkable to see how the banks are making record profits while families with children struggle to make the money last the whole month, and that we have a government that is not doing much about this. Real wages for Swedish employees have fallen sharply while the business sector's share of profit remains at high levels. The government allows the child allowance to decrease when it is needed most and has said no to a tax on the banks' record profits. When Sweden, together with the rest of the EU, was to introduce a revenue cap on the electricity companies' excess profits to return the money to Swedish households, a proposal was presented that caused households to lose several billion. It would have been possible to distribute the costs more fairly, but the Tidö parties have chosen not to do so.

"The government's vision of an ambitious and effective climate policy is not reflected in action. The policy decided during 2023 increases emissions and does not lead in the direction of achieving Sweden's climate goals and EU commitments by 2030." These words are not mine or the Green Party's, but the Climate Policy Council's. One might think that such stinging criticism should make any government turn around and do the right thing. But no, instead of changing policy, they tinker with talking points and continue with a fool's persistence to assert that the climate policy they do have will lead to reduced emissions, sometime and perhaps somewhere else.

On Friday, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency stated that Sweden is not reaching any of our climate goals - not by 2030, not by 2040 and not by 2045. This should lead to crisis meetings and rapid action, but as usual, the government seems to believe that even when it comes to the climate crisis, it is possible to lean back.

Decision by decision, we are moving further away from the just climate transition that is absolutely necessary. We know that we must break Sweden's and the EU's fossil dependency. It is nothing less than a win-win for future generations, but it would also reduce our own vulnerability to fossil cost shocks here and now.

The government usually justifies its climate-destroying policy in the transport sector by stating that electrification is the solution. I agree with that to some extent, but then it is extra difficult to understand why one abolishes support for electric cars and makes it less profitable to drive on electricity than with fossil fuels. The effect is as predictable as it is tragic: For the first time ever, the sale of electric cars is decreasing.

Now, the government is indeed making an ambitious attempt to give the appearance of investing in the transition through invented diagrams and promises of charging stations. The problem is only that the investments are mediocre attempts to hide cuts and a lack of completely necessary investments. They are investing in charging stations, but electric car sales are plummeting. They spend small amounts on Klimatklivet but pour in many times more into the aviation industry. The government is therefore investing much more in destroying the climate than in reducing emissions. It is pure and utter madness.

During the spring, the country's county administrative boards have repeatedly warned about the consequences that the Sverigedemokraternas and the government's budget cuts will have for nature and biodiversity. It is about access to nature that is being restricted, jobs that are disappearing, and losses of biodiversity that we will never be able to recover. The paltry 30 million that is injected in this budget will not be able to reverse this development. The right-wing parties' slaughter in the environmental area has been unparalleled. In comparison with the last budget bill we were involved in negotiating, 2 billion less is now allocated just for the protection of valuable nature.

The government's policy for the climate and nature is not holding up. It is a betrayal of the people who live in the countryside because they are being forced further and further into a fossil dependency. It is also a betrayal of the people who will be hit hardest by floods and forest fires and who are left with less and less to leave for future generations.

In summary, this is a budget that unfortunately fails the climate, nature, welfare, and Sweden's families. This budget provides far too little, far too late. Miljöpartiet presented a budget this autumn that would have reduced emissions and met the challenges in welfare. We continue to fight for this policy, because Sweden can do better.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! It has been and still is a tough time in Sweden. Inflation has made us all poorer and has hit everyone hard: those who are dependent on benefits, wage earners, entrepreneurs, and the public sector. Everyone has become poorer, and everything has become more expensive.

There is, however, an elephant in the room that no other parties mention and which is also stated in the guidelines for the economic policy today, namely that the development of the krona constitutes a factor of uncertainty. It has caused it to be even worse in Sweden than in other countries, a fact which has also caused us to worsen inflation by importing it with the things we buy.

We have seen that the value of the currency is incredibly affected by our restless world. Despite the fact that we have a low-valued krona, things are going poorly for our export companies. These are only some of the reasons why the Liberals want us to join the euro as soon as possible. The Swedish people deserve the predictability and stability that a currency like the euro offers.

Madam Speaker! It is pleasing that last week's inflation figures showed that the work being done is yielding results. Now, it shall be taken all the way to the goal. At the same time, we will now begin to roll out the long-term reforms for growth in order to get Sweden moving again. I look forward to doing even more in the upcoming budget work.

Now we present a spring budget that shall contain necessary investments during the remainder of the year. We are investing an additional 100 million to accelerate the expansion of charging infrastructure - an important announcement to speed up previous climate investments that we made in the budget for more electrification and elimination of emissions.

Madam Speaker! The largest investments are being made in welfare, with 6 billion to the regions and 500 million to the school. In these tough times, it is important to ensure that welfare does not have to make any short-sighted, bad decisions because of tough times.

Throughout the entire spring, the opposition has spoken about the crisis in the public sector. We have heard it from the rostrum here today from, among others, Member Damberg. His picture of reality is not my picture of reality.

We have seen examples of vulnerable people, stressed staff, and children who have not received the support they should have in school. It is obviously unacceptable. Then it is easy to shout loudly and say that it would be solved with more tax money.

The entire basis of my political commitment is precisely that we shall have a safety net without holes for those who fall and a school that sees every child so that the children can manage school academically with the self-confidence that they can become exactly what they want.

The state receives approximately 2,500 billion in taxes. Wage earners and employers pay high taxes on labor, and there is VAT on everything we consume, and so on. In Sweden, we spend a sum that is high by international standards on, for example, healthcare, but we do not have better quality and accessibility corresponding to the money we spend.

We face large expenditures to upgrade defense, the correctional services, civil defense, healthcare and school, invest in climate initiatives and plan for future infrastructure. Everything is important, and everything must be done. But it is necessary to ask: What do we get for the money?

Madam Speaker! The state apparatus generates rules and laws that are cost-driving for municipalities and regions. We make public investments that become so expensive that one can question the social benefit. There are voices that say better procurement could have saved countless millions. The examples can be listed. Generally, administrative staff has also increased, but not teachers, nurses, or nursing assistants.

That an increase in administrative staff can be good, if it leads to those working out there having less to do. But that is not the case. It is the opposite: the regulatory burden for public employees is only swelling. Then one must ask: What administrative monster have politicians created? Is that what the residents want, or do they want school and healthcare for the money? What does the hard-pressed staff want – time for students or countless reports to fill out?

We politicians must take responsibility for ensuring that every tax krona is used correctly. We must not become blinkered by the fact that we handle large sums and fail to question things, taking the easy way out and crying out for more money that the taxpayers shall pay. Therefore, I am proud of the well-balanced spring budget we are presenting today, which supports the public sector along with the establishment of the efficiency delegation.

It should be consigned to the dustbin to simply shout that welfare is underfunded in general, because the solution is not that simple. We need to both invest more money and question how it is used. Every responsible politician should think that is reasonable.

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! In November, I visited together with Ukraine's Finance Minister Butya. There, we met, among others, a priest named Andrij. He showed us a photo on his phone of one of his colleagues, a cheerful colleague. Just a few seconds later, we saw another picture of the same colleague – dead in a stairwell. Executed, murdered by the Russians. This showed me what war means for people but also for a country.

For those of you listening to this: Why are we helping Ukraine? Why is Sweden's Riksdag united in this task? The answer is quite simple: for Ukraine's sake, but also for Europe's sake and for Sweden's sake.

Madam Speaker! Sweden must stand strong here, because Ukraine constitutes the absolute primary front line against Russian aggression. Russia is a threat, not only to Ukraine but to the entire West, which Russia perceives as its enemy.

The Swedish Parliament and government have made a decision regarding military support of 30 billion kronor. It concerns everything from tanks to air defense and artillery systems. We will continue to support Ukraine for as long as it is required.

Madam Speaker! Let me just conclude by saying thank you once again for the cooperation we have between our parties, for that we stand united in the fight to support Ukraine. Together we shall ensure that Russia does not succeed with what they plan for Ukraine.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! When I hear the Minister for Finance, and also Oscar Sjöstedt, describe that the policy is working today, I wonder a bit in what reality the government is living. Is the SD government's policy working when thousands of employees in healthcare risk losing their jobs right now? Is the policy working as intended when every other single mother who earns a little in our country cannot afford to put nutritious food on the table and is forced to borrow for food or for rent? Is the policy working when LKAB is forced to reduce production and warns that they are forced to reduce staff because the Malmbanan does not meet the requirements? Is the policy working optimally when seven construction companies go bankrupt every day?

In summary: We are at the bottom of the league in growth, we have increased unemployment and we have had higher inflation than our neighboring countries. What is it that is working so well?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Mikael Damberg for the question. What is working is the fight against inflation. After 30 years where Sweden had not faced this type of cost increase that makes everyone poorer, which erodes purchasing power and creates problems for companies and the Swedish economy, the task of fighting inflation was the most important for this government, together with the Sverigedemokraterna. And it has worked.

Together with the parties and the Riksbank, we have soon reached the goal. It is important and central, because it is precisely inflation that makes people poorer and causes problems. It is therefore working.

We see that we can now switch over and conduct economic policy to make Sweden both wealthier and safer after many years in which Sweden has become both more dangerous and poorer. I do not intend to look back at other governments. I turn my gaze forward and say that we can now do what Sweden needs: build a safe Sweden, and build a wealthy Sweden.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden has had higher inflation than our neighboring countries. Now inflation is falling in Sweden, in our neighboring countries, and internationally, and that is good. But one must also consider whether the policy is balanced in a good way? Does the overall policy have the effect that is sought?

It is now thousands of people who risk losing their jobs in Swedish healthcare, seven construction companies go bankrupt every day and half of the single mothers with low income cannot afford to put nutritious food on the table.

Our neighboring countries, which have had lower inflation than Sweden, have managed to support families with children during this time. All our neighboring countries have increased the child allowance during the cost crisis, Elisabeth Svantesson, but not Sweden because you chose something else instead.

You chose to lower the tax - by 13 billion kronor - for the people who have the highest incomes in our country instead of guaranteeing welfare and the finances of ordinary people. In this budget, you continue with the same policy. You shrug your shoulders and look away, and people have to take the hit.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Every day since I got this job, I have had people before my eyes - people who are struggling. That is why we have lowered the tax for people who work and lowered the tax on pension. Mikael Damberg is welcome to roll his eyes, but it is a fact.

We have lowered the fuel tax twice and changed the reduction obligation. We have also extended and increased the housing allowance that the previous government began to increase. We have increased it further, and this makes a difference.

That we do not conduct politics exactly as the Social Democrats think one should, perhaps is not so strange, because we are changing Sweden and building Sweden in a new direction. I have heard that Mikael Damberg during the day has said that it will be a complete mess with our politics. When I hear the word mess, what do I see before me then? Yes, I see Ida Gabrielsson, Martin Ådahl, Mikael Damberg and Janine Alm Ericson - from four parties who want completely different things and who cannot agree on a single thing.

We are four parties who have decided to turn the development around. It is not simple, and it is not easy. One must prioritize when times are tough, but that is what we do. We take responsibility for the Sweden that you, Mikael Damberg, left behind.

(Applause)

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! The overloads in healthcare are breaking records. The number of intensive care beds has decreased and is almost the lowest in Europe. Läkarförbundet is sounding the alarm, Vårdförbundet is sounding the alarm, and Kommunal is sounding the alarm. So that is how it looks in the country that the Minister for Finance is responsible for and governs.

What we have received so far is that the Finance Minister, Oscar Sjöstedt, and the others have a plan. What this plan entails has not become clear, and the cards remain on the table. In 21 out of 21 regions, patient safety is threatened. It is the state's responsibility when patient safety is threatened. Only the state can act as a guarantor for patients and staff at such a cost peak.

Why does the Minister for Finance not take responsibility and provide the funds required in healthcare?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! I welcome Ida Gabrielsson to the economic-political debates.

I have been asked what reality I live in. I can only say that I live in Örebro in a fairly ordinary apartment and am married to a nurse who works in Region Örebro län, and that we talk a lot about the challenges we face.

Just to have it said, Madam Speaker: We are allocating 12 billion during this year specifically to healthcare. Everyone in here, and perhaps those listening, know that it is the regions and municipalities themselves that have the primary responsibility for their mission, where the turnover is 1,300 billion kronor.

The state must be involved. I have said this many times, in several budgets - even actually together with Vänsterpartiet - but right now it is tough. Perhaps Ida Gabrielsson should reflect a bit on this issue of inflation. It seemed as if Ida Gabrielsson in her speech herself did not quite believe that it is the culprit in that healthcare is now struggling, but that is what it is.

I may find the answer in your budget motions, Ida Gabrielsson, because there you have large deficits that would lead to high inflation and make it even harder for the Swedish healthcare system.

Yes, I will take responsibility, but we must do it together.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! The Minister for Finance must read better, because we paused the deficit during the crisis. Now we are in a recession, and then it is a different matter.

It has been an inflation that has primarily been supply-driven, and there are no reasons to say that one cannot spend money on healthcare and that this would increase inflation. What is raising inflation is what the government has done. They have let the food giants run wild, and they have let the banks set double records. It is this that has driven inflation – the pricing and the behavior that exists in a poorly functioning market. There, I have not seen the Finance Minister realize any plan.

15 billion kronor are needed for healthcare. Only the state can guarantee it under such a cost peak as inflation and the increased costs for pensions entail. Why are the funds required not being contributed?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Ida Gabrielsson may have misunderstood me. My point is that the cause of the very tough situation that the regions are in now is largely inflation. This was what I emphasized, and by that, I mean that one should generally pursue a policy that does not increase inflation.

We are doing a lot: 12 billion this year. These are historical levels, even if Ida Gabrielsson does not think so. We see how tough it is for very many.

Finally, I must confess to you here in the chamber - you are not so many - that I have smoked secretly. When I lived in Avesta and was in primary school and came home to my mother, she asked why it smelled so much of smoke, and then I said that I had fallen into one of those big sandboxes that one smoked in, which you who are my age or older perhaps remember. She fell for it. It is a bit like saying "I am not a communist - I am a Left Party member." I shouldn't say this, but that is how it can be when one comes home like that and does not live in the truth.

I live in the truth. In the speech that Ida Gabrielsson just gave, it sounded as if I do not see reality, but I see it every day. Every day I do everything I can to make things easier for people, for healthcare, and for everyone who lives in Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I just want to say very briefly that I appreciate what the Minister for Finance said about Ukraine in his speech, but I think we should be able to agree on providing significantly greater support to Ukraine than what we do today. Even though what has been done is good, it could be many times greater, as in our neighboring countries, and we could agree on that.

My question to the Minister for Finance, however, concerns something else. She says that she lives in the truth, so we must test that now. Is it not so, with the situation we have in Sweden now, with many young people drifting and with problems in many places in the school, that you wish you had invested much more so that we would not have had the mass layoffs of teachers and counselors in the school that are ongoing right now, according to the municipalities? According to their own survey, 61 percent of the municipalities, despite the resources that the government is providing, which are small, will lay off teachers and counselors in this vulnerable situation.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Martin Ådahl, for an important question! School is central. Regardless of the economic climate, children must have a good education. Regardless of the economic climate, young people must receive the knowledge they need to be able to move forward and manage in life.

This year, the government and the Sweden Democrats collectively allocate 2.6 billion kronor to education. This will be an additional 500 million in this spring budget amendment, but we allocated money for it already in the autumn. This, together with staffed school libraries, this together with facilitating for children to learn to read, and this together with summer jobs for young people and many other things, for example preventive work, is important to facilitate and improve for children and young people in Sweden so that they get a better future.

My view is that we are doing quite a lot despite a difficult situation, but we can and will, naturally, continue to do more for Sweden's young people.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! The answer was truthful, Elisabeth Svantesson, but the question was not whether you are doing things for the school, but whether you are doing enough to, in this vulnerable situation, avoid the mass resignations of thousands of teachers that are being reported from across the country. Obviously, you are not prepared to commit the billions that are described as needed in this vulnerable situation, and you have also not prioritized this in the budget.

Then I must take the opportunity to ask if the Minister for Finance also regrets the removal of the reduced employer contribution for young people now that we have a youth unemployment that actually cannot be called anything other than mass unemployment, also this in a very vulnerable situation.

It is also possible to answer the first question. Don't you feel that it was wrong not to invest more in schools in this vulnerable situation, where many teachers, counselors, and other staff are being laid off?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Unlike when it comes to healthcare, this looks very different in Sweden's municipalities - some municipalities have actually lowered the tax this year and have no challenges when it comes to the school, while others have huge challenges. It is about both inflation and about student cohorts and how they develop in different parts of the country. But certainly, many have it tough, and therefore it is pleasing that we are now moving towards lower inflation and that it is stabilizing for Sweden's municipalities.

No, I do not regret the budget investments we have made. The 2.6 billion we have invested in education this year are well-balanced in the situation we find ourselves in - together with many other parts. Right now, Sweden has many needs. It is about defense and the justice system, and it is also about supporting households that are having a hard time. It is about healthcare, which we have managed to get into, and about building security.

We naturally follow the situation in Swedish schools every day, and in the autumn we will present a new budget for next year. We will have to return with the direction for school initiatives specifically then.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Over the years, I have made many remarks to Elisabeth Svantesson regarding the Moderates' economic policy to meet the climate goals. I have almost always been told in response that the Moderates do indeed care about climate change and that they have a policy for this, namely electrification.

On Friday, new figures from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency were released, showing that Sweden, with the government's policy, will not reach any climate goal, neither by 2045 nor any of the interim targets on the way there. Even though electrification is not the only answer to the climate issue, it is an important part – and now electric car sales are falling. Miljöpartiet has, since the government presented its so-called climate action plan, pointed out the obvious, namely that the Tidö parties have no plan for the climate. Now, the experts in the Climate Policy Council have also established this.

I would therefore like to ask the Minister for Finance: What is the plan, really, and when will we others be told how this government intends to tackle our time's greatest crisis, namely the climate crisis?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for your and your party's commitment, Janine Alm Ericson! It is genuine, and it is important.

It is completely true that we do not conduct the same environmental and climate policy as Miljöpartiet has, but let me begin with where Sweden stands. In Sweden, 98 percent of all electricity is produced fossil-free. In many ways, we are a pioneering country, both regarding households and companies as well as within politics. We have been at the forefront for many years, and emissions have decreased over several decades. This is important and will continue; that we agree on. A large majority in the Riksdag wants to reduce emissions.

Some things that are important moving forward are, for example, what Janine Alm Ericson has said, that is to say electrification. We are now investing in the construction of nuclear power and have a roadmap for this. It is also important with everything from charging infrastructure to other things. That electric car sales have decreased can also be an effect of the fact that inflation has been tough and that many have had it tough to buy a new car.

Fundamentally, it is such that the policy we have laid out, with more clean electricity and more production of clean electricity, will move Sweden forward in a very strong way even moving forward.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! The same climate policy would of course have been best, but any climate policy at all would actually have been welcome.

I am also glad that the Minister for Finance is raising this issue regarding nuclear power, because the Moderaterna have made the climate debate about electrification and electrification about nuclear power. After an inspiration trip that was recently made to the heavily delayed and more expensive nuclear power construction at Hinkley Point in the United Kingdom, the Ministry of Finance now seems to confirm what we Miljöpartister have known for a long time, namely that nuclear power – besides being dangerous – is incredibly expensive. It is too expensive for anyone to want to build it without massive subsidies.

I therefore wonder when that announcement will come from the Minister for Finance. Will it be nuclear power, and how much will it then cost the taxpayers – that is, be taken straight out of the households' wallets? Or will that project be scrapped now, so that we can instead focus on quickly expanding renewable energy types and providing Swedish households and companies with clean, cheap, and renewable energy?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank you once again for the opportunity to speak specifically about nuclear power. Since I received the question, I shall answer it during the seconds of speaking time I have remaining.

The point is that more electricity is needed if we are to achieve everything that both Janine Alm Ericson and I want us to achieve, and it will not work with just more wind power. Nuclear power is needed, and even now – Janine Alm Ericson surely knows this too – for example, state-owned Vattenfall is planning further expansion.

I see this as part of the infrastructure. If we do not get more electricity - and clean electricity - in the years ahead, the companies cannot grow. We will also not be able to make our climate investments within the companies or transition through electrification. It is important. This will also create stability in the grids. It is not possible with just wind power. I want more wind and solar but also nuclear power.

It will cost. It has done so everywhere it has been built. That is why we are now very carefully reviewing a risk distribution model where the state shall participate in taking part of the risk, so that together with the industry and the electricity producers, we get more clean electricity on site in Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the government's and SD's spring budget, which was presented today. It is clear that there is a risk that our comments will mostly concern the policies that we feel are not included in the budget. It is perfectly reasonable for the opposition to present that.

I would, however, like to take the opportunity to say a few words about how we Social Democrats, since we entered opposition, have constantly focused on presenting alternatives and showing that there are proposals that can take Sweden in a different direction. We see now that Sweden's growth is among the worst in the entire EU, and the Finance Minister and I agree that one of the main explanations for that is that housing construction has completely stalled. Therefore, in the previous budget, we presented a complete package of measures to increase housing construction and ensure that the construction workers could keep their jobs.

We have criticized the government for not holding Sweden together through a cost crisis. It has been said several times that everyone is affected by inflation, but that is not quite true. There are very many who have made money during the crisis. One sector is the banking sector, which has made enormous profits by being quick to raise interest rates on mortgages and slow to raise interest rates on savings. Enormous profits have been made.

We have proposed that a portion of those profits should be returned to households and returned to finance investments in welfare. In our first budget, we doubled the state grants to municipalities and regions, schools, healthcare, and elderly care. In the previous budget, we doubled the resources for healthcare, because we saw that it will create a national healthcare crisis if the government continues to manage this policy in this way. That is where we are today.

Despite the fact that it is dark and despite that we are going through tough times, I want to say that there is another way to both handle the recession and hold Sweden together. But that requires having a direction, knowing where one is going, and coming up with proposals that make a difference in reality.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! I have a question regarding how Member Mikael Damberg intends to proceed.

The Leader of the Opposition has spoken in the rostrum about real people and ordinary folk. You governed for eight years, but you did not implement any necessary structural reforms. You left behind one of Europe's highest unemployment figures and sky-high electricity prices which – do not let yourselves be deceived – rose before Russia's invasion, as an effect of you shutting down the nuclear power at Ringhals. As the peak on that, we also showed bottom results in the Pisau survey.

If Damberg is now talking about ordinary people and real people, what is he thinking? Is there no self-reflection?

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Cecilia Rönn for the question.

It is clear that we did very much that really had a focus on ordinary people. We set records in the number of employed; there had never been more people going to work and fewer people living on benefits. It was good.

We also made major investments for the poorest pensioners just as Sweden was heading into the cost crisis, because we knew it would mean great strain for those with the smallest margins. During our years, we increased the child allowance even though there was no cost crisis, and we made enormous investments in welfare during the pandemic so that one would not end up in a welfare crisis in the middle of the pandemic. It is clear that we have governed Sweden in both good and tough times, but I think one can compare the actions during the pandemic with the actions we have had during the cost crisis.

The current government has, with the help of the Liberals, been incredibly passive. The result has been that we have some of the worst growth rates in all of Europe. We have had higher price increases than other countries, and we have not held society together. You bear that responsibility right now, Cecilia Rönn, because you are part of the government base.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Unfortunately, I did not receive answers to my questions. Perhaps I should not have expected it either.

We have, as we have said, an unemployment rate that is among Europe's highest. We also have a school crisis. It is good to repair the roof when the sun is shining, which it has done – with low interest rates and a boom – for the last eight years.

We are involved and taking responsibility. We are now making large and important investments so that Sweden can get things in order and to push back inflation and get growth started.

Damberg was given no chance to answer Svantesson's question on how to assemble the government base, but I give him a new chance here. The Center Party said in its reply that the Social Democrats did not create the jobs, and I actually agree. How is Damberg to assemble his government base, if he can take power, with the reluctant Center Party, the growth-hostile tax-raising party Vänsterpartiet, and the nuclear power opponents in Miljöpartiet?

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats have the ability to cooperate with different parties. We have cooperated with the Liberals, the Centre Party, the Green Party, and the Left Party. We have cooperated with many parties. On major issues, we have also cooperated across the block divide with the Moderates. In those cases, it has concerned defense and security or other heavy and important decisions for Sweden. In energy policy, we have strived for broad agreements, because that is good for Sweden.

We are a coalition party. I believe that the humility to be able to cooperate across block boundaries on important issues in a very tough economic situation would have been something for the current government to consider. The risk is that otherwise, the investments will not end up in Sweden. They end up in other countries when one backs climate policy, pulls away the foundation for energy policy, and does not provide long-term conditions for important sectors such as the housing sector. Then growth and jobs are affected. Then there will be 40,000 more unemployed, according to the government's own forecasts.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! When the Tidö parties took over in connection with the change of government on 18 October 2022, a liter of diesel cost 28 kronor and 12 öre. Today, a liter of diesel costs barely 19 kronor. It is almost 10 kronor cheaper, or at least a little more than 9 kronor cheaper.

This obviously has to do with the fact that we have pushed through tax cuts on fuels, but it also has to do with the fact that we have significantly reduced the so-called reduction obligation. It is now 6 percent on diesel instead of, as before, over 30 percent. That is good in itself.

The interesting thing, however, is that the price reduction at the pump, which is a consequence of the changed reduction obligation, also lowered inflation by 0.3 percentage points in direct effects and by the same amount in indirect effects. Transport became cheaper, which could make goods in stores cheaper and so on. This is according to an assessment from Nordea.

Think then if we had followed the opposition's line and raised the reduction obligation to 60 percent instead of lowering it to today's level of 6 percent. Then we would not only have been back at 28 kronor for a liter of diesel, but rather a liter of diesel would have cost 38 kronor. What effect would this have had on inflation? Inflation went down when we lowered the reduction obligation. What effect would such an increase have had then, besides the fact that not a single soul would have been able to afford to drive a car in this country?

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I have a question about growth and the construction sector.

Before the election, Oscar Sjöstedt and Sverigedemokraterna were quite clear that they would not worsen the sickness insurance or the cash box. These were important red lines for Sverigedemokraterna in the cooperation with the government.

Now we have a collapse in the construction sector due to raised interest rates and high inflation, which makes it more expensive to build. In this situation, the government and the Sverigedemokraterna have worsened the conditions by withdrawing the investment support. They have not taken any measures to get housing construction started.

The risk is now very great that the construction workers will have to pay the price because you have no housing policy. Furthermore, the allowance is to be lowered, and if one becomes worn out at work, one shall be kicked out of the insurance. Was this what you promised the voters before the election, Oscar Sjöstedt?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! To begin with, we have not worsened the unemployment insurance. We have strengthened the unemployment insurance not just at one occasion but at two occasions. The ceiling will be at 34,000 kronor per month. We have, therefore, strengthened the unemployment insurance at two occasions, which is something that the Social Democrats did not manage to do during eight years in power.

The sickness insurance has not deteriorated either. I am fully aware that there is an investigation which, I believe, is complete. There is no proposal on the floor of the Riksdag to worsen the sickness insurance. Where the investigation will land, I can only speculate - I do not know that at the moment.

The Sweden Democrats' entry into this issue is, however, very clear. Our people in the Committee on Social Insurance are essentially sitting in this now and scrutinizing this investigation, which has implications for the health insurance. I do not know exactly where this will land or what the other parties' positions are in this issue.

The best thing that can happen for the construction sector is that inflation falls back so that the Riksbank can finally start lowering interest rates, because that is the problem from the very beginning.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Madam Speaker! It is very good if inflation falls back and interest rates drop; everyone knows that this affects the construction industry.

The fact is that it is wrong - we raised the ceiling in the budget much more than you have, and it was without a cost crisis that had eroded the budget. That does not add up.

My point is that the entire industry has now said that it is not enough to wait for lower inflation and hopefully lower interest rates, but urgent measures are required now. We have proposed construction stimuli and state credits to make it cheaper to build. We have also proposed that the rot deduction should be changed so that one receives a larger deduction of 50 percent if one performs energy efficiency improvements. This would benefit the construction workers and give the individual a lower electricity bill, but it would also improve Sweden's electricity system.

You do not have to take our proposals, but would it not have been respectful towards the construction workers to do something now that they are seeing the worst construction crisis since the 90s? During the election campaign, it did not sound like this would be the result when SD gained influence over the economic policy.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! What the Social Democrats did with the unemployment insurance was temporary. What we from the Sweden Democrats did with the unemployment insurance when we strengthened it and raised the ceiling is permanent. This is the difference, and it is obviously quite relevant for the individual wage earner.

We just heard Mikael Damberg talking about the investment support. We know that it doesn't work; it is money straight into the developers' pockets. Jobseekers do not benefit from an investment support. The developers might benefit from it; it is money straight into the developers' pockets.

The ROT deduction has been increased. We have done that. Above all, we have separated the ROT deduction from the RUT deduction, which targets completely different things. The ROT deduction is separate from the RUT deduction. Previously, there was a maximum ceiling for both ROT and RUT, so if one had made a lot of RUT deductions, one could not make any ROT deductions at all. Now they are completely separated and also higher, so it is clear that we have done things.

It might be possible to do more things. One does not have a patent on good politics; we can agree on that.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! I am also concerned by what the Sverigedemokraterna promised regarding that the sickness insurance would not be worsened. The improvements from Vänsterpartiet that had been implemented were to be preserved.

However, new directives, which aimed at worsening the sickness insurance, were then allowed to an investigation. The investigator was replaced. It concerns a person who has worked to establish the "stupstocken" and the quantified targets. These two things created the two largest waves of layoffs ever in Sweden.

We can all guess what happened next, even if Oscar here didn't have a full grasp of it.

It is now proposed that all the improvements to that which previously led to tens of thousands of people being denied benefits shall, in principle, be removed. Can Oscar Sjöstedt guarantee me and all those who are in need of a strong health insurance that the Sverigedemokraterna will not contribute with their mandates to worsen the health insurance?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! I do not intend to provide any guarantees or promises whatsoever. In this exchange, I can once again emphasize what the Sverigedemokraternas position in this is. The Sverigedemokraternas position is not to worsen the sickness insurance.

An investigation has recently been released, and our people are sitting and looking at that investigation. I do not know exactly what other parties have for starting points in this issue. No one has raised it in that way in any negotiation. It may happen that it becomes that way. I cannot promise one hundred percent exactly how the future will look. It simply doesn't work or is in any case not responsible to do.

I can reassure Ida Gabrielsson that the Sverigedemokraterna's starting point is not to worsen the sickness insurance. That being said, there may still be wise proposals, even though I am not personally involved in the details of the specific investigation referred to. I am also not entirely at peace with exactly how all the details work today. There may be potential for improvement. I will leave that unsaid.

The Sweden Democrats' entry is clear. But I do not intend to make one hundred percent prophecies about the future. It is not responsible.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! But it is irresponsible to make one hundred percent prophecies before the election. After the election, one is more reflective. I believe the voters would prefer if one did the opposite.

It is lucky for Oscar Sjöstedt that I am very well-versed in the investigation. Oscar Sjöstedt's colleague has also been at the meetings, so it should be quick to read through. All that is proposed is to put back all the rules that caused everyone to be disqualified.

The Sweden Democrats have stood and complained about what the Green Party and the Social Democrats did with the quantified goals during the period of government. The Sweden Democrats wrote in all their motions that all those rules must be changed. Then it was implemented when the Left Party set the requirements.

Now we are in a situation where we have allowed our coalition partners to pave the way to return to this situation. Is that what Oscar Sjöstedt is now going to tell all those who need a strong health insurance, that it was just talk before the election?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! It honors Ida Gabrielsson that she is involved in the investigation. I cannot claim to be the same.

I do not intend to make a big deal out of the fact that an investigation has landed. Investigations land almost daily, or practically every week. There are no proposals on the Riksdag's table. The Sweden Democrats have not submitted any proposal, and none of our coalition parties have submitted any sharp proposals.

Proposals have been submitted from an investigation. Then one sits down and looks at that investigation and sees what the investigation says. It is not more dramatic than that. That is where we are. There are no proposals on the floor of the Riksdag. I do not feel stressed or worried in any way. If bad proposals come, we must ensure that we shoot them down, and if good proposals come, we can contribute to them. It remains to be seen.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Every time we have a debate here in the chamber about economic policy, Oscar Sjöstedt thinks that no one is watching this program in northern Sweden. He is going to launch a frontal attack against all the investments being made up there in green industry.

Last time it was about H2 Green Steel and the fossil-free steel. Today it is about Northvolt Ett's factory in Skellefteå. Now Oscar Sjöstedt has read an article in Dagens Industri. Now he knows how everything stands.

Hundreds of billions have been invested in Northvolt. It is Volvo that is building a large battery factory and putting its entire future on Northvolt in Gothenburg. They don't know what they are doing, because I have read an article. All of this is just nonsense up there in Norrland.

Should I interpret the post as that Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson, despite everything, is keeping SD's paws away from our large green industrial investments in northern Sweden and in the rest of the country?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! The reason I referred to the article was so that everyone can go back to the source. If I stand here and say that it is 88 billion and have no source reference, it could appear a bit unprofessional. That was why I referred very clearly to an article, and in this case, in the newspaper Dagens Industri.

They claim in the review they have conducted that of the capital that has gone specifically into the company Northvolt, which I mentioned, 88 billion are public funds. If Volvo has contributed money, that is not included in that. Volvo is not public. It is obviously private. It lies outside the 88 billion.

The whole point is that 88 billion of public funds have gone into a private company. That was my point, and that is what worries me. It surprises me just as much as when we had this exchange last time that the Center Party is so enthusiastic that it is the public, not the private, that should step in and finance companies. I am very skeptical.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I interpret the answer as that Elisabeth Svantesson ensures that SD's paws are away from the large green industrial projects so that one does not destroy all of this now.

It also states in the article that it is a Timbro report that Oscar Sjöstedt is essentially quoting. It would have been nice if he had quoted all Timbro reports about that one should not raise the tax on young people's work. But it is this particular report that one is very keen to quote. It directly attacks the large industrial projects in different parts of the country, and not least in northern Sweden.

When Sweden is about to win the global race for battery factories and fossil-free steel, I cannot understand that SD is going to barge in and put a big, nice tripwire there so that Canada, USA, Germany and all others can dominate this industry. I cannot understand it.

I cannot interpret the answer as anything other than that the Finance Minister is going to keep you out. Otherwise, you will not have any votes left in northern Sweden in the next election.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! I do not know if I actually perceived any question there.

I and the Sweden Democrats, of course, pursue exactly the issues we want to pursue in every individual budget negotiation. This is something that I have raised with the other Tidö parties. I have expressed my party's great skepticism towards the large involvement of public capital.

It is said that we are about to win. I don't even know what it is that we are supposed to win. To win is to put a finger on public money. To win is to put a finger on tax money. Maybe that is what we win. It is a rather poor victory to win.

It is exactly as I said earlier in my speech from the rostrum. I do not think it is the taxpayers' task to finance companies. It is the companies' task to have a product, to develop a product and to sell that product with profitability. That is my view on market economy.

I would not have been surprised if I had had this exchange with Ida, Mikael, or Janine. But that I have it with a representative for what is claimed to be some kind of market-economy oriented party surprises me.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! I have noted that Oscar Sjöstedt is very well-informed about what the diesel prices are and expresses that. I do not know if he is as well-informed about what the price for driving an electric car is per kilometer. I can state that according to calculations last summer, it is approximately 3.70 kronor per kilometer.

What I would like to speak with Oscar Sjöstedt about is why the Sverigedemokraterna want the countryside to be squeezed into a continued diesel dependency and exposed to the very cost shocks caused by war and conflicts around the world. Miljöpartiet has an economic policy that makes it easier to transition from a fossil fuel car to an electric car, so that is possible. But all the Sverigedemokraterna talk about is the price at the pump.

What I want to ask Oscar Sjöstedt is: Why does one want to continue giving Putin that power over Sweden's and Swedish households' economy instead of ensuring that we can run on clean, cheap, renewable electricity?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! That sounded very cheap. When I drive my old Volvo, it costs significantly more than 3 kronor per mile. But buy an electric car then! It is not that I am trying to forbid anyone from doing so. It is up to each individual.

On the other hand, you don't get a subsidy from the other taxpayers if you buy a car. I don't get one either if I buy the car I want. It is up to each individual. Buy whichever car you want! I'm not interfering in that. Just because I am a politician doesn't mean I have opinions on everything in that way. It is up to each individual. I have no opinion.

My neighbor has an electric car - fine! I don't have one. I have an old Volvo - thirsty as can be, drinks gasoline so much that it's not sensible. But this is up to each individual. I have no opinion on it. I do not prevent and do not destroy. One can buy exactly the car one wants, and then one has to pay what that car costs. If it costs 3 kronor per mile - well, good heavens, then one might as well just buy a lot of electric cars. I place no obstacles for that.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! I am a bit confused by Oscar Sjöstedt's answer. I assume that he, just like me, is in politics to make a change because society needs to develop into something better than what we see today. This answer, however, indicates that one is laying down completely.

I asked why it was desired that Putin should continue to have great power over the Swedish economy and the economy of Swedish households. Oscar Sjöstedt did not answer that at all. But it is that power that we politicians have the power to change. We can make a transition that ensures we move away from climate change and that simultaneously builds Sweden and the Swedish economy stronger.

Why don't the Sweden Democrats want that? Why do they want people in the countryside to remain in a fossil dependency that they have difficulty getting out of themselves?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is, in itself, a completely correct observation. I have not engaged in politics because I have any strong opinion about what type of car other people drive. I have engaged in politics because I have seen serious problems in society that we are now tackling together. What type of car other people drive is probably my absolute last concern.

Now, we do, in fact, buy our oil from the Norwegians, but that is a different matter. This is a global system that is more complex than what Janine Alm Ericson is trying to make it out to be. The best thing, of course, would be if we didn't buy any oil from Russia at all, but that would not change anything for Putin. Then he sells it somewhere else, and we buy the oil from there instead. It is not the case that he becomes poorer for that reason. It is more complex, and Janine Alm Ericson knows that.

But otherwise, the observation is correct. I have not engaged politically because I do not have any strong opinion about what cars other people drive. I am very uninterested in that question.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! What alternative possibilities would there have been for a government that wanted to take responsibility for its citizens' safety in the crisis? Was there no other choice than to gaslight the voters?

Almost one-third of workers in Sweden lack a cash buffer today. In a demand-driven inflation, as the current economic crisis was previously characterized by, austerity measures for households are hardly effective. It is the excess profits in the banks, the food giants' pricing behavior, and the electricity companies' high prices that drive inflation. Despite this, the government has let the households bear the bill.

Swedbank's CEO Jens Henriksson argues that when we earn money, we can use it to be there for our customers. But it is the customers' money that has been taken.

The Minister for Finance is once again suggesting that people should change banks. But what customers can choose in that case is only which bank they want to be robbed by.

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet proposed that SBAB's return requirements should be lowered so that mortgage rates could be lowered through healthier competition, that the food giants should be held accountable, and that Swedish prices on electricity should be introduced. The Finance Minister, in our exchange of remarks, tried in the best gaslighting to make it sound as if this was something odd or extreme, but several of these measures are things that have been done all over Europe.

If, against all odds, someone out there is thinking that perhaps it is me who is at fault—perhaps I should have put on wool socks to lower electricity costs, changed banks, or gone to another store to buy milk—I want to be clear: It is not you, but those who rule the country who are at fault.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! The Member spoke in both statements about gaslighting, alternative reality, and that this year's budget and the spring budget are a historic cut to the public sector. I became confused and wondered if I had misunderstood. I actually had to check: Who is it really that is gaslighting in the speaker's chair?

That this year's budget and the spring budget would be a historic cut to the public sector is not quite true. During the pandemic, there was indeed significantly greater support, which was completely justified and necessary. But the support being given now is not a historic cut.

If we are to have a sincere debate, I wonder partly why the member says things that only confuse the Swedish people, and partly what she herself wants to do.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet has allocated 15 billion. That is what is needed to keep your government constellation's Prime Minister's promise that no one should have to go into care without maintaining the staffing levels. We see in our budget proposal to that at least someone keeps that promise.

Then there are the automatic cuts in welfare. Of course, it has happened before as well. That is why Vänsterpartiet is now proposing an income floor so that voters will know what it will cost next year to have a preschool or to have a state subsidy for healthcare. It should be clear when one decides to cut back, as has been done during this period. The regions needed 24 billion for patient safety to be guaranteed, and they have not put in anywhere near that.

It is good if the voters find out about it. One can do things differently, but one must take responsibility for it. One must not stand at a press conference and say that one is making a historic investment, while at the same time enormous cuts are being made.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Then perhaps it was good that I asked the question so that the member could explain what she meant by a historical cut.

If the Left Party were to govern Sweden and want to spend these funds, what would that Sweden look like? In the Left Party's budget for the autumn, you reported large tax increases on almost all wage earners, important pillars of society with completely ordinary jobs. Furthermore, you were hostile to growth when you wanted to remove the growth support, the R&D deduction, and the experts' tax.

So, how are all these subsidy increases and public expenditures to be financed in the Left Party's Sweden?

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Madam Speaker! Growth is something that the right-wing parties often highlight that they are good at. Nothing could be more wrong. Growth is not primarily the supports that the member here highlights. It is about investments. It is about the fact that we have a completely neglected infrastructure. The iron ore line does not work. The freight trains cannot get through. We have a construction crash, and no state responsibility is taken to get housing construction started. We do not have Swedish prices on electricity. Companies and large industries that need to transition have to pay expensive money to be able to do so.

If one is to get growth started, one needs to invest in employment and infrastructure initiatives, which are fundamental for the large investments from the corporate side to also be made. That is what Vänsterpartiet is pushing for.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! First, I just have a small piece of information for Oscar Sjöstedt and the Sverigedemokraterna: If you fuel your car with fossil fuel, you contribute to something called the greenhouse effect, which has major consequences for the entire global community.

After that, I intended in my post to remind the Minister for Finance and the government of a word that many have forgotten after the election: the countryside.

A small update: Many teachers are now being laid off in many small municipalities. Many small health centers risk being closed due to the healthcare crisis. Sweden's self-sufficiency of food continues to decrease. Many forest owners are currently receiving logging bans on their forests, in practice a confiscation without compensation, due to a species inventory that you have not managed to stop and the derailment that has occurred. None of this is included in the budget.

The most serious issue is nevertheless when it comes to the infrastructure in our country. Decades of neglected maintenance and insufficient investments have caught up with Sweden. Both industry and passengers protest when the switches fail and when the tracks crack. We have cheap gasoline, but the roads are not drivable. There are hundreds of thousands of potholes - according to an estimate 1 million potholes - on our smaller roads. 150 billion is estimated to be the need for investments in started projects that have not been completed, according to the latest calculations.

How can Sweden function if the infrastructure does not? We want to ensure directly that these gears and the immediate problems with potholes begin to be addressed. We have said that when the national debt decreases, we must tackle the maintenance debt in our entire country, so that we get railways and roads worthy of a modern country. It should be a boost for our entire elongated country.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! The fact is that one in ten people living on this planet lives in extreme poverty. It is sad in every way, but the World Bank has noted that poverty as such has decreased since the 1980s. The reason is economic growth. The proportion of poor people has therefore decreased from over 40 percent to under 10 percent. In terms of numbers, the number of poor people has decreased by over 1 billion people. With this, I want to have said that not a single country has been lifted out of poverty through aid alone.

In my previous role as a parish priest in the Church of Sweden, one of my most pressing tasks was the diaconal work we did quietly by assisting the lonely and supporting vulnerable households. The diacony always aimed to not be needed in the end. Therefore, I think the government's line, to try to take advantage of synergies between development cooperation and trade policy, is important. To escape poverty, economic development and trade are crucial.

Aid is, however, sometimes completely crucial in the difficult and atrocious situation that many people are forced to live in despite everything. In this spring budget amendment, approximately 1.5 billion kronor are now being returned to aid. It is an aid that works according to the agenda of freedom, empowerment, and sustainable growth. It is an aid where the support is to be channeled to a greater extent via civil society, which has the best contact with local grassroots organizations. It is these that contribute to real change on the ground where the very poorest and most vulnerable live.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is very welcome that the government is putting back money that was originally intended for aid.

But that Hans Eklind, under the current situation, when Sida has terminated all agreements with civil society organizations, can say that it is a strength in the aid policy that the government is pursuing, exceeds my understanding. He is welcome to mention it, because it seems to be precisely the opposite.

I also want to take the opportunity to ask a question. The Christian Democrats went to the election on a platform of fixing the queues to healthcare and expanding the healthcare beds. Ebba Busch was very clear about this. But what we are now seeing in Swedish healthcare is the complete opposite. The government knows what healthcare needs but is holding back. They are lowering taxes for high-income earners while the regions are on their knees.

Therefore, I want to ask how Hans Eklind wants to explain that prioritization to the voters who cast their votes for the Christian Democrats, precisely so that they would keep their healthcare promises.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the questions, Janine Alm Ericson!

The Christian Democrats are also concerned that Sida is already moving forward and noting drastic consequences when one actually did not have that mandate. This is a three-step story. The strategic partner organizations, as they are called, are now to be reviewed, and Sida is to come back with a basis. We have not at all said the final word on the issue. We still believe that SPO, as they are called with an abbreviation, has an important role. I sit as a member on the board of the Lepra Mission, and I know that otherwise it would mean huge difficulties for us to continue our operations.

I will answer the question on healthcare in my next reply.

We must however note that 14 percent of civil society's assistance disappeared in the spring of 2022, because it was offset against migration. Now we in Kristdemokraterna have ensured that there is a cap of 8 percent.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! I have said that I think that ceiling is very good. In the spring of 2022, we were not in government, and we criticized much the way the money for aid was used instead to cover for migration. That is not Green Party policy.

It is good that Hans Eklind will return when it comes to healthcare.

But I have one more question. I am glad he brought up the diaconal work and its purpose. We know, after all, that many families with children are struggling financially. The Christian Democrats have pushed for the introduction of a leisure card, to give more children a chance to participate in leisure activities. But it now seems to have been pushed back until next year.

We know that measures to strengthen children's meaningful leisure time are needed here and now. What is happening with the leisure card funds, and what is being done to give children in families with economic difficulties a better chance to be able to participate?

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! When it comes to aid, we must remember that Sweden gives 56 billion kronor. Luxembourg gives the most. Sweden is second in the world. I think we should keep that perspective when we talk about aid.

Regarding the healthcare queues, the government is now taking many different types of measures precisely so that we can try to do what we did last time. The last time a Christian Democrat was social minister, we halved the healthcare queues.

I believe it will be difficult to achieve the same results this time. But when we relinquished power for eight years to other parties, the healthcare queues doubled. I therefore believe that we have good chances of doing something much better than the previous government managed.

Finally, I shall say something about the leisure card. The decision stands. It must move forward, and it must be launched as soon as possible. It has been a bit more complicated than one thought. But the leisure card will very soon become a reality.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! There is much that is not working in Sweden today. Young people who should have their whole lives ahead of them die in gang shootings, and women are murdered by men they once loved. The profits of school companies take precedence over children's education, and the government prioritizes tax cuts for high-income earners over care for everyone. Climate change is spiraling out of control while the government, with bold courage, increases emissions and accelerates the loss of biodiversity. At the same time, wars are raging in the world, and democracy is in retreat in far too many places.

This is not the reality we want to see, but it is the reality that this chamber has to deal with. And this government is not capable of handling it.

But Sweden can choose another path. I and Miljöpartiet know that another society is possible and that economic policy is the most important tool to create a fundamental change. We can reduce emissions and sequester the carbon dioxide in the trees and in the fields. We can save biodiversity and transition Sweden's transport. We can invest in the railway and accelerate electrification.

We can build a Sweden without the contradictions between city and country, where we invest in schools and social services and where we renovate residential areas. It is a society where those who have the most also contribute more, where no children are forced to grow up in poverty and exclusion and where no patients need to die in care queues. But if we are to get there, we need to invest in what is our common good and meet mistrust and fear with hope and faith in the future. It is possible, and we must do it now. But unfortunately, this government does not do that, and therefore they leave us to grope in the darkness of the future.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Why do the Liberals always nag about the school? Well, because there is nothing more important than the school and the freedom and self-determination that knowledge and education provide. If one manages the school, it is a vaccine against exclusion and ill health that is completely invaluable. Doors open if one is capable of working with what one wants or starting a company.

Investments in schools provide future tax revenues and ensure that large costs are avoided. But that is nothing compared to how it realizes life chances, prevents tragedies, and creates a completely crucial sense of belonging and of being important in society. Therefore, we from the state side, together with all municipal authorities, must ensure that we have sufficient resources even in temporarily tough times.

The money we are now allocating to schools in the spring budget is not conditional or earmarked. The intention is that each municipality should use them in the best way for the school, perhaps to avoid having to make short-term cuts due to costs that have increased because of inflation, or to purchase books to develop the teaching. They know best what their students need right now.

Learning is lifelong. Therefore, we are now investing additional funds in the spring budget, as a continuation of the major investments in the 2024 budget, to further strengthen vocational adult education with a corresponding 2,000 full-year places. Sweden is facing a major skills shortage that must be addressed to get growth moving again. Our investment, together with an extra investment involving 15,000 summer jobs in the municipalities that have high unemployment, means that we lower the thresholds for people to get a foot in the door on the labor market and get a first job. These are good investments for the individual and good investments for Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! It was a fine speech the member gave, but it apparently belonged to some other budget than the one that has just been presented in the Swedish Riksdag. The mass layoffs of teachers and counselors will, in fact, continue in Sweden.

When I meet those who work with gang crime in Skärholmen, the first thing they say is that the layoffs in the school must be stopped and that one must invest fully in the school. The chairman of Sveriges Lärare says that they are nowhere near getting the money that is needed and that it is very sad because it will affect so many.

How can you defend that you have spent 670 million on cheaper plastic bags and 970 million on cheaper snus when the only thing you from the Liberals manage to do in the school crisis is to spend 500 million kronor to save remaining teachers, counselors, and other staff at Sweden's schools?

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the question! Just as I said earlier, I am very pleased that the Center Party recognizes the importance of good investments in schools. This is a spring budget where we are investing an additional 500 million in schools. It will be a total of 1.7 billion. In addition to that, we have invested 10 billion in general state grants to municipalities and regions, of which 7 billion go to the municipalities. A large part of the municipalities' activities are schools. I therefore think that this means several important additions to schools specifically.

At the same time, it looks very different in different municipalities. Some are hit very hard by the cost crisis and have major problems with the school, others do not. That is also why it is so important that municipalities, with their right of taxation, make priorities in order to be able to invest what is needed in the school.

In addition to us providing money to the school, we are also making major reforms now that will reduce the regulatory burden and make it better for the teachers and, among other things, strengthen their working environment. It is therefore both money and important structural reforms so that every child can succeed in school.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Yes, but this is a cost crisis in the municipalities and in the school that has arisen due to the inflation shock. One can choose to meet it and avoid the school being drastically weakened so that thousands of teachers and counselors are not laid off right now when there are problems with the youth generation on many different levels – or choose not to do so, that is, to negotiate it away. I do not understand how you have been able to negotiate away these schoolchildren's and youth's future and a school that is capable of meeting the problems in favor of everything else.

I also want to take the opportunity to ask, since the member raised it in their speech, whether you now, when there is mass unemployment among young people, regret that you shock-raised the tax on employing young people. You in the Liberals had promised to lower the employer contributions – not raise them.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! The member is absolutely right that there is a cost crisis as a result of high inflation. Therefore, together with other actors in society, we have done everything we can to push it back. It makes the public sector poorer.

During the time there has been high inflation, we have made the investments that I described regarding the school. These are important investments that the state contributes to; I hope that the municipalities also do what they can to prioritize the school. It is, after all, the core of the welfare.

When it comes to investments in youth, I am very happy that we are now investing in more summer jobs in municipalities with high unemployment. But the most important thing we also need to remember is that the companies are facing a major skills crisis. There are vacant jobs but no people who can take them. We have made major investments in vocational adult education and lifelong learning in order to actually get growth started again. I also think that is good, liberal market economy policy.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! The Liberals went to the election with a relatively ambitious climate policy if one compares it with the comrades in the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates and the Christian Democrats. Then, after the election, one also holds the position of Minister for Climate. It could have been an opportunity to demonstrate competence and leadership in the climate issue, but unfortunately, it has become quite the opposite.

In Dagens Nyheter this week, the nestor of Swedish economics, Lars Calmfors, who is open about the fact that his views have overlapped with the Liberals', wrote that precisely the current climate policy is the strongest argument against a liberal voice in the EU election. This is because it could be perceived as a support for how the Liberals act at home.

We know that the world, Sweden, Sweden's population and the Liberals themselves would benefit from a better climate policy. When will the Liberals take a stand for such a policy? When will a plan come that secures the transition for real?

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Janine Alm Ericson, for the questions! We have now, for the first time, united all the parties in the Riksdag behind the long-term climate goals in the Swedish Parliament. This lays the foundation for us to be able to go all the way to zero.

We started this government term by being the chair of the EU, and there we did a lot to push through climate policy that is more than just Sweden's climate policy with Fit for 55. I am very proud of what we did there and of the fact that we will continue to work in that direction. Karin Karlsbro, our fantastic MEP, has worked hard for both climate and environment during all the five years that have passed.

We are laying the foundation to be able to eliminate emissions for real. I heard Janine Alm Ericson say in her speech that we must break the gas dependency on Putin. I truly agree with that. That is why electrification is so important, and that is why we must also have a serious plan to manage it in the short and long term, which we now have.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Unfortunately, what the member is now saying is not in accordance with the truth. The government has, in the EU cooperation, systematically and all the time undermined both climate and nature work. It will not lead to any reduced emissions. Unfortunately, we can also state that both the Climate Policy Council and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency have said that we will not reach the goals. It is nothing other than a disgrace.

I had an exchange with the Minister for Finance regarding electrification. It is wind power and solar power that are cheap and will be available quickly. The government continues, however, to talk about nuclear power. I know that it is a liberal heart issue, but it will not deliver the emission reductions that are needed here and now. Households, Sweden, and the world are left completely without answers to the future's biggest question. I ask again: When will the Liberals take their climate responsibility seriously and deliver reforms that yield results?

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! I can answer the member clearly. We take our climate responsibility every day and will continue to do so throughout this entire mandate period and hopefully longer.

Janine Alm Ericson can protest as much as she wants about our nuclear power policy. The fact is that the policy that caused the steering instruments to be changed, so that functioning nuclear power was decommissioned before one had a way to instead generate fossil-free electricity, was very irresponsible. That is why we were not part of the energy agreement.

We have granted offshore wind power. We have support for solar power. We see how the flexibility market is emerging. These are very important initiatives in the short term. But in the long term, we need to have stable predictable energy, which is provided by wind power, hydropower, and nuclear power. Furthermore, we are now making investments in a scrapping premium, a climate premium for light trucks, an enhanced climate premium for heavy vehicles, and support for charging infrastructure. To claim that we have no proposals is, therefore, completely hollow.

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)