Debate on the occasion of the submission of our government bill

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! When I just a short while ago came here from the Ministry of Finance, I was followed by some journalists. One of them asked me: Have there ever been such uncertain times when you have presented a budget? I believe that both the previous and the current government can state that the last five years have contained several periods of uncertain times. The uncertainty has been of different kinds, but it has been uncertain times.

It is probably many who, in the breakroom at work, or when they are sitting and checking the news on their phone in the evening, ask themselves the question: What is actually happening? That question was absolutely asked five years ago, when the pandemic gained momentum and we experienced something we had never experienced before. That question was asked by many when energy prices quickly shot up and were sky-high for a number of months. When we suddenly had double-digit inflation, many asked themselves: What is happening? Even when Russia invaded Ukraine and started a war in a friendly-minded European country, many asked themselves: What is happening?

In the last few days and weeks, the American administration has done something that we a few years ago would not have expected, namely started a trade war. What is it that is happening?

I understand that many feel anxiety in this time. Many Swedes save in funds or stocks for their pension or for a buffer. One might not have so much ice in one's stomach right now, but rather a lump in one's stomach. Then it can be good to know that Sweden stands on a very stable economic foundation. Sweden and the Swedes have experienced tough periods before, for example the financial crisis and the pandemic. We have come through them, and we will do so again.

Mr. Speaker! Here in Sweden, we are presenting a spring budget amendment today. A few months ago, we saw that the recovery finally began to pick up pace. We could see positive outcomes at the end of last year. During the past few weeks, however, with turbulence on the world's stock markets and with uncertainty and unpredictability, activity and demand have been dampened. It is quite obvious that Sweden and many other countries will need to revise downwards the growth forecasts for this year and – perhaps – next year.

It is worth reminding that we have never experienced anything like this before, Mr. Speaker. A trade war is currently underway, primarily between China and the USA, which has raised tariffs to very high levels. This war, however, is also directed at all other countries. When we heard the word pause, it might have felt good for a short moment, but we know that there are still high tariffs against the world's countries that the USA trades with. This causes a lot of problems for Swedish and European companies but also, not to be forgotten, for American consumers and American companies. There is no winner in a trade war – only losers.

In this situation, it is very good that Sweden's economy is very strong. I met several other countries' finance ministers on Friday. While several other countries have debt levels of 162, 110, or for that matter 137 percent of GDP, we stand here in the Riksdag together behind a framework that ensures Sweden has strong public finances. It is a fantastically good starting point. That is not to say that it will be easy, Mr. Speaker, but we have the resources and the power to act.

In the budget that our four parties laid on the Riksdag's table last autumn, which has now begun to take effect, and in the amending budget that is now here on the Speaker's table, we are making major investments – over 70 billion. It is an expansive fiscal policy. We are lowering taxes for households by 25 billion this year. We are making historical investments in infrastructure. We ensure to build a better energy system, a strong defense, and a strong justice system.

How can we do all this? Well, partly because Sweden has good finances, partly because our parties have the ability to prioritize and do what is truly important. One cannot do everything, but one must do what one is tasked to do. That is what we do.

I have received questions about the budget we have now placed on the Riksdag's table. Is it not completely outdated? No, it is not. We are in a recession, and this budget will affect the economy positively. I have, however, been very clear during the day and said that it may absolutely need to be increased during the year. We also have an autumn budget. If it happens that Sweden enters a deeper recession, there may be reason to return to it.

We are following the situation closely. The expansive budget we are presenting will make things easier for people. It will also make it easier for companies to stay here in Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! Despite the fact that inflation has been fought, very many households are still struggling. Despite the fact that inflation has been dampened, many still have quite high mortgage costs. Despite the fact that inflation has been fought, which was our most important task, the situation is tough. It is precisely for that reason we have, for two years in a row, lowered the tax for every person who works and for those who have a pension. It is for that reason we have ensured that the price of fuel and diesel is 10 kronor lower now than when we took office. A large part of this is about our policy. It makes a real difference.

Are we proud and satisfied? No, but we are very happy that we have a focus forward. Firstly, we want to make Sweden safer. Secondly, we want to ensure that growth takes off and do what is required in this difficult situation, but also what is required for the economy to grow in the years ahead and for the generation that comes after us.

Mr. Speaker! Unemployment is reaching record levels. I rarely look back, but I want to pause for a few seconds at the fact that we inherited high unemployment, low growth, and sky-high inflation. Inflation has been fought. Now we need to take more steps to bring down unemployment. The most important thing is to get the economy moving and for the economic cycle to turn. The recovery we saw is broken, but I still believe – and the assessment is – that Sweden will have stronger growth than many other countries in the EU during this year.

The 11.5 billion that we are now placing on the Riksdag's table is about supporting, for example, a sector where it is very tough. I have heard that many have been critical of the deduction for renovation today. It was Göran Persson's fantastic invention. It is good economic policy, and we use it for a few months during this year so that more can use it and so that more craftsmen can work.

We are putting money into Arbetsförmedlingen and into vocational college educations, and we are moving the higher allowance forward. Step by step, we are doing what is needed. We do not give everything to everyone, but we do what is needed.

I am very pleased that there are systems that, during this period of high inflation, have indexed many of those who have had it the hardest. These people have had their compensations increased due to the high inflation. We believe that it is also time for the wage earners, and that is why we do everything we can to also strengthen their situation.

Mr. Speaker! I will not be very long-winded, but let me state that we find ourselves in an uncertain and rather difficult situation. In that situation, it is good to know that we stand politically stable with a majority for this budget and in many important issues. This applies, among other things, to the defense agreement from December, and we are now taking new steps to discuss how we shall continue to build a strong defense. That all eight parties in the Swedish Riksdag are on board with this is a strength.

I am also pleased that there is a large consensus around the framework and that we will have order and clarity in our finances so that we can handle situations like this. The countries I just mentioned that have very high public debts also have very high interest costs every year. There are countries that have loan interest as their largest or second-largest budget item. That is not the case for us, which is a strength, and we will continue to use this strength to support Sweden's economy and Swedish households. More people shall also come into work through support and help to become employable, and it shall also pay off better to work.

As I have said many times over the last two and a half years: We need to take long-term growth seriously, now more than ever. We must ensure that companies stay in Sweden and grow, because it is only a growing economy that can sustain the welfare of the future and a strong defense.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Today, the government has submitted its and the Sweden Democrats' spring budget to the Riksdag, and I can state that it is a budget without crisis awareness.

We live in uncertain times. The war in Ukraine continues, and we no longer know to what extent we can rely on the USA, whether regarding defense or trade. Households are under heavy pressure from skyrocketing costs, and unemployment is at a record high.

In this situation, one could have expected the government to understand that it is necessary to step forward and that it is time to rethink. But this budget shows, as stated, no sense of crisis. On the contrary, it shows that the government was not prepared for the trade war, that the government was not prepared for the economic downturn to persist, and that the government was not prepared for the food price increases to pick up pace again.

Mr. Speaker! The turbulence in the world and Trump's right-wing populist tariffs are obviously not the government's fault. However, the government is responsible for ensuring that Sweden and the Swedish people are well-equipped when the world becomes more restless. But the fact is that after three years with Ulf Kristersson and Jimmie Åkesson in power, Sweden has become weaker, and we are less well-equipped than we should have been.

But perhaps we should not be surprised, because when one listens to the government's representatives, it becomes painfully clear that they do not always understand the new situation. A few weeks ago, the Minister for Employment said that he does not see a risk of mass unemployment – this despite the fact that 500,000 people are already unemployed and Sweden has Europe's second highest unemployment. Just before Christmas, the Finance Minister said that Trump's tariffs were not the great threat to the Swedish economy. Now the tariffs have turned the entire world economy upside down. This summer, the government said that they had defeated inflation. Now a bag of coffee costs over 100 kronor.

The government's representatives have time and again promised that the economic turnaround is here. The Prime Minister proudly proclaimed that it is brightening on the horizon. Today, the Finance Minister is forced to say that the recovery for the Swedish economy is broken. The recession will be longer, unemployment higher, and household consumption lower.

Mr. Speaker! It seems that many have understood the seriousness of the situation, but not the government. When one looks through the budget, one might wonder if the government has taken into account what is happening in the rest of the world, because if it had, it surely would not cut back on export promotion measures for companies in a situation of total tariff chaos.

Let me speak a little about the situation in Sweden right now as the spring budget is presented. The economic development of recent years has hit people's wallets hard. Ordinary wage earners have seen real wage increases eroded while it has become more expensive to live. Food prices have increased by almost 30 percent since the cost crisis began, and for an ordinary family with children, the grocery bill has thus become 30,000 kronor more expensive in a year. The price increase on food was again the highest in several years in March.

This hits those with the smallest margins the hardest. Half of the country's single parents with low incomes testify that they have difficulty buying nutritious food for their children and difficulty clothing the children for the weather, and six out of ten have difficulty paying for leisure activities. Child poverty is increasing in our country and is currently the highest in the Nordic countries, and the government actively chooses to worsen the situation.

Mr. Speaker! I mean that the government has consistently refused to support ordinary people during the economic crisis. Instead, they have prioritized giving a tax bonus to those with the highest incomes. This prioritization is not only unfair, but it is also bad economic policy. The fact that the government has kept down household purchasing power has hit the Swedish economy. In recent years, the Swedish economy has been at the bottom of Europe, unemployment has increased and increased, and bankruptcies have reached record levels. The situation was pressured even before the recent weeks of tariff chaos, and now the current situation further exacerbates the uncertainty for Swedish companies and Swedish households.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden could have had a better starting position, because we fundamentally have very good conditions. We have strong public finances, we have modern industry, we have strong parties in the labor market who take responsibility for wage formation and transition, and we are one of the world's most innovative countries. But Swedish households could have had it better.

We Social Democrats have proposed broad measures to strengthen household purchasing power. We want to see a broad tax cut instead of the tax bonus for the very richest. We want to see an increase of the child allowance by 200 kronor per month for all families with children. We have proposed that the enhanced housing allowance for families with children be made permanent and not be reduced. We say no to the government's price increase for medicines, and we want to strengthen the housing supplement for pensioners.

Mr. Speaker! In the end, I believed that the government would present some proposal in the budget to support households. But that was not the case. On the contrary, one chooses to proceed with the proposals previously announced that worsen things for those who have it hardest.

Despite the fact that nothing in the finances of families with children has improved, one chooses, as the only government in the Nordic countries, not to increase the child allowance during the cost crisis. It is a choice. The government also thinks it is reasonable to abolish the supplement in the housing allowance for families with children, which could mean over 2,000 kronor less per month for parents who are already on their knees. This is what the government does when child poverty is increasing and parents are struggling to put food on the table. I find it provoking.

But it is not the only deterioration that is planned. The government is also raising the ceiling for the high-cost protection for medicines, which means that the out-of-pocket fee for picking up medicine is increased by 900 kronor. It is a crazy prioritization when so many are struggling to make ends meet.

Mr. Speaker! The Swedish economy could have been stronger. We Social Democrats have proposed a series of measures to increase growth, create more jobs, and strengthen Sweden's competitiveness. Already two years ago, we saw where it was heading in the construction sector. Housing construction was about to stall, which would affect both the economy and many construction workers. In two budgets in a row, we have therefore proposed state credits, a new investment support, and money for energy efficiency of multi-family houses, yes, an entire housing policy program to keep up the construction. We have proposed a billion-kronor investment in labor market policy, and we want to speed up the upgrading of the civil and military defense with a total defense fund. Against the background of Trump's tariffs, we also want to strengthen the system with short-term work so that Sweden becomes more competitive in relation to its neighboring countries and so that Swedish jobs can be secured in a very uncertain world.

Mr. Speaker! I mean that the government has time and again misjudged the economic situation. When unemployment rose, they cut back on labor market policy measures. When construction came to a standstill, they chose to remove the investment support for the construction of new housing. The government has consistently oriented its economic policy toward measures that do not drive growth but which increase the economic inequalities in our country.

One has always had the means to lower taxes even further for those with the highest incomes, while one has not had the means to make efforts for ordinary people's household finances. With this spring budget, the government misses the mark once again. This budget will not give ordinary people more in their wallets, it will not strengthen our resilience, and it will not turn the economy around.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! A quote: Defense is a special interest. A new quote: To make the budget balance, one can always take the last billion from defense.

It was two former prime ministers that I just quoted: Fredrik Reinfeldt and Göran Persson respectively. During approximately the same time that the quotes were uttered, there was a party leader in this chamber who made the opposite analysis and who criticized the eagerness for disarmament, and that party leader was named Jimmie Åkesson. It is quite clear which of the three party leaders, and by extension which party, got it right. Most wrong of all was, in ordinary terms, Miljöpartiet, which previously wanted to dismantle the Swedish Armed Forces entirely.

But that was then, and now is now. Many parties have sobered up since then. Now the Tidö parties are working intensively and focused on strengthening Sweden's defense capability. Already now, that is this year, the appropriations are nearly double compared to when we took over nearly three years ago.

The global development has in no way gone in the right direction, and therefore the Tidö parties have agreed that further expansion of the Armed Forces will be loan-financed, in the short term, I shall add. In the long term, loan financing is not a realistic alternative.

I am aware that there are parties in this chamber who think that one can borrow for everything and that one can run the state with large deficits even in the long term, but it is not a viable path. I judge that the two parties who think so are not serious regarding economic policy. It concerns, perhaps not entirely unexpectedly, Miljöpartiet and the Communist Party.

In the proposition, the Armed Forces are authorized to carry out so-called "readiness purchases" already during the current year for a sum of 25 billion kronor. This is therefore in addition to already decided appropriations and authorizations.

Mr. Speaker! The economy has not really gained momentum, at least not as one could have hoped, and it is unlikely to improve with the ongoing trade wars. Growth in Sweden does, however, look considerably stronger compared to, for example, the rest of the EU and the euro area, but unemployment remains stuck at all too high levels.

The Tidö parties supported the economy with 60 billion kronor in the autumn and are now moving forward with further economic stimulus amounting to 5.8 billion kronor.

The deduction for renovation is increased from 30 to 50 percent. This will, of course, help all those households that have carried out or intend to carry out some kind of repair, renovation, or extension. But it is more of a bonus as this, in particular, facilitates things for the entire construction industry, which is in a strained situation.

We are adding resources to an additional 4,000 places at the university college, up to a total of 53,000 places. This can involve education in everything from economics and sales to IT and healthcare. Regional vocational adult education is increased by 3,600 places to a total of 75,600.

We are moving forward with the increase of the ceiling in the unemployment benefit. That those who are temporarily unemployed can receive an adequate compensation is good. It is not only good for the individual, but it is also good economic policy.

We are strengthening the support for rural grocery stores and gas stations in the countryside, and we are investing in the road maintenance, which has been neglected for a long time. The needs have been greater than the measures that have been carried out. It is a situation that has been more tangible for those who live outside the larger urban areas, not least those who live in rural areas. We have made it cheaper to drive a car, and now we will also ensure that the roads one drives on are passable.

Speaking of us having made it cheaper to drive a car, Mr. Speaker: When the Tidö parties took over, the diesel price was around 27 kronor per liter, or almost 28 and more on top of that. Today it is under 16 kronor. The gasoline price was a bit over 21 kronor, but today even that is under 16 kronor. We are talking about thousands of kronor for all households that are dependent on the car. I have said it before, but I say it once more: The car is a question of freedom. It should not be a class issue, as the gang I am now pointing to wants to make it.

Mr. Speaker! The Swedish krona has strengthened significantly recently. The Swedish krona is more highly valued both vis-à-vis the euro as well as vis-à-vis the dollar compared to when the Tidö parties took over. The Swedish krona has, so far this year, strengthened the most of all the so-called G10 currencies. There, in addition to the previously mentioned dollar and euro, one also finds the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc.

The Swedish krona has strengthened. Why is this important? There, I set aside the obvious – that those traveling abroad for the summer will notice that as a Swede, one has much higher purchasing power, which in itself is very nice. It is important because it lowers the price of everything we import. It becomes cheaper to import, and this in turn obviously affects inflation in a downward direction, that is to say, prices fall, all other things being equal.

If this positive development with a strong Swedish krona continues, it will also have an impact on things such as food and groceries, at least to the extent that they are imported.

This matter of currencies and exchange rate movements is quite complicated, both to understand and, perhaps above all, to predict. I will willingly admit that. But in broad terms, they reflect the collective international assessment of the situation in a country.

It is about sound public finances, which of course is number one, no skyrocketing budget deficits, a low, controlled and controllable public debt, normal interest rates, a trade balance that does not deviate too much in either direction, confidence in the rule of law, institutions and authorities, a stable and predictable policy in general and a stable and predictable economic policy in particular, a stable government base, future optimism and safe one hundred and again one hundred factors on top of that.

The world wants to invest in Swedish kronor right now. It obviously would not want to do so if the overall assessment was that Sweden is heading straight down into the cellar. I voted no to the euro on September 14, 2003, and I have not regretted that decision for a single day since.

Overall, Mr. Speaker, the Tidö parties continue to deliver. The paradigm shift in justice policy continues and is beginning to yield results. I would say that the Committee on Justice here in the Swedish Parliament, under the leadership of Henrik Vinge, obviously together with the Ministry of Justice, achieves more in two weeks of work than the Social Democrats did during two parliamentary terms.

More crimes are being solved. The deadly gun violence is decreasing. The trend is correct, even if we are not there or at the goal in any way. We also know that the law enforcement authorities, not least the police, appreciate the tools and resources they receive to carry out their task. It is extremely important that this work continues even during the next mandate period and that we do not go back to the lax policy that the gang I pointed out advocates.

The restructured migration policy is yielding results. Immigration is decreasing. Repatriation, whether it occurs voluntarily or in part by force, is increasing. Labor migration has decreased by almost half compared to 2022. Regarding certain countries – I can mention Iraq, Syria and Somalia as examples – the repatriation is higher than the immigration. Sweden thus has net emigration to those countries. This has obviously to do with the legislative changes and other decisions that the Tidö parties have implemented.

More heavy-duty measures need to be put in place before the end of the mandate period, but when we are finished, Mr. Speaker, Sweden will have the EU's absolutely strictest migration legislation.

(Applause)

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by allowing myself a small reflection. Perhaps it is the case that Member Sjöstedt has a secret friend of his own with him into the chamber, for it is not the Sweden Democrats who can invent and move new parties into Sweden's Riksdag. So one must not do in a democracy, just so that the Member knows for next time. But perhaps it is Mållgan he is talking about.

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

That time is long gone. But had politics taken responsibility and made different decisions, it could have looked different today. The single mother I met here outside would have been able to afford to give her son a birthday party to remember. The nurse Anna would have had time to go to the toilet during her work shift because she would have had enough colleagues, and my childhood friend would have escaped the anxiety when her life-saving cancer surgery was postponed due to a staff shortage.

It is not an idealistic dream world. We have done it before, and we can do it again. The question is only whether those in power want it. However scandalous it may sound, we must conclude after today's budget presentation that they do not seem to want it.

For Sweden to become robust and for citizens to be secured in both times of peace and war, the politics of sound common sense must begin to apply in Sweden again. Politics has retreated in area after area for decades. The voters have voted red and voted blue but have not received what they deserve.

Now many are thinking. Further worsening of the security systems does not provide more jobs, says the government's own fiscal council. Put the money on equipping school premises instead of on the renovation deduction! says Tillväxtverket. Stimulate the economy by giving those with small margins more money to move with! say the austerity economists. Unemployment benefits and lowered employer contributions do not provide more jobs. Today we know better. The future requires something completely different: a stronger public commitment and more of justice and cohesion. So Sweden is built stronger.

Mr. Speaker! In a separate parallel universe far from climate crises, waves of war, poor families with children, and healthcare crises, the ministers seem to sit in a circle and tell stories to each other in the Government Offices' own little pillow room.

Hello! My name is Peter Kullgren and I am the Minister for Rural Affairs, and I think it is so difficult when the voters nag about high food prices. Hello, Peter! say the colleagues.

Now the climate goals have been achieved, says the Minister for Climate with satisfaction, and the ministerial colleagues join in applause.

Over to the Minister for Finance: Nothing new on the growth area, but it will take hold soon. Thank you for sharing, Elisabeth! say the ministers in the circle.

"We are investing in welfare," says the Prime Minister and closes the book. "Next week, we read the chapter on how we saved the households and eliminated mass unemployment," he says. "Oh, that will be exciting!" exclaims Minister for Employment Mats Persson and scrolls through the stock portfolio, ready for new deals.

Can you take that one about Little Red Riding Hood and the wolf, I say, and the rest of the population, who see how Sweden has become increasingly more fragile and increasingly poorer.

Today's budget is nothing less than a disgrace, and households are left completely stranded. Svanteson's growth failure is a fact, Mr. Speaker; not even ingenious PR consultants can magic it away with innovative graphs. Like circus horses, they perform pirouettes and contortions, and when the act is over, they step off the stage. Instead, we would need real workhorses who put in the effort and do what is required. But then, one sends in the clowns from Sverigedemokraterna for the parade act, which consists of getting the citizens to look the other way. Hate rhetoric is cheap – fiscally neutral, so to speak. But it doesn't put food on the table, and for those hit hardest by the hate rhetoric, the price is high.

When I look at the government and its lack of decisiveness and action in these times of unrest, I will think of the slow-TV program *Den stora älgvandringen* (The Great Elk Migration). No harm to the elks – everyone has their role to fill. But now, the government and the Sverigedemokraterna are not elks seeking new pastures. In that case, they should perhaps take up positions in public service instead of, as they do today, claiming to govern the country. I heard, by the way, that they had started moving earlier than planned – the elks, that is. Not the government, Mr. Speaker, for never before have I experienced a government that is so unwilling to actually govern.

The social problems should be solved by the citizens themselves. The government statement and this budget are a self-help book. Nowadays it is called DIY, do it yourself. It appears more and more as if the ministers do not work at a government office but have instead become some kind of tax-funded lifestyle coaches.

Shop cheaper! the Prime Minister advised as recently as Thursday. But we have luxury-ROT and expanded ROT deduction, says the Finance Minister and bets on Swedes' balcony constructions both abroad and in Sweden. If you can't afford to pay the rent for the apartment, build a balcony! If you can't put food on the table for the kids, eat pastries! becomes the message to the citizens.

My daughter actually wanted one of those popular DIY kits for her tenth birthday. It can contain just about anything. Especially around Easter, it is common with pom-poms that you put together to make your own chicken, but there are plenty of variants.

Since "do it yourself" is the government's motto, I think that from now on we will be offered a wealth of Tidö kits to handle the crisis. Do your own prime minister! Just make sure to screw on the head properly so that it stays on the shaft. Do it yourself, Mr. Speaker – or else we do it together!

S and Tidö made an agreement in the autumn regarding a framework for the state's economy for the coming eight years. The result was devastating: an investment brake that put a stop to growth and jobs. Against the advice of an entire economic team and all heavy experts, they chose to tie the economy's hands.

But now, a five-öre coin has been flipped. The global situation has changed. It is important that more people can see what is happening and change their minds. We shall make the citizens feel secure that we can defend Sweden if the worst should happen through a strengthened and expanded military defense, but also through a functioning total defense. If the railway does not function, it doesn't matter how much ammunition we have stockpiled. If there are no healthcare beds, the resilience decreases in both peacetime and wartime.

The Swedes have rarely had such low confidence in the future. Our responsibility as politicians is not to erase all clouds of worry – that would be overwhelming. Our responsibility is to use the means that politics has at its disposal, increase the public commitment, ensure that the voters know that they are not left alone in this, and do everything in our power to secure the population. But today, the government pulled the rug out from under the households.

In order to avoid falling into the economic turmoil of the 1990s, running costs need to be financed crown for crown. Borrowing for investments in railways, electricity infrastructure, defense buildings, and healthcare beds is wise. Borrowing for operations to finance tax cuts for the well-off is irresponsible. The government has lowered taxes mostly for those who have the most, totaling 70 billion – just as much as the defense buildup has cost. If we are not to fall into the luxury trap, the belt must be tightened when it comes to large tax subsidies to the very richest.

One must be honest: Not everything is the responsibility of Sweden's government. We stand united in support of Ukraine. We cannot blame Trump's tariff threats on Elisabeth Svantesson and the government. They have little power over that. A trade war has no winners. It is bad for the world economy and for our societies. But for the things the government and the Sweden Democrats do have power over, they need to be held accountable for.

The state's primary task is to ensure the safety of its citizens. There are no excuses for a lack of decisiveness.

Let go of the prestige, the old dogmas and ideas and increase equality! One is not the master of their own fortune.

Raise the child allowance, stimulate the economy, invest! Keep and expand the housing allowances! Invest in growth and infrastructure! Ensure that more housing is built and that we have the opportunity to strengthen both welfare and defense!

We need more than ever a leadership for society's community where we stick together and where politics exists for the citizens. That is how resilience is built. That is how Sweden becomes stronger. I look forward to returning when we have presented our budget and our proposals.

(Applause)

In this speech, Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V) concurred.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance asked on behalf of the Swedish people: What is happening? I believe that there are many around kitchen tables in Sweden who are asking themselves that very question right now.

How will it go with the jobs when Sweden already has half a million unemployed? Under the Tidö government, we have climbed to the top – not of the prosperity league, but of the unemployment league in the Western world.

How will it go for the companies when the bankruptcies are already hitting records since the Tidö government imposed 15 billion in new tax burdens on the companies?

How am I supposed to afford to buy the food that is to be placed on that kitchen table when inflation is picking up again because the Tidöregeringen has imposed new costs and burdens on our companies instead of lowering them?

How will it go with my savings? How will it go with my pension? How will it go with the money for welfare when our growth is at a standstill?

All these questions were also asked before Donald Trump struck with his tariff chaos, that is to say before we ended up in a situation where we actually face the greatest challenges ever in our Swedish economy, which is so enormously export-dependent.

When the Minister for Finance asks what is happening, I believe it is because there are many at home who are asking the question: When are you actually going to do something? But there we get no answer. We wait for the Minister for Finance as one waits for Godot. Or as the Minister for Finance himself expresses it: One should wait and see if there is reason to take measures. Yes, then we feel safe!

We Center Party members have an adequate Fälldinskt expression for this: Stop dragging this out! We cannot be the only party that, in this crisis situation, wants to lighten the burdens on our Swedish companies and our Swedish business sector so that we can save the jobs and the growth.

There is no risk of mass unemployment, says the Minister for Employment. Many have quoted him. That is what he says when we have half a million unemployed. They must not be lazy, is otherwise his message to them.

There is no risk of a financial crash – yes, it may be a bit unfortunately quoted by the Minister for Finance when the financial markets are racing like a rattling roller coaster on Wildfire in Kolmården and the world's leading investors and economists warn of the risk of a financial meltdown.

What does the captain of the ship himself, Ulf Kristersson, say? He has ice in his belly. Wait and see. Sit still in the boat. That is what he says as he stands there in the storm, paralyzed by inaction and frozen at the helm while the ship steers toward the rocks. He is unable to change course and unable to actually react to the crisis.

For two years, Ulf Kristersson has gotten away with outsourcing all decision-making power to Jimmie Åkesson – by letting Åkesson steer the government's and the Finance Minister's priorities and forgetting the economic reality out there. He has gotten away with letting the taxes on our small businesses pay for SD's meaningless return migration subsidies and by letting SD constantly put the cash register ahead of the work line, until SD has become almost as bad for the economy here as Trump is for the economy there.

But now, friends! Now, Mr. Speaker! It can no longer go on. As the only cyclical measure, the deduction is being raised from 30 to 50 percent. We C party members may love rot and rut – they are good – but it cannot be enough for all the exporting small businesses.

I have spoken with some very successful small companies, which only have a handful of employees and are located in a small town in Sweden but actually export to the whole world – not just to the USA, but to the whole world. They wonder: Is ROT the only thing you have to offer? There is nothing wrong with changing kitchen cabinet doors, but it will not make the 150,000 jobs that the government's job has cost come back.

People need answers at home. That is why the Centre Party is now calling for a massive investment to save growth and jobs. Lift the burdens from small businesses! Lower the tax for hiring so that more people get jobs when mass unemployment threatens! Lower the costs of hiring and producing in Sweden so that inflation is dampened when the Trump tariffs now threaten to create a new wave of inflation!

In this situation, we must lower the costs for Swedish companies by at least 20 billion SEK so that growth and jobs go up and inflation goes down. We must halve in order to reduce unemployment among the vulnerable. Furthermore, there are many around the kitchen tables, in fact many hundreds of thousands, who worry that one or both parents in the household do not have a job right now. Only one, or neither, of the parents goes to work because there are so many unemployed in Sweden right now. What does that mean for exclusion, gaps, crime, and problems in Sweden?

We must halve the tax on employing those with the lowest incomes so that they enter the workforce. We must lower the employer contribution all the way up to the median wage, and we must do it from the beginning of the year. We must also invest in the small companies, which account for four out of five jobs. Let them hire their first ten employees tax-free! There should be no employer contribution for the first ten employees.

Naturally, we should also – even if it is too late now – have lowered the income tax most for those with the lowest incomes so that people can afford to meet this crisis as the Centerpartiet proposes.

Massive investments are also needed in vocational training and transition, as well as in real integration where we believe in people and do not see them as burdens but as resources. It should be tough but heartfelt: People should be allowed to show what they can do when they have made it through late nights and early mornings, learned Swedish through practice and hard work, and proven that they can be a part of Swedish society. This leads to jobs. We want job-related Swedish and intensive integration.

Now the clock is ticking for the Tidö government, and it is also ticking for the Swedish climate transition. That was what we were – the country that grew and still pushed down emissions. We were the country that had high growth and falling emissions. Now we are the country that is stagnating and where emissions are soaring.

Again: Act, Kristersson and Elisabeth Svantesson! You are standing in the way of all Swedes who want to switch to environmentally friendly alternatives when you make them more expensive. Let them switch to used plug-in hybrids, used electric cars, and used gas cars, so that these are not exported to the rest of the world! You have made this much more expensive by abolishing all environmental bonuses. Yes, you have some scrap premium left – which perhaps 400 people, who happen to fit exactly into Romina Pourmokhtari's rules for how to scrap the car and then buy an expensive electric car, can use. But we need hundreds of thousands of people, not least in the countryside, who can afford to switch to that car that is cheap to run.

If we are to electrify, we must also lower the tax on electricity, not hike it up. Move out of the way! With your fossil-clutching, you are standing in the way of Swedish industry, which wants to grow green. It wants more wind power, which you block by refusing to fix both the permits and the cables. And do not crush the rest of Northvolt by stopping people from staying in Sweden and continuing to work in the green industry!

To all of you who still believe in the future but who are sitting at the kitchen table and perhaps are just in the process of losing hope that Sweden can rise again, I want to say something. Small businesses can free us from unemployment. Sweden can shine with the help of new industries that make climate transitions and sell to Europe and to the rest of the world – perhaps even to the USA, despite everything. The security and the jobs will return. The purchasing power and the money for the welfare state will return.

Centerpartiet and I say that it can be done. We can turn this around if we do the right things and if we do them now. Don't drag your feet! Wake up, Kristersson! Wake up, Svantesson! Wake up, Åkesson! The clock is ticking for the Swedish economy. It is urgent now.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We live in uncertain times, and we have several difficult years behind us. It is in that environment that the government presents the spring budget. It is a budget that focuses on supporting the economy now that inflation has been dampened. It is about getting growth started and giving households their purchasing power back. We also continue the work of strengthening Swedish security and safety while making targeted and important investments in welfare.

Mr. Speaker! Four months ago, the government's new budget began to take effect. In it, 60 billion goes to, among other things, getting economic growth started, after the government had presented two restrained budgets where fiscal policy joined forces with monetary policy and the parties in the labor market to win the battle against inflation.

A spring budget amendment is not a budget bill, but we are adding 11.5 billion to the initiatives of 60 billion that have been made. With investments in road maintenance, we reinforce the largest investments that have been made on infrastructure in modern times. We also invest in more housing, we reinforce the tax deduction for renovations, and we strengthen labor market and education initiatives to get more people into jobs.

Mr. Speaker! I have previously highlighted the government's work regarding mental ill-health. As a Christian Democrat, I am proud of that work and that it is further strengthened in this budget. Over the last 20 years, the number of Swedes who describe their lives as meaningless has quadrupled, from 6 percent to 24 percent. And we know that half of those who are on sick leave in Sweden are on sick leave for mental illnesses and ailments. Now, a Christian Democrat minister has the responsibility and is doing significant work to improve this vital care.

In the motions here in the Riksdag, I have personally proposed that a crisis commission for mental ill-health among children and young people should be appointed. It is one of our time's great public health issues. There is, in fact, a lack of important knowledge about why some are affected more severely than others. It is high time that we seek knowledge about why girls and boys develop anxiety and depression, or actually feel so poorly that they try to take their own lives. Last year, I visited child and adolescent psychiatry, BUP, all over the country. I met fantastic staff who made a real difference for children who lacked the will to live.

To the historical investment of 1 billion that was made earlier, an addition of a further 50 million is now presented in the year-end budget. This enables highly specialized care for those who have eating disorder issues. The purpose is to reduce the pressure and shorten the queues. 250 million is allocated to increase the number of places within adult psychiatry, and 200 million kronor is allocated to increase the number of places in what is called self-chosen admission.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I want to comment on the household economy. This government has made very large tax cuts for ordinary working households. We have brought down the high fuel prices. And we have pursued a restrained fiscal policy in order to dampen inflation. All of this is very important.

The Christian Democrats have fought to extend the supplementary housing allowance a number of times. We believe that it was a well-targeted and justified reinforcement, not least for single mothers, whom we know are captured by the targeted support. The support was, however, of an extraordinary character during a pandemic. It was then extended during the inflation crisis. But it was, therefore, only intended to apply during a limited period of time.

The situation remains tough for many households at the same time. The supplementary grant is not being extended, but I can guarantee that for the Kristdemokraterna it will be extremely important that we secure the finances for families with children in the upcoming autumn budget.

With that, I move for approval of the proposal in this spring revision budget.

(Applause)

In this speech, Lili André, Yusuf Aydin, Mathias Bengtsson, Camilla Brodin, Gudrun Brunegård, Dan Hovskär, Magnus Jacobsson and Camilla Rinaldo Miller (all KD) concurred.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The government has today presented a budget that does not meet the challenges we face. In a turbulent global situation and a prolonged recession, one presents a tone-deaf budget where one stands helpless in the face of Trump's tariffs and fails ordinary people as the difficulties grow ever larger.

This is not a budget for the welfare state, not for the households and not for the Swedish companies. It is unfortunately really not a budget for the climate either. It is a budget for a few.

The uncertainty surrounding Donald Trump's tariff policy is currently hitting the entire world economy very hard. Sweden is unfortunately no exception. Companies are worried about how their operations will be affected. Employees wonder if they will even have their jobs left. Ordinary households see their savings shrinking. It is about people's security and faith in the future and about the government's responsibility to act.

Against that background, I hoped that the government and the Sweden Democrats would today present proposals for reforms that show that they understand that we now need to create security for Swedish households and companies – but no. Passivity seems unfortunately to have become a watchword for this government. During the cost-of-living crisis, they left households and welfare in the lurch. Unfortunately, we now see that the government is once again far too passive in a restless situation.

The government likes to talk about having patience, but now it seems they have unfortunately frozen in place. Instead of a policy that strengthens, they are pushing through economic priorities that make Sweden even more vulnerable. It is not something the government can blame on Trump.

One conducts a policy that means high-income earners get tax cuts while families with children see their housing allowances reduced. It is an economic policy that prioritizes those who already have over those who truly need support when times are tough. It is a shameless right-wing policy when it is at its absolute worst. In the spring budget, we see nothing else, but one continues on the path already taken.

We now hear that the Sweden Democrats have blocked an extra child allowance, even though it is precisely families with children with small margins who are hit hardest by the cost crisis. Instead, they are increasing the renovation deduction. It is yet another reform that primarily benefits those with high incomes and large renovation projects. It is a betrayal by the Sweden Democrats toward their voters, who voted for them when they said they wanted to make things better for ordinary people. This is instead a policy that fuels inequality. It is a policy that causes healthcare to take a backseat, forces the school to save, and erodes the welfare while the well-off get their way.

Mr. Speaker! We find ourselves in a very serious situation in many ways, both trade-politically and security-politically. We must re-equip and strengthen the total defense to meet the new world order that appears to be emerging. It is something that we largely agree on, but which will also place great demands on economic policy.

In the upgrading, we must also not forget civil defense. We need to ensure that the entire society functions both in times of peace and in times of crisis.

In addition to the already mentioned challenges, we also have the climate crisis. Just the other day, we received confirmation once again that Sweden is on track to miss all climate goals. It is crazy. It becomes even more absurd when we are reached today by the Copernicus report, which states that 2024 was the warmest year ever recorded in Europe. We are now the continent where the warming is proceeding the fastest. The glaciers are melting at high speed, and emissions really must be reduced.

In this situation, however, the government continues to back away from the green transition. At the same time as companies demand more renewable energy and stable infrastructure, they are met by government parties who would rather talk about nuclear power that does not exist than invest in the energy transition that can happen here and now. Climate policy needs to be long-term, effective, and fair. Unfortunately, the Tidö parties fail on all points.

We also face major investment needs. It is about upgrading the railway, expanding the electricity supply, securing welfare, and carrying out the climate transition that is not only necessary for the planet but also good for jobs, the economy, and security.

In uncertain times, one of the tasks of politics is to create faith in the future. That is how we strengthen Sweden both today and tomorrow. It is about ensuring the conditions for the whole country. For the transition to be both effective and fair, it cannot look the same for all households and no matter where you live. We need to invest in public transport, in the trains, and in alternatives to the fossil fuels where the car is needed.

The policy then needs to be built on some central starting points. Fossil fuels need to become more expensive. Miljöpartiet wants to see a Sweden where people profit from taking the climate crisis seriously. We also know that the Swedish people want that. They want to see the polluter pay and that the sustainable alternatives become better and cheaper. More people need to be able to choose renewable energy, public transport, trains, and bicycles. Households that need the car shall receive support to manage higher fuel prices during a transition period.

In this economic situation, the government chooses the opposite. They simply do not support the most vulnerable. Instead, they implement tax cuts for those who have the most. They have made cuts in healthcare, in schools, and in elderly care. They show passivity in the face of Trump's trade war, and they pursue a continued policy that presses households with small margins even harder.

Mr. Speaker! It is not easy to run businesses in such an uncertain situation. One naturally hesitates to make investment decisions when one does not know what the world will look like even in a few weeks. What has happened now will affect the Swedish economy, but the question is to what extent – because the answer depends on how politics acts now.

Even before Trump announced his tariffs, more than half a million people were unemployed in Sweden. Excluding the pandemic, we have not had higher unemployment since the aftermath of the financial crisis. Our starting position after three Tidö budgets is therefore not strong.

The Minister for Employment, however, sees no risk of mass unemployment. It is, to say the least, concerning that there does not seem to be more preparation from the government's side, but perhaps this is the explanation for the very strange and tone-deaf budget that the Tidö parties are presenting today.

What we need to do is to support households that are struggling, invest in the future and secure jobs. We need to choose welfare over tax cuts, climate over short-term profits and security over uncertainty. The government's main number in meeting the development is increased subsidies in the rotavdrag. I dare to assert nevertheless that it will not be the investment that turns the economy around.

I share the Finance Minister's joy that Sweden still has a very good economy and that the interest expenses are not the highest. I just want to bring to the record that it was this economy that was handed over by the previous Green Party and Social Democratic government.

Mr. Speaker! A policy that prioritizes welfare, a just transition, and prudence with small economic margins would lead to better confidence in the future and better economic development. These are not radical ideas. This is a proven effective policy to get the economy moving while simultaneously building a stronger and more just Sweden. What the government has presented today is instead a budget that makes Sweden weaker. It is a budget that lacks solutions to the problems we face.

No one benefits from the trade war that Donald Trump has now started. But it is this government's responsibility to act to protect Swedish jobs, Swedish companies and Swedish households, as well as to lower emissions.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is a country with a strong economy, good public finances and a good welfare state. But we stand and have stood before great and tough challenges. We live in a restless world characterized by uncertainty, trade wars, war in Europe and a world order that is being disrupted. Here in Sweden, households and companies have been pressed hard by inflation for some years. The school system faces great challenges, and unemployment is high.

The recovery had begun, and growth was on the way up again in the latest forecasts. Given the events of the last few weeks, however, the uncertainty is great.

Therefore, the government is now presenting a spring budget to meet the challenges we have at home. It is a budget that shall strengthen the recovery, create jobs and make our schools safer and more secure while we drive forward the climate transition.

It is a total of 11.5 billion kronor. Half of it is pure cyclical measures. In total for 2025, it will be a budget space of 71.5 billion to strengthen households and companies, equip our defense, increase security in the country, drive forward the climate transition, and build a future where every child can succeed in school.

We have already put more money in the pockets of wage earners through lowered marginal taxes and lowered taxes on work and savings in all instances where we have been able to influence. For an average wage earner, this means several thousand extra every year. This is money that can make a difference when the electricity bill needs to be paid or when the children need new shoes.

Mr. Speaker! We need to do more. Therefore, we are temporarily raising the renovation deduction from 30 to 50 percent during 2025. It makes it cheaper to renovate, and it creates jobs in the construction sector. We also continue to invest in education. We are expanding the places at yrkeshögskola and yrkesvux, which means thousands of new opportunities for people to further their education, change careers, and take the step into the labor market. We now offer more than 120,000 different vocational trainings so that companies can hire the competence they need and push back unemployment.

We also do not forget the youth in this. Through targeted initiatives on summer jobs and jobs for young people in municipalities where unemployment is high, we provide opportunities for people to get their very first job. That is how self-confidence is built: through responsibility and a first foot into the labor market.

We are also strengthening psychiatry to increase the number of care beds within adult psychiatry and voluntary admission, as well as to shorten the queues to BUP.

School is another important priority in the budget. To prevent absenteeism and break social exclusion, we are increasing the state grants to school social teams. It is about ensuring that students who risk falling behind receive the right support in time, before the problems grow.

We are also strengthening safety in schools with new rules for increased security, restricted access, and preparedness plans against violence. The municipalities will receive resources to truly implement these initiatives.

We are also pushing forward to enable the climate transition. We are raising the scrapping premium to 25,000 kronor for those who replace an old petrol or diesel car with an electric car. This will also apply retroactively. At the same time, we are increasing the ceiling for Klimatklivet and providing additional funding to Industriklivet so that more companies and municipalities can receive support for investments in climate-smart solutions. It is a climate transition with a focus on technology, innovation, and competitiveness.

Mr. Speaker! We know that there are households that are still struggling. During recent years, the government has supported with temporarily increased housing allowances, electricity support, and tax cuts. We are prepared to act again if inflation or food prices take off again. This is a budget that takes responsibility for the economy and for the people in it. It provides the conditions for more people to be able to work, educate themselves, and step forward. For us liberals, the core is that every human being is given the opportunity to grow and shape their own life.

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! We find ourselves in difficult times, in restless times. As I began by saying, many are wondering what is happening. Many have a lump in their stomach.

What does the opposition do then, Mr. Speaker? Mikael Damberg stacks negative adjectives about the government to a very great extent. Ida Gabrielsson jokes away the situation and finds witty connections. Martin Ådahl chooses to basically misinterpret what I and everyone else in here say. Janine Alm Ericson puts her head in deep folds and says that we find ourselves in a serious situation.

Mr. Speaker! For me, this doesn't matter. But the person listening to this debate and who is worried probably wants to know what the opposition wants. There is barely one and a half years left until the election. Perhaps it is time for you in the opposition to come down from the stands, stand together, play together and tell at least one, two or three things that you intend to do together to make Sweden better. Will immigration be higher or lower with your four parties? Will taxes be higher or lower with your four parties? Will the benefits be higher or lower with your four parties?

I believe and think that it is time to take responsibility even in a difficult time and state what you want together. Our four parties have done it and are doing it. And we do not just talk – we act. Step by step, we are making Sweden safer with legislation and resources at a speed that has never been seen before. Step by step, we are strengthening households. We are lowering taxes, as I have mentioned previously. We are doing a number of things to facilitate things now. But what are your four parties doing? It is, after all, about doing things together with others. Alone is not strong; we know that. We use strength to improve Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance will have to accept that the results of the government's economic policy are being scrutinized in the Riksdag. They are not impressive, to summarize them this far into the mandate period. We in Sweden have had a poorer economic development than our European neighbors. Unemployment has increased, and we have had record numbers of bankruptcies. Furthermore, greenhouse gas emissions are increasing at record levels.

In a situation where unemployment rose, the Finance Minister cut back on labor market policy measures and education policy. When construction was abruptly halted, the Finance Minister chose to remove the investment support for housing construction. In this budget, the government misjudges the situation again and removes resources that have gone to export-promoting activities for small and medium-sized enterprises.

Can one not have a certain humility and admit that one has made a mistake? And above all: Was it right to cut back on vocational training and labor market measures? Would it not have been better for people to have a job to go to?

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is absolutely true that Sweden needs more people working. That is why we are strengthening vocational training and making it more profitable to work. Sweden has received a new direction in policy. That was also why we were assessed by the IMF and many others to have the highest growth in this part of the world. Now the growth level has been broken, but that has happened for all countries. We shall continue every day of the week to facilitate for Swedish companies. It is, after all, so, Mr. Speaker, that it is in the companies that the foundation lies.

Mikael Damberg talks about growth and entrepreneurship. But if one is serious about it, one should not shut down nuclear power but expand it. One should not raise taxes for those who have money and already pay high taxes today; that is not how we get them to invest. One should not worsen the research deduction. Instead, one should ensure that Swedish companies and employees are given reinforcements. But that is not what the Social Democrats do, and I think that is sad.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! What my question is about is whether it was right to be so optimistic about the economy that in previous budgets, cuts were made on labor market training and vocational training. The result was lower growth and higher unemployment. Now you are forced to put back money for things that you have taken away. Would it not have been smarter to provide education – vocational training and labor market training – to people who have been affected by unemployment, so that we could have avoided standing here with a budget where the government is forced to increase the total cost of unemployment by 2 billion? Would it not have been smarter to use that money for preventive measures so that people could take the jobs that actually exist in the Swedish economy? The government has backed into the recession and the unemployment.

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is nevertheless interesting that the Social Democrats continued to do exactly the same thing as they did when, during their time, we went from low unemployment to high. But I will let it go.

What this is about is that people do not want to talk about the real big problems. The Social Democrats always prioritize higher benefits over lower taxes. I have, both here in the Riksdag in both opposition and majority and in the government, been involved in making decisions on tax cuts that have meant that a nurse today has 4,000 kronor more per month. You have voted no to all those tax cuts. I have heard Mikael Damberg accuse us of not prioritizing welfare. He has threatened mass layoffs, but yesterday SKR said there will be more nurses and doctors.

Step by step, we are taking responsibility for a difficult situation. We will continue with a focus on education, taxes, infrastructure, and energy systems. All of this we did in the previous budget, and we are doing it in this one as well. The 70 billion that we are injecting into the Swedish economy this year will make a difference.

Once again: Your four parties want completely different things. The only thing one can know, the only thing that is certain in the opposition, is that one does not know at all what policy one will get.

(Applause)

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! There is something to what Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson says. But for the time being, we are managing; the people think that this government is doing such a bad job that we can almost take over with just three parties. We will return to that when things start to heat up.

Sometimes one needs humor to be able to get through tough times. That is what I have always thought. When you present your budget here in the Riksdag, Finance Minister, there is hardly anyone who seems to want to stand behind it. One almost apologizes a little.

The budget itself is in any case no joke. The Finance Minister says that she stands by the households. What does the Finance Minister want to say to the single mother who cannot afford to organize a children's party for her child now that the housing allowance is being worsened? Is this standing by her side?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! One should naturally have humor in politics. I appreciate that. But sometimes it is serious times. Then one must actually show together what one wants to do. Here in the city and region of Stockholm, we know what your parties want to do. You have raised the tax for two years in a row for precisely those single mothers who struggle and toil. Every month they have to pay higher tax. But despite the fact that you have raised the tax, you have succeeded in the feat of having fewer bus trips and closed eating disorder clinics as a result.

My point, Mr. Speaker, is that our policy is about supporting households in different ways. The housing allowance, therefore, remains at the normal level. It is not removed. But we ensure that those who work get to keep more of their wages. We know that Vänsterpartiet does not like that nurses, nursing assistants, and bus drivers should get to keep more of their wages. But we have a different view on households, a different view on that it should pay to work, and a different view on supporting all those who today need support. That is why, day after day, we have households in our sights; we lower taxes, change fuel prices, and do much more else to facilitate things for households.

(Applause)

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance talks very much about others and not about his own budget. Then one begins to wonder if there isn't a dog buried. It was said that one would stand on the same side as those who had a lump in their stomach and who asked themselves: How is it going to add up?

Can the Minister for Finance mention a single one of the proposals directed at Caroline and the other single mothers who gathered here outside the Riksdag and asked us to push for the housing allowance to remain?

Mr. Speaker! I must admit that I was naive. I actually thought that the Minister for Finance today would say that one was prepared to give Caroline and the others who are in this situation at least this.

Can you look them in the eye and stand by the budget that you have presented?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I can stand by the budget that we have presented every day. It is an extension of the budget that applies for this year with over 70 billion in investments.

We also showed during the first years that we prioritized welfare in our reform space. It did not result in mass layoffs as the Left Party members and Social Democrats said.

We have shown that we can present an infrastructure budget in a proposition that is larger than ever before.

We have simultaneously managed to lower taxes for everyone who works, because we can prioritize.

Yes, I can look people in the eye. I would have a much harder time looking them in the eye if I were governing here in Stockholm. It is in the most difficult times that you choose to raise taxes. It is your parties that do it.

We have different views on taxes and subsidies. More support may be needed in different ways. But here and now, we have presented an expansive budget that affects the economy and which will facilitate.

But there are many who have a lump in their stomach. The one who has saved throughout their entire life, the one who is single, or an entrepreneur who currently feels that demand is receding – we stand on all their sides.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I just want to quickly point out that what the Finance Minister just said might not be correct. It is not an expansive budget. The structural saving is exactly zero, according to your own table.

I go back more to the matter. Since it is so easy to misinterpret the Finance Minister, according to what was just said, my questions are simply the following, in order to make it very clear.

When does the government intend to do something about this crisis? Is it a matter of a week, is it a matter of a month, or is it a matter of half a year, after everyone else in Europe and in the rest of the world has acted on the customs chaos?

Shall we never lower the costs for small and growing companies and for job creators in this country so that we can secure the economy? Shall we just continue to raise them, as the government has done until now?

The Minister for Finance may well answer how he himself intends to act in the crisis and not just review all the other parties, if that is possible, Mr. Speaker.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I actually think it is quite bold of Martin Ådahl. But I will overlook the arrogance and the fact that he many times misinterprets me. I will tell you what we are going to do and what we do. It is quite simple.

First and foremost, we stand firmly together with other countries in the EU to now ensure that we can negotiate and counter the American tariffs. Alone is not strong. 27 countries are much stronger and even larger than the USA. That is what we shall do.

Here in Sweden, we are taking many steps to facilitate for small and large companies with the changed 3:12 rules that are now underway, the experts tax which has become more favorable, the R&D deduction, and also the energy system. I heard someone say that there is no new nuclear power. We have nuclear power in Sweden, but we need more.

We are all taking steps to facilitate for companies to grow in Sweden. I speak with representatives of large and small companies all the time for a dialogue. What do we need to do now so that they will stay and want to remain here and not move their operations elsewhere? We are working on that day by day and step by step.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Apart from all that stuff about attacks on the opposition, us or whoever it may be, I heard no answer at all on what the government intends to do moving forward and when it intends to do it.

Everything else is things that you have already done. Then the interpretation must be that everything you have done so far is sufficient. Nothing more needs to be done.

We all agree that we are to negotiate for free trade in Brussels with all countries where it is possible to do so. There is no discussion. We can say that everyone who follows this is certain of that, Mr. Speaker, and knows exactly what it is about.

But I did not hear, and neither did anyone else, any answer to the question of when you intend to do something.

I want to ask when you intend to do something about the enormous gap you have to reach the climate goal, which the government has also promised. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency said on Friday that it was 19 million tons. Will you not also do something about that?

Can you answer anything about what you intend to do in the crises that we are currently facing and when you intend to do it?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! One should not listen to those who know exactly what should be done right now. We have had a few days and a few weeks of incredible turbulence. The market goes up and down. We still do not know exactly where the tariff war and the trade war will end. But we know that it will get worse – and worse growth directly and indirectly for Sweden.

The government will, of course, act in this matter just as we acted with inflation. We are acting now by lowering taxes for everyone so that people have more money in their pockets. I just said what we are doing to improve the conditions for companies. We will continue to do so step by step. That direction remains.

I understand that it is frustrating for Martin Ådahl, who does not seem to have many friends on his side in politics. They want larger deficits and higher taxes. It will never benefit Swedish companies.

Swedish companies, small as well as large, are now quite happy that it is we who hold the baton and the gavel and that, together with them, we can steer towards a better growth policy.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Last autumn, the Minister for Finance spoke of a brightening on the horizon. But already at the beginning of the year, it became darker again. Households' view of the economy worsened even before Trump's trade policy caused stock markets around the world to crash.

Lowering the tax for high-income earners has, therefore, not reversed the development. Instead, many families with children have had it tougher. At the same time as the tax for high-income earners was lowered by 3,000 kronor per month, the housing allowance for families with children in a difficult economic situation was also lowered. Now it will deteriorate again at the half-year turn, while at the same time the government makes medicines more expensive.

One has to wonder. I want to ask the Minister for Finance what the government's actual plan is to reverse the development and whether any support will come to households. When will measures be presented that strengthen the economy and reduce unemployment?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would recommend that Janine Alm Ericson read both the budget bill for 2025 and the supplementary budget. In those, we are making major investments, as I have now mentioned a few times here. It is both tax cuts for households and large investments in infrastructure and research. We are taking new steps towards an energy system that works.

It is important policy. But as I have said all day today, we also have the strength and opportunity to counter worse times than the ones we are in today. We are in a recession. This budget meets it. But we may need to do more. In that case, we have the strength to do just that.

But do not forget that it is an expansive budget – Martin Ådahl can say what he wants! It is an expansive budget where money enters the economy. The tax deduction, for example, also enters the economy. This also applies to Arbetsförmedlingen's efforts and the university college.

We are doing a number of different things in terms of the economy, and we are also, of course, doing the most important thing: We continue to make Sweden safer and more secure in a very restless time.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Finance, for the answer!

It is precisely this that is so worrying. We have, in these difficult times, a government that only presents more of the same. We have not seen any change. Despite the fact that several of the measures the Finance Minister brings up are good, they do not lead right now to what we need to see right now, namely a stronger economy. There, safer households with more for the most vulnerable families would make a difference. Instead, the government chooses to continue with a tax policy that favors those who have the most.

I know that the Minister for Finance likes to say that she has lowered taxes for everyone. That may be so, but if I remember correctly, it was with like nine kronor in autumn for those who earn the least, while it was with several hundred for those who earn the most. It creates no equality, it does not help the economy, and it does not create security in this vulnerable situation.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I want to thank you for the entire debate, because it is important. It is important because we show the alternatives. We are four parties who stand together and who have the ability to do many things at the same time. We can do what is difficult and reprioritize in the budget to do what is needed here and now. It is about security and safety, and it is about household purchasing power and about lower taxes. Overall in our budgets, it therefore goes, in percentage terms, most to those who earn the least. Janine Alm Ericson is welcome to read in the distribution appendix.

But we are not satisfied. We have taken on a mission to make Sweden wealthier in the long run, not just here and now but both. Then it is about exactly what I have mentioned earlier: investments in Sweden so that our children and grandchildren get a different Sweden, a wealthier Sweden, than what we have.

Many young people have lost hope today. We want to give them that hope. It is dark, and it is tough. But we have a strength in the economy and in politics. I would like it to show a bit more sometimes, even in these debates.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance asks what is happening in the world and remarks that many are asking that question.

The truth is that it is right-wing populist politics from the USA that is currently driving up defense costs across Europe. It is a right-wing populist tariff policy that lowers growth, increases unemployment, and risks leading to global inflation. That is what is the cause of this.

But one cannot escape the discussion that the government also has a choice to make here and now. Most people will probably ask themselves: What does this mean for me and my family? I therefore believed until the very last moment, before the government was to present the budget, that the government would of course do something to ease the economy for households in this budget. But the government chose to skip it.

In our latest budget, we proposed a fair tax cut. We proposed increased child allowance by 200 kronor a month. We proposed targeted funds to the poorest pensioners. In the budget that we are discussing now, there were no new initiatives directly to households.

On the other hand, the government chooses to proceed with worsening the situation for the most vulnerable families with children in our country. It is clear that it is provoking when we know that your budget gave the Finance Minister over 3,000 kronor in tax cuts per month, while the poorest families with children are simultaneously forced to try to provide food for their children with even fewer resources. It is provoking that the government proceeds with making it more expensive to pick up medicine in a situation where households are very pressured.

It is clear that the government must be asked questions about how they intend to act when they do not support ordinary people in the cost crisis. Regardless of what is the cause of the anxiety and the economic turbulence, one expects a government that stands on the side of the households and that actually protects ordinary people in uneasy times.

Unfortunately, we do not have such a government. Sweden needs a new direction on economic policy.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker and members! Today we present a spring budget to further strengthen the economy. But the events of the past weeks have once again shown how quickly the world around us can change, both economically and in terms of security policy. In that situation, we need not only short-term stimulus packages but also long-term tools that strengthen Sweden's competitiveness.

I therefore want to take the opportunity to raise a question with Member Damberg regarding Sweden's relationship with the euro. A Swedish adoption of the euro could mean increased stability for our export-dependent economy, more attractive conditions for investments, and a clearer place at the table when important economic decisions are made in the EU.

There is also a security aspect in not standing alone with a small currency in an uncertain world. We saw how quickly it went with the Natoprocess when the security situation changed. The world will not wait for Sweden.

Therefore, I want to ask Member Damberg: How do you view the euro today? Is it not time to investigate the issue and prepare ourselves to be able to quickly switch currency if that were to be required?

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is not the first time we have discussed the euro in this chamber. I am happy to continue doing so, as it is an important issue that can be turned over and over.

But the Liberals should perhaps instead have that discussion with the Prime Minister or with the Moderates, who are the largest governing party. They have indeed said that it is not current to make a shift from the krona to the euro and that there will be no investigation, so that discussion perhaps you should have in government circles.

However, I think that we should discuss competitiveness and equal conditions right now. Swedish industry has submitted a proposal to the government where they want the system for short-term work to be updated. This means an enormous amount for competitiveness and for equal rules of the game. When tariffs are introduced and a Swedish company gets caught in this war, there is a risk that the jobs will disappear in Sweden instead of in other countries.

If the industry says they want competitive rules – why does the government then not come forward with competitive rules that also secure Swedish industry in a very uncertain time?

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, member, even though I may not think the answer was entirely clear! The member can rely on the fact that we take up the issue with all parties we can when we can and also in the government constellation.

This is truly relevant right now when so much is happening in our global environment. We know that uncertainty and instability hit small open economies like Sweden hard, and we also know that the technical and political threshold for an entry into the euro requires preparations well in advance.

My follow-up question is therefore still: If not now, then when? Shall we really wait with even investigating the alternatives until the crisis is already here?

Even though the member's party is not in power right now, it is still Sweden's largest party, and the Social Democrats have a large and important responsibility. I am convinced that the Swedish people want to know where the Social Democrats stand on the issue so that it does not turn out like in the Natoprocess.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! This matter of debate within the government parties is interesting because it does not seem to be so successful for the Liberals. It is roughly like the Christian Democrats' internal debate with the government regarding the child allowances or regarding investments for families with children, which also did not seem to be so successful. We can hope that KD has greater success this autumn.

It is important to see that we have acute problems concerning competitiveness. The government has had this on the table; there is a completed investigation. The industry says that this is important for our competitiveness here and now, in this uncertain environment with trade wars that can affect Swedish companies.

It is dangerous that the government does not include the proposal on short-term work in the spring budget and update that system. It could risk many thousands of jobs in Sweden if it goes poorly. I hope that the Liberals also take the words from Swedish industry into account when discussing which issues are crucial for Swedish industry's competitiveness.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! On March 12 this year, what many of us had seen coming for quite some time happened: Northvolt filed for bankruptcy.

I and several of my party colleagues have just stood in this speaker's chair and urged others in this chamber not to enter into this high-risk project with the taxpayers' money. But they did not want to listen, and now not only have the taxpayers lost money against their will, but the pensioners have also become poorer. The AP funds 1, 2, 3 and 4 have invested almost 6 billion kronor in the project, Mr. Speaker, and these 6 billion kronor are currently worth exactly zero kronor.

Other parties must start learning from their mistakes. This applies in particular to the Socialdemokraterna. This bubble came to be under the Socialdemokraterna's rule. It would not have been inflated and burst without the political hype, backing, and direct influence that existed. Here, it is not possible to shovel away the responsibility one has. The Socialdemokraterna, with Magdalena Andersson at the helm, should apologize to the country's 2.3 million pensioners because they will now receive a lower pension than they would have received without this debacle.

I think it is sad, Mr. Speaker, to see with what nonchalance certain parties in this chamber treat the taxpayers' money. Now, at least the Sweden Democrats have ensured that no payments of tax money will be made to another high-risk project, namely Stegra.

It is like this: There is a fully functioning private capital market where those who want to borrow can do so, where those who want to lend can do so, and where those who want to invest can do so. But do it with your own money, not with the taxpayers' or the pensioners' money!

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats promised practically everything to everyone during the election campaign. Now, the Sweden Democrats and the governing parties have ruled the country for three years, and it is clear that the election promises are not worth as much anymore. We see in black and white that when the Sweden Democrats rule, Sweden gets more expensive dental care for young people, worsened unemployment insurance, and worsened health insurance. We have a construction crisis rolling across the country. We have a welfare crisis. Now we also get more expensive medicine when the Sweden Democrats choose to worsen the high-cost protection for pharmaceuticals.

Oscar Sjöstedt raised the issue of pensioners' finances. How do you and the Sverigedemokraterna defend all these deteriorations for ordinary people, but above all for pensioners? How do you defend that ordinary Swedes should have to pay more for their medicine while you lower the tax most for the very highest earners in our country?

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Regarding dental care, we are now in the process of pushing through the world's largest dental care reform. It will be in place on January 1, 2026, and then our hope is that it will continue to be rolled out even in 2027.

Since then, it is a very unfortunate situation with the medicines, but it does not work that a number of politicians sit and decide how much medicines cost. I do not believe that anyone is pleased with the situation that medicines have become more expensive, Mr. Speaker – not I, at least. But it is not, therefore, a politically made decision that medicines should be expensive. Medicines have gone up in price, like quite a lot of other things.

I do not dare to bet that I have the figures right, Mr. Speaker, but I believe that the state accounts for 41 billion of the total cost for the pharmaceutical benefits, which is 50 billion kronor per year. The absolute lion's share is therefore covered by the state. The share that the state covers vis-à-vis the user or the consumer is also higher than it has been historically.

But it is very unfortunate that medicines have become more expensive. It is not a decision that I, the Minister for Finance, or the Prime Minister have made. They have gone up in price.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! That is simply not true. Right now, political decisions are worsening the high-cost protection and making it more expensive to collect one's medicines – approximately 900 kronor. It affects ordinary people but especially those pensioners with low incomes who do not know if they will be able to afford to get the medicine.

All that can be discussed in terms of whether it is wise or not. But it becomes more immoral when the Sweden Democrats and the government apparently in the previous budget had the means to lower the tax for high-income earners by 3,000 kronor a month, but now demand that poor pensioners should pay 900 kronor more to pick up their medicines. It is that trade-off that the Sweden Democrats must stand for. It is part of the budget that you have pushed through. No one else has made the decisions to make the high-cost protection worse and to make it more expensive to pick up one's medicines.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I understand that as well. But the reason why this change in the high-cost protection has been made is that medicines have gone up in price. Had we not had a situation where medicines themselves had become more expensive, there would have been no motive to make any changes in the high-cost protection. We are talking past each other – possibly deliberately; I do not know.

Then Mikael Damberg presents a false contradiction, I think, with our very high marginal tax rates. They are still too high, if I am to be completely honest. They were at 55 percent; now we have brought them down to 52 percent. Internationally, it is very high. That reform, Mr. Speaker, had a so-called self-financing rate of as much as 125 percent and thus financed itself with ease. The state receives more tax revenue through that tax cut. It sounds like magic, but it is not. The explanation is that the number of hours worked in the economy increases so that the state receives more tax revenue. There is therefore no contradiction in that way.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is amazing how it always seems to be free and good to favor the very richest.

The Sweden Democrats have here announced many things that they do not want to do. They have arranged so that one should not invest in this and that. They have arranged so that medicines will not become cheaper, or the same price as before, for pensioners. They have arranged so that, as I have understood it, there will be no child allowance. They have arranged so that certain people will not be able to stay. They have arranged so that there will be no increase in the pensioners' housing supplement.

I ask Oscar Sjöstedt: What have you achieved in this budget? What is Oscar Sjöstedt's and the Sverigedemokraternas footprint in the budget we are discussing today?

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It becomes a bit difficult to keep up in such a short exchange of remarks. I am very pleased with the investment in road maintenance that we are pushing through. It will benefit people who live in parts of the country like the one I live in myself, that is to say, rural municipalities where road maintenance has been very neglected, Mr. Speaker. We continue the upgrading of the judicial authorities and give almost half a billion kronor to the Prison and Probation Service, an agency that is in a phase of expansion that I do not believe any Swedish agency has ever been in – and so on, and so forth.

Then I, of course, do not sign off on that description that we are hearing here from Ida Gabrielsson, but it is perhaps not entirely unexpected.

This is a spring budget. If you add it to the autumn budget where we supported the economy, both households and companies, with 60 billion kronor, you can see that, on the whole, we see a wise and well-balanced economic policy from the Tidö parties.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is, in that case, a wise and well-considered policy that leaves the pensioners in the lurch. We heard earlier how Oscar Sjöstedt is concerned about their pensions due to the government's authorities AP-funds. But what has Oscar Sjöstedt himself done in the budget we are now discussing to strengthen the pensioners' finances? I look at the table but see no increased housing supplement for pensioners. I only see more expensive medicines and deteriorations, but it is possible that I have missed something.

Tell me, Oscar Sjöstedt, how you have transformed this concern for Swedish pensioners and their pensions into investments in the budget that will now apply for this year!

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is quite obvious. Above all, we have lowered the tax for pensioners, not just on one occasion but on two occasions. We have also increased the guaranteed pension quite significantly. The pensioners have received stronger purchasing power in 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025, Mr. Speaker.

Once again, I do not think that anyone, possibly apart from the pharmaceutical companies themselves, thinks it is a very fun situation that it has become expensive with medicine and pharmaceuticals. I do not, at least, but this is the explanation.

In Ida Gabrielsson's world, perhaps everything that happens in the broadest sense is political decisions. However, there is no one who has made the political decision that medicine should go up in price and be expensive. Here we have had an inflation, just like in much else, and that inflation has been a bit higher. It is very unfortunate, but that is how it is. There is no conspiracy or any political decision behind it. It is an unfortunate situation, quite simply.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Given that SD is a nationalist party, it still sometimes feels as if SD is uninterested in strengthening Sweden as a nation. One such example is the low level of self-sufficiency in food. This, in turn, means that every time food prices are shaken up on the global market, prices rise in Sweden without our farmers receiving better pay. Self-sufficiency we have, in principle, only for grain, carrots, and sugar. If there is war, we will probably have to bake carrot cake. The level is, overall, down to 50 percent.

I have the following questions for SD: What do you intend to do to raise the self-sufficiency rate to the level of 80 percent, which we in Centerpartiet and many with us consider necessary for our total defense? How should one strengthen Sweden and our preparedness?

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I agree completely, but that the Centre Party has a numerical target is completely uninteresting.

What we have done is to lower the tax to the EU's minimum levels for agricultural diesel, which means that we are making it practically cheaper to be a farmer. If we make it cheaper in the production stage, it will ultimately also be cheaper in the consumer stage, and we thereby strengthen our entire food sector. We have lowered the fuel taxes in general, which I mentioned in my speech – and that benefits the farmers.

When I have delved into these issues, the explanation for why it looks the way it does has been various types of surcharges in climate signals, not least at the EU level. It is a bit like what you are cooking up at home in Sweden – unfortunately, but not least at the EU level. The EU is the biggest culprit against a higher self-financing rate.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Now, it is not only we in the Center Party who have put forward the goal. I do not think at all that a goal for the self-sufficiency rate is something to sneeze at. On the contrary, many countries have such a goal. All our neighbors in northern Europe have a higher self-sufficiency rate than we do.

You have recently presented a food strategy, and it has received harsh criticism, among other things from Lantbrukarnas Riksförbund. It lacks both goals and concrete measures at the farm level. No rule simplifications are being made for investments, as the member himself points out, and nothing is being done to lower costs, which we have submitted motions for and which you have rejected outright. We have submitted proposals for committee initiatives, and you have rejected those outright as well.

How do you intend for us, with the help of 80 million kronor, to reach an 80 percent self-sufficiency rate in Sweden, as many actors hope and believe?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not mean that it is a bad idea to have goals. That is not quite what I meant. But I mean that just because the Center Party flails out a figure – 80 percent in this case – it does not mean that anything has been achieved at all. If we find a feasible way to go from, say, 50 percent to 80 percent, I am all ears. This is to the highest degree a problem that we need to take seriously.

I pose a couple of counter-questions: With whom is Martin Ådahl to carry out the secret plan that is supposed to lead to 80 percent? Shall we go back to a situation where diesel costs 27–28 kronor? That is what is being advocated from the opposition side. But we know what we get with that policy.

What is happening to the farmers? Now the cost for a liter of diesel is under 16 kronor. Should it cost 28 kronor instead? Is that something that will increase the self-sufficiency rate? Absolutely not – of course.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I see in Expressen that Oscar Sjöstedt has commented on the budget and said that it is already passé. This occurs after we have heard the Minister for Finance defend the budget and claim that it truly makes the right efforts for Sweden in a difficult time.

It is least said remarkable when Oscar Sjöstedt undermines the budget he himself has negotiated. I want to ask Oscar Sjöstedt if the opposition's criticism is correct. If the budget can become obsolete the same day it is presented, does it mean that the government lacks a plan for how to meet the uncertainty that we are now living in? What does that mean for the global economic situation, and what does it do for Swedish households and companies?

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I did not say it exactly like that, but it doesn't matter. It is clear that there is a point. I actually think the Minister for Finance said something wise, namely that one should not listen to the person who claims to know exactly how it will land with everything that is happening in the world right now. It was wisely said. So much is moving. Something might happen during this exchange of remarks; a new announcement will come, and then that announcement will disappear a bit later tonight. Tomorrow, a third announcement will come, and then it will change. That was my point.

What is the alternative? It is not possible to present a spring budget in a climate that is deeply dependent on the whims of the American administration on the issue. What is the alternative? Not presenting a spring budget at all is a bad alternative. But it moves so fast, and I think Janine Alm Ericson should have some respect for that.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I do not think anyone says that one knows exactly. However, the Minister for Finance wanted absolute answers from the opposition regarding what we were going to do.

But I think it is the government's budget proposal that is being presented today, and it is a proposal that the Sweden Democrats have been involved in negotiating. At the same time, one wants to make it sound as if one has no responsibility, that the global situation means that one is completely without answers and that one simply has to wait and see.

The opposition's criticism today has been that there does not seem to be any plan. One is not prepared. One hopes for the best, and one does nothing to meet the worst.

I still wonder if the opposition's criticism is actually correct. Of course, one does not know exactly how it will look. Of course, one does not know exactly which measures should be taken. But the government that governs Sweden, and its support party, should definitely have a better elaborated plan to meet the difficulties we see ahead.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I can agree that the government should have a plan. What is it that says we do not have it? There are a multitude of outcomes and parameters to keep track of.

Now there is some kind of 90-day reprieve, and agreements are to be negotiated with the whole world. I do not know if it will work or how it will affect us. Sweden is dependent on the German economy. Will Sweden possibly not be hit, but instead the Germans with the automotive industry they have? It will spill over onto Germany.

That American consumers will be hit by higher inflation is certain, even obvious. Will it spill over to us? Or will trade flows be adjusted in such a way that it becomes a deflationary pressure? It is not at all impossible that trade flows from other parts of the world, instead of being directed towards the USA, land in Europe and Sweden, and thereby become a deflationary pressure.

There are a number of outcomes, and obviously there is a plan to handle all different types of outcomes.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! I was in the same class as the Sandvik director's daughter at the end of the 80s. Her father was a director at the same company as my grandfather, who worked on the workshop floor. We used to play together with our rabbits.

It took a long time before I understood that her mother was a housewife. There were several kinds of cookies, and they lived centrally in a large villa. We lived in a house in Klangberget. Dad worked at Konsum, and mom worked at the preschool.

The clatter from one of Sweden's largest industrial areas sounded exciting at night. The office buildings were adjacent. The adult-day, which my grandfather used to call the engineers' workplaces – because they were allowed to draw during working hours.

We felt safe. After school, my grandmother Helmi came and picked me up. She had retired after many years as a cleaner. Grandfather took me out into the forest, and he talked all the way until he passed away about what a devil I was for picking cloudberries on the mire. Grandmother worked shifts at the laundry. She took the Sparkstöttingen to the store, and she made the tastiest meatballs.

Not everything was better before, but we stuck together better. Grandfather's hands shook just as much as the road machine he had worked with, and grandmother's hands were crooked from the years at the laundry. They rarely went outside Ockelbo municipality.

We went with mom and dad on a caravan holiday to Orsa camping. The Sandvik director's daughter and her family surely went on more exciting trips. We didn't have much compared to them. Still, we could meet, see each other and bridge the obstacles that our backgrounds had given us.

Today we no longer meet in the same class. Through political decisions, parents are made poor. My daughter's classmates are told that they do not belong here solely because their skin is darker.

We have made Sweden strong before, and we can do it again. Such a Sweden is worth defending.

In this speech, Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V) concurred.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! If we are to be able to reverse the deep economic crisis that awaits Sweden, get around mass unemployment, and reduce the inequalities in Sweden, we must invest in the Swedish countryside. The government has not done this during its two years in power. It is an unsustainable situation that one often has the worst healthcare, the worst schools, and the worst roads in the Swedish countryside. This is so after previous investments but also after the latest investments. Not least, there are the worst railways and communications in the countryside. At the same time, one has the highest tax, despite that the small businesses and the people in the countryside are doing their part. This is completely unsustainable.

It is unsustainable, especially now when we are to carry out the largest upgrade of the Swedish defense in modern times. It will require great sacrifices and resources, but it will also require that our total defense holds. For Ukraine, total defense has indeed been very important.

If we do not invest in the countryside and make the whole country function, we also cannot defend our entire country. As mentioned earlier in the debate, it is therefore also unsustainable that Sweden has the lowest self-sufficiency of food in Northern Europe. We are so dependent on the outside world that food prices soar every time the markets shake. We are at barely 50 percent. We must set concrete goals and allocate funds for this.

We must also finally reduce the regulations. I would like to greet the Swedish Riksdag from the rooster Erik and the hens Evita, Snövita, and Gråvita who live in an unnamed location in Central Sweden. There they lay eggs and live a good life, even though they do not have an indoor area as large as a student apartment – according to the Swedish Board of Agriculture's rules – and thus have not received the Swedish Board of Agriculture's blessing. Please, Tidöregeringen, free the countryside from all these insane micro-regulations!

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! This autumn, the government presented the largest investment in infrastructure in modern times: over 200 billion kronor up to and including the year 2037. The new framework became 1,171 billion kronor and gives us the conditions to build away 100 percent of the maintenance debt on the roadside. In the autumn supplementary budget, an additional 500 million kronor is now added so that we can more quickly address the neglected maintenance as well as improve the condition, robustness, and accessibility of the state roads.

This is very good, because the maintenance debt has indeed grown increasingly. One in four roads in the country was judged to be in poor condition. Good infrastructure benefits everyone – families, companies, and Swedish growth.

Madam Speaker! The Government is also doubling the grant to the Norrland Fund. It will receive a capital supplement of 300 million kronor during 2025. Large investments and business establishments in places that have for a long period had low or stagnating population growth involve great challenges for community building, not least when it comes to producing new housing to meet the needs of increased immigration to the affected municipalities.

The measure contributes to improving the economy within the construction sector by increasing access to capital so that more housing projects can be started. This means that the demand for labor within the construction, building materials, and installation sectors increases and that the business environment's conditions are strengthened.

(Applause)

In this speech, Lili André and Camilla Brodin (both KD) concurred.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Last year, 73,649 faults were reported on the Swedish railway. It is the highest recording in many years. It is not so strange that the consequences were that Sweden had the worst punctuality on the railway in 14 years. Furthermore, it is worse punctuality than Ukraine had, which has a fantastic railway network which both Hans Eklind and I have experienced.

Nearly 40 percent of the signaling systems have passed their technical lifespan. Trafikverket argues that a radical change is required to break the negative trend. We in the Center Party agree with this and are pushing very hard on it. Therefore, I ask: Can we in the Riksdag, regardless of party affiliation, not eventually take responsibility for the railway maintenance debt?

I am disappointed when I see the year-end budget. Not even a tenth of the maintenance goes to the Swedish railway over the next twelve years. But one does invest in the roads, for that matter.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! It was a train journey to Kyiv that I will be slow to forget. But just as Martin Ådahl noted, I also observed the same thing afterwards. A country that is at war still manages to ensure that the train both departs on time and arrives on time. Then, both Martin Ådahl and I, as well as a few others from the Finance Committee, witnessed heartbreaking scenes at the train station when we were about to travel home again. That is all on this.

Let us talk about the infrastructure investment. If I remember correctly, the members and I debated the same thing in the autumn. What the government is putting forward is already a ceiling. One cannot invest more money in the railway and expect to get anything out of it. It is already at the maximum level. For that reason, there is no more appropriation for the railway in 2025. But I promise that the government will return, because the railway is also part of the socially important infrastructure.

Now we begin with the road. We are reinforcing this year. Then we return to the railway. There are a number of different points of improvement here that must be implemented.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! The reason we are back in the same debate is that the problem has not disappeared. The government is once again doing nothing, despite the fact that you from the Christian Democrats have promised the world when it comes to fixing the railway. This is not being prioritized.

The experts say that there are indeed resources. In other parts of Europe, they are increasing their railway maintenance and renovating in a completely different way, while we in Sweden only get a growing railway debt. According to calculations, it will take 350 years to replace all the overhead lines and poles that are exhausted. We cannot continue like this.

Now my question is: Is the only answer from this sitting government here, as in all other issues, that we should just wait and see if it sorts itself out? At best, we will be at a tenth of the maintenance debt that we have. What does that mean for the Swedish countryside and for all of Sweden's infrastructure in a very difficult security situation?

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! I do not know if I have problems with the Swedish language. I usually do not have it. I have, in any case, never heard it. I did say in my previous contribution to Martin Ådahl that the government wants to do something about both roads and railways. But when it comes to the railway, we have maxed out the amount for what can be converted into practical work. It does not matter how many times Martin Ådahl says that we are not investing more than so and so. We must, of course, ensure that something gets done with the money that we allocate. We have maxed out the amount for 2025.

I hope and believe, given that I know the Minister for Infrastructure very well, that he will ensure that this railway maintenance that is needed – but an expansion of the railway was also needed – will take place. It is indeed truly important infrastructure we are talking about.

But, as I said, we are leaving no stone unturned in this work. We have shown that now by maximizing the amount that can be utilized to carry out these maintenance and repair works, which are so important to do.

Martin Ådahl and I are actually in agreement. But I do not invest money where nothing can be done for it. That is the answer – once again.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is no secret that the Christian Democrats are warm supporters of nuclear power and are now prepared to risk a great deal of the taxpayers' money to get a reactor construction started. In order to secure an investment, it has been proposed that the electricity tax for households and companies should be raised and the money then transferred to those who operate the fundamentally unprofitable reactors.

Several experts have pointed out that the new nuclear power is not needed and that the alternatives based on green base load are cheaper. Furthermore, the government's unilateral support for nuclear power risks pushing out investments in new electricity production in the near term.

What I would like to ask the Christian Democrats is why they are prepared to indebt the Swedish people for something that perhaps is not even needed.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! It was interesting to hear that there are people who believe that nuclear power is not needed. We need to expand the planned energy production in Sweden, period. But one has, from the left and not least from the Miljöparti's side, been obsessed with the idea of phasing out nuclear power. One has even prohibited research on nuclear power – only that, I think, is completely bizarre.

Yes, nuclear power costs money. But the problem has been that if there is uncertainty, it is, as Janine Alm Ericson also knows, difficult to make long-term investments. Does one dare to make these investments, yes or no?

This government is trying to ensure that these long-term investments can now be realized. I am very pleased with that, because if we are now to talk about a green transition and this new society where we do not use fossil fuels, I believe it requires that we have predictable energy sources that can deliver electricity 24/7. The question of whether we should invest in wind power or nuclear power, I think, reflects a binary opposition that I don't quite buy; we need to have both.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Hans Eklind, for the answer! I can point out that we have proposals for investments in green base load instead. That would stabilize the system and give us much more electricity production within a short time.

That is the point. Hans Eklind talks about the green transition. This is very pleasing for an environmentalist, because it is incredibly important. It is not a prioritization we have previously seen from the Kristdemokraterna, but which I welcome, as I said. But for it to work, companies cannot wait to get more electricity by 2035.

This is the entire difficulty with the proposal that the government has now presented. They want to borrow large sums, and they want to place a tax on households and companies. Furthermore, we will have to wait for new electricity all the way until 2035. How can this be a responsible action from a governing party?

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! The simple answer is that Janine Alm Ericson's description of reality has nothing to do with reality. This government has already taken over 70 measures to improve so that electricity can be delivered. It is not possible to use political slogans.

I believe that our Minister for Energy, as well as my own party leader Ebba Busch, has been clear that we need all different types of energy in this bouquet to be able to solve the problems of the future. In that regard, nuclear power is one of the most decisive, because we need predictable energy.

In Germany, there is a concept that I find interesting and that I would like Janine Alm Ericson to reflect a bit on: Dunkelflaute. It is German and means dark doldrums – when it is not shining and not blowing, you have no electricity if you invest unilaterally in the type of energy sources that Janine Alm Ericson believes will solve the future's problems.

We need nuclear power, wind power, solar power and, above all, hydropower, of course. All of these are needed so that we can make the transition that I believe Janine Alm Ericson and I actually agree on.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Last week, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency established that the government is missing all climate targets for 2030, 2040, and 2045. It is one of several bodies saying the same thing: the government's climate policy is totally inadequate. Instead, this government has significantly increased emissions. This is the continuation of a policy that has completely lost sight of the green transition. Companies need to be able to rely on the fact that it will pay off to invest in sustainable investments and that energy and infrastructure will actually be delivered.

The government's prestige project to build new nuclear power will become a sinkhole for taxpayers' money. The nuclear power support will force cuts in welfare, and households will be forced to pay a new electricity tax – an Ebba Busch tax, if you will – for 40 years to finance this extravaganza. This gigantic nuclear power subsidy also hampers investments in new renewable electricity production that can be built out quickly, regardless of what Hans Eklind says. One is therefore braking electrification and the climate transition.

The Moderates went to the election on getting the climate in order. I believe that, unfortunately, we can say with certainty that this has not happened. Whether it is due to their own lack of ambition or concessions to the Sweden Democrats' climate denial policy, we do not know, but it is very serious.

Sweden needs to carry out major investments to strengthen our competitiveness and implement the green transition. It is about refurbishing and expanding our railway, expanding the electricity supply, and investing in the technologies of the future. In an uneasy world, politics needs to create confidence in the future. This government does not do that. It is simply time to replace it.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Now Hans Eklind also managed to request the floor. But I thought our friends from Kristdemokraterna got away a bit too easily with that thing about the Dunkelflaute, when it is not shining and not blowing. The Center Party has, in fact, recently presented a report where we have delved into this. How are we to be able to obtain corresponding controllable base load as cheaply as possible?

It turns out, based on reports from Sveriges Ingenjörer, the Swedish Energy Agency, and many other experts, what the three cheapest things are. Firstly, it is about modernizing hydropower, simply replacing the turbines. Secondly, it is about creating incentives to connect electricity to the ordinary district heating. This can, in fact, be done today at a much lower cost. Thirdly, it naturally concerns improving energy efficiency.

This together actually corresponds to all four reactors. It takes half the time. In fact, we can start doing it right away instead of waiting until 2035 – and at a quarter of the cost. What do you say to this?

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Yes, it is precisely this that we are also talking about. We have submitted a proposal concerning green base power and specifically about streamlining hydropower and improving energy efficiency, as well as expanding battery capacity. It is not such a very foreign technology as the government parties most of the time seem to want to make it sound like.

It sounds, therefore, as if we have proposals that very much resemble the Center Party's, and we look forward to providing the government with a joint package that they can take a position on – instead of locking Sweden into an expensive and difficult Ebba Busch tax, which actually does not resemble anything else I have heard of in the Swedish economy before.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! It would be very unfortunate if Sweden, in a situation where we need to make large investments in our defense, need to face a serious economic crisis and also have other important investments, would invest 400 billion on a gigantic risk project for nuclear power at any cost, which would crowd out all of this. Furthermore, we would additionally get a lot of taxes that make electricity expensive for everyone – not at all cheap, as promised, but very expensive. This would also, as also mentioned, become a reality sometime in 2035, when all the industries that intended to use the electricity no longer even exist in Sweden but have instead moved to Spain or somewhere else where there is cheaper electricity.

We do not agree on everything. If nuclear power can become profitable and cheaper, we of course think that it can be connected to the system, but not at any price. But it is important that this debate is not carried out with the political slogans that the Kristdemokraterna mentioned here earlier, but in reality.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! Precisely, one of the problems with the proposal that the government has now presented regarding new nuclear power is that it does not answer the question of how it is to be financed. This will cost several hundred billion, and at the same time, it is said that one shall not borrow for it, even though it is okay to borrow for defense. But the government's talking point when the proposal was presented was very clear: We shall not borrow for the expansion of nuclear power.

It is not possible to understand how this is going to happen or who will want to do it. Something is it that we do not get an answer to.

What we are sure of, however, is the Ebba Busch tax, which will be placed on energy. It will lock Swedish households and companies into higher electricity prices than is necessary. And on top of this, we will therefore not even get the electricity that we need until 2035. It is nothing other than a very bad proposal.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! I must begin by correcting the Minister for Finance, because it seems that one can cooperate sometimes at least. So it evidently is. It has been a wonderfully fine exchange of remarks. Enough of that. It is perfectly okay – it is clear that you shall take the chance to speak as much as you can.

The facts remain. We have, therefore, installed more than 13,000 megawatts since this government took office. The problem, however, is that we only get out 330 megawatts. It is not that this government has not added this, but the problem is about what can be extracted.

However, it was not for this that I requested the floor. I requested the floor to ask a counter-question regarding this with fertilizer production. During Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, the import of precisely fertilizer has increased, not decreased. It finances Putin's war chest. Does Janine Alm Eriksson think that is okay, or should we start with fertilizer production in Sweden instead?

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! I want to start by staying a little longer on the nuclear power debate and the discussion about how much energy this government has created. That may be so, but one has also said no to large wind power investments, which means that Sweden is in a worse position and has received higher prices. I just want this to be brought out. This policy is continued now, and it makes it harder for households and companies moving forward. One wants, above all, to make it more expensive in a situation where it is not needed.

When it comes to fertilizer production, I hope and believe that Swedish farmers take advantage of the fertilizer they have themselves and use it to the greatest extent possible. But we do know that one is also dependent on bringing in fertilizer from outside. Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine hit the farmers very hard initially, because much was lacking. But I must say that I don't quite understand the question, so Hans Eklind is welcome to repeat it. We in Miljöpartiet have nothing against fertilizer.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! Russia is the world's largest producer of fertilizer. That is the fact. Fertilizer is very important for their war chest. We know that we ourselves are increasing the import of fertilizer.

The question then is whether we can strengthen domestic fertilizer production and thus reduce Sweden's import dependency on mineral fertilizer from Russia. We can indeed become independent. We can even turn it into an export industry if we want to. But then the following small delicate problem arises, namely that we will not live up to our emission commitments, because emissions in Sweden will increase. The problem, or perhaps rather the advantage, of emissions increasing in Sweden is however that the total still decreases. We can, for instance, ensure that we have a fertilizer production that is smarter and more climate-friendly than the one currently taking place in Russia. My question then is: Is it okay for an environmentalist party that we make such a maneuver – that is, that we increase fertilizer production in Sweden even if it unfortunately means that we increase emissions? For Mother Earth, the total emissions should surely be the central point. Could one imagine that Miljöpartiet accepts that maneuver?

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Madam Speaker! For the Green Party, it is important that emissions decrease across the entire globe. Emissions are local, but they contribute globally. It is therefore a matter of us constantly lowering emissions.

When it comes to how we are to do it and how we lay it out in the world, there are very many agreements. Everyone tries to work according to them, not least towards the global sustainability goals. There we are not really getting anywhere.

It is very pleasing that the Christian Democrats are now raising the issue of climate in our exchanges of remarks. Then perhaps we can hope to get more out of it.

As long as we need this type of fertilizer, it also needs to be produced in the best way. Here we see how Swedish innovative power and Swedish companies contribute to the transition. This is something that Miljöpartiet has invested a lot of money in through, among other things, Industriklivet. There we see that we have great opportunities to continue working to secure Swedish companies and Swedish workplaces.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! Let me repeat an important truth: School is society's most important freedom reform. It is there that the foundation is laid. It is there that children learn that they have the right to dream and the right to succeed, and that it does not matter where one comes from, but where one is headed.

That is why I am proud that we in the spring budget continue to prioritize the school. We are strengthening the support for school social teams. It is an important tool to be able to catch students at an early stage who risk ending up on the wrong path. It works for the students, the teachers, and society. We are also increasing safety in the school.

The government is now introducing clearer security rules to prevent threats and violence. It is a matter of course that children should be able to feel safe in school. The municipalities are receiving resources to ensure that this becomes a reality.

These are important initiatives together with what was presented in the budget for 2025 and with the investigations that the Liberals have driven and which are now being completed one by one. For example, one looks at important issues such as limited profit extraction, reduced administrative burden for teachers, and so on.

At the same time, we create summer jobs for young people to give them the chance to feel needed, get responsibility, and receive a salary. That is how we build self-esteem. That is how we build faith in the future.

Madam Speaker! This is what social liberalism is in practice – that we give people the freedom to grow and that we build a society where no one is held back but where no one is either left behind.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Now I believe that Member Hans Eklind suspects that I am going to talk about fertilizer, because it was spoken of in the previous exchange of remarks. But I will not do that. No, jokes aside!

Madam Speaker! I think we cannot leave this debate without addressing the enormous funding needs that the Ukrainian state currently has regarding the procurement and self-production of weapons – it is, of course, also about receiving weapons that are made in Sweden and financed in Sweden. We in the Centerpartiet have pleaded that Sweden, which has very good public finances and strong interests in Ukraine continuing to function as a shield for all of free Europe, should triple the support – per year – from the framework of 25 billion that has now already been exceeded. Thus, the resources have also been shifted. It shall therefore go from 26 to 75 billion per year, a bit over 1 percent of our country's GDP.

I would like to ask the member from the Liberals if it is not time for our government to drive this, because it is urgent.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you very much for a very important question.

I can truly agree with Member Ådahl on how important it is with the long-term and sustained support for Ukraine's struggle to win the war. They are fighting not only for their own survival and freedom but also for all of Europe's freedom and security.

I think that now, in the restless times we are in and considering what is happening externally with the recent change of president in the USA, it is even more important that Europe unites and that we do everything we can.

My colleague Gulan Avci, our defense policy spokesperson, made a statement in Agenda when she was there and discussed this. The Liberals want to increase the support to Ukraine. In our spring budget, we announced that we would move forward parts of the framework for this baseline, which we announced and which was 25 billion per year. It is now exceeded. This is good and important, because we need to do what we can here and now to support Ukraine here and now.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I want to emphasize that we truly support this proposal, even though we naturally wished that there had been more money and that it had not been moved from 2026. But even there, time is very short, especially considering the current situation with the negotiation, where the new American administration is unfortunately trying to force a peace on Ukraine on Putin's terms, which neither you nor we nor, I hope, anyone in Sweden accepts. It must be a peace on Ukraine's terms. But then, naturally, as several of you have said, their hand must be strengthened. It must be done concretely, and it must be done now.

We have placed this outside the framework, so it actually does not affect the framework of the public finances. We have done this deliberately, because there is now war in the middle of Europe. We hope that you have the opportunity to actually finally do what we have several times placed on the Finance Committee's table. It is about tripling the aid.

I would like to take the opportunity to wish all members and the Committee on Finance a happy Easter.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Madam Speaker! It was good that I was given an opportunity, for I did not have time to finish speaking in my previous contribution.

Now we have seen to it that we allocate even more money for 2025. From the Liberals' side, we want to push forward, so that we do what we can. I would like to say that there is a great consensus in the government and the Swedish Riksdag regarding the long-term support for Ukraine. I think it is very good and very important.

What happens in 2026 and beyond, we will have to return to. But here I think: We exclude nothing. We need to do what is required to support Ukraine, so that they win the war and get peace on their own terms.

(Applause)

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

The bill was tabled.

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