Debate on the occasion of the submission of our government bill

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden stands firm despite the harsh winds and turbulence in the world around us. With strong public finances and political decisiveness, the government and the Sweden Democrats are building a stronger, safer, and wealthier Sweden, step by step and reform by reform.

When I became Finance Minister, Sweden had an inflation of 10 percent. Families with children had difficulty making ends meet for the grocery bag, and many elderly people turned away when they reached the coffee shelf. With a restrained fiscal policy during the first two years of the mandate period, we fought the high inflation, and now it lies a bit below the target of 2 percent.

When I became Finance Minister, Mr. Speaker, diesel in Sweden was the most expensive in the world – or at least in Europe. Today, when all of Europe is being pressured by higher oil prices as a result of the war in Iran, Sweden has a better starting position than the vast majority of countries in Europe because the Sweden Democrats and the government have significantly lowered the reduction obligation.

Mr. Speaker! When I became Finance Minister, Sweden was at the bottom of the EU ranking regarding growth, and this year the EU Commission expects Sweden to be one of the countries in the EU's top tier. Now, the structural unemployment is also falling. It is falling trend-wise for the first time in 20 years, thanks to the government's policy.

With all this said, there are still many Swedes struggling with their finances. There are parents who find it difficult to make ends meet. There are also many who are worried about becoming unemployed or who are unemployed and worried about how they can return to work. The Swedish economy is currently in a recovery phase, Mr. Speaker, but we are still in a recession after Donald Trump started a trade war last spring.

The key to completely breaking the Swedish economy free from the recession is to strengthen domestic demand. It simply means strengthening Swedes' finances so that more people have the opportunity to purchase goods and services. Then, clothing store owners, hairdressers, restaurant owners, carpenters, electricians, and many other business owners can see their businesses grow instead of being threatened by closure. That is how we get the wheels turning.

That is also why we, in the budget that came into effect on January 1, lowered the tax on work and pension for the third year in a row, Mr. Speaker. We lowered the tax on electricity, and just recently we halved the food VAT. We are lowering the preschool fee from July 1, and we increased the housing allowance at the beginning of the year.

We do all this so that people will have it better and so that the Swedish economy will get moving. The recovery is fragile, Mr. Speaker, and the rest of the world is unpredictable; we have truly been brutally reminded of that over several years. But Sweden stands firm.

Mr. Speaker! When we took over government power in October 2022, the shootings were at record levels. Children murdered children, and if they did not want to murder other children, they were murdered. Now the shootings have been halved, and January this year was the first month in almost eight years without any fatal shooting. But children still murder children, and the month of March was dark: A 15-year-old was shot dead in Malmö, and a teenage boy was shot dead in Vårby gård. A 15-year-old girl is suspected of both murders. And at home in Örebro on a Saturday evening a few weeks ago, a 20-year-old football player was shot dead.

A great deal of work remains when it comes to stopping deadly violence, but step by step and reform by reform, we are now making Sweden safer.

Mr. Speaker! When we took over government power, Sweden was not a member of Nato. After good and constructive cooperation with the opposition, Sweden is now a member, and now the defense is being expanded at a pace never seen before. It is literally life-saving. I will say that I am both proud and grateful to be the Finance Minister in a country where the consensus on the support for Ukraine and the support for the defense buildup is so monumental, so, from the bottom of my heart: Thank you!

(Applause)

Mr. Speaker! If there is anything that the recent years have taught us, it is that the only constant – the only thing one can be sure of – is uncertainty. The war in the Middle East, which has now been ongoing for several weeks, affects the world economy and Sweden. We may not be able to influence the war, as it is not entirely in our hands – unfortunately! But what is in our hands is the work of continuing to build a strong and resilient economy.

Over the last ten years, both the Riksdag and the government have come to handle many crises – the refugee crisis, the pandemic, the wars, the serious crime, and the inflation. We have been able to do so thanks to strong public finances. We must also not let the current crises obscure the view for the future, but instead, we must devote all the strength we can to building the economy stronger and larger for the future.

Our government bill, which the Speaker has just received in his hand, contains a plan in three parts. We want to continue building a resilient economy that can also continue to stand on its own feet and be among the strongest in Europe, and that requires three things.

First and foremost, we must continue to guard our strong public finances. Many want to paint a bleak picture of the Swedish economy right now, but the fact is that Sweden is one of only nine countries in the world with the highest credit rating – AAA – from the major credit institutions. Our public debt amounts to 36 percent of GDP, which can be compared with the average in the EU, which exceeds 80. Another way to express it is that Sweden has world-class public finances, and that means that, unlike many other countries, we have the room to maneuver to build protective barriers around the Swedes' economy.

That is not how it looks everywhere, as said. Finland has a national debt that has increased incredibly fast over the last 15 years, and the country is now forced to make cuts in welfare. France has become one of the most indebted countries in Europe with a debt of 117 percent of GDP. Here, a lot of money must be spent on interest payments – in many countries even more than what is spent on healthcare and defense.

For me, it is very important that Sweden never ends up in that situation. That is why we want to continue building protective barriers, and that is why I have said that the reforms and election promises of the next mandate period must primarily be financed. It is no stranger than that. We are now building a strong and secure Sweden, and we must show that, in addition to that, we can finance what will make Sweden safer and stronger moving forward.

One thing that not only I but all our four parties can give an answer on, namely that we agree that this shall not be financed with increased taxes on work or savings.

(Applause)

If the first part of the plan for our economy is about safeguarding the strong public finances, the second part is about enabling more Swedish jobs. We here do not create jobs, but we have a great responsibility and an obligation to give companies the right conditions to grow. This is more important than ever. There is currently fierce competition for investments and skills all around the world. Not least USA and China are competing for production and company establishments.

For a relatively small player like Sweden, increased trade is an enormously important part. We need to find more trade routes, not least now that the USA has raised the tariffs on exports. It is very important that the EU has now received a free trade agreement with the world's largest country, India, and furthermore an agreement with Mercosur. More free trade agreements are needed.

Taxes are another important part when it comes to job creation. The government has extended the time period for the expert tax. We have also raised the amount limit for the R&D deduction, improved the 3:12 rules, abolished receipt complications, and raised the turnover limit for when entrepreneurs must pay VAT. Now we have also temporarily lowered the employer contribution for young people. It cannot be avoided that taxes play a role for the growth of jobs.

It is also impossible to escape the fact that it is incredibly important for a country to have a functioning energy system so that companies can grow and invest and dare to invest forward. That is why the construction of new nuclear power is so incredibly important. It takes time but is completely necessary so that there is more predictable base load when Sweden is now being electrified.

(Applause)

For those who wonder: This government is, together with the Sweden Democrats, the guarantor that new nuclear power will be possible in Sweden. Believe nothing else!

The third and final part of our plan for the way forward and for achieving a stronger economy is that effort shall pay off even more. Regardless of whether you are the caretaker who unlocks the school in the morning, the engineer who invents smart solutions for industry, or the bus driver who drives the school bus in the countryside in Närkes Kil, the government will always stand on your side. As Finance Minister, I will always stand on the side of the hard-working people. I am speaking of those who do their duty every day and expect society to function.

During this mandate period, we have lowered the tax three times. We have also lowered the tax on pensions to the same extent. It is a path that I want to continue on.

This year, something unique and historical is happening: We are now carrying out a major subsidy reform. The focus is that one should do more to get into work if one receives compensation or a subsidy; one should be active. There will be rules for what levels larger families can receive as subsidy recipients.

I have said it many times, and it is just as true every time: It is not fair that the person who works hard every day, and perhaps goes to a job they don't even like, has about as much money every month as the neighbor and the neighbor's entire family, even though they do not work. So you do not build a strong society. So we do not build a strong Sweden.

That is why we want, together with the subsidy reform, to lower the tax – I, as a Moderate, want to continue with that. We know that this leads to more hours worked in the economy, and it is precisely that which is needed for the economy to grow.

The return of the work line is long-awaited, Mr. Speaker. It needs to continue, and therefore, our four parties want to continue to strengthen it and build an even stronger foundation over the coming years.

Mr. Speaker! I want to mention some of the things that the Sweden Democrats and the government are now proposing in the spring budget.

We want to increase resources for summer staffing in healthcare in the country's regions. We know that it is tough in many places and that support is needed.

Another very important and long-awaited initiative concerns IVF treatments for those who are involuntarily childless. It can be a pain that is enormous. Furthermore, it is costly. Today, one receives three tax-funded opportunities. We are now doubling this and adding an additional three. It can be decisive for very many people.

We also continue to strengthen the work regarding men's violence against women. Just as hard as we will go against gang criminals – or even harder – we will push back those men who physically or mentally abuse women in their vicinity. In far too many cases, women are also affected by men who murder women. This must come to an end. I know that the entire Riksdag agrees on this, and I am pleased with this initiative.

Mr. Speaker! School is the key for children. Regardless of the parents' education or finances, school is completely central. Now we propose investments in language breakfast, homework help, and the purchase of books.

In the budget, we also propose a temporary reduction of the tax on petrol and diesel to the EU's minimum level. Even though Sweden, as I said, stands better equipped than many other countries due to a changed reduction obligation, fuel prices have increased.

To compensate for the high electricity prices and mitigate the impact, we propose a new temporary electricity and gas support. It will be paid out for the months of January and February this year.

Finally: It is very clear that we have entered a new world situation with a partially new world order. We need to collectively direct full focus on reforms that both strengthen the economy and strengthen Swedish security. I want us to enter the next mandate period with a focus on building Sweden more competitively and resiliently, so that Sweden's economy can grow. It is because only a growing economy can carry the future's welfare and defense and meet all the great needs that Sweden has. Sweden shall be a leading growth country, not a stagnating high-tax country.

(Applause)

In this speech, Fredrik Ahlstedt, Ann-Sofie Alm and Jan Ericson (all M) as well as Erik Hellsborn (SD) agreed.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Today the government has placed its final spring budget on the floor of the Riksdag, and I can summarize it as the economically worst mandate period since the 90s crisis. It has been four lost years for Sweden and for the Swedish people. We know that prices are high. Hard-working people are having a tough time. It is expensive to be Swedish.

Sweden today has the third highest unemployment in the EU. Half a million people lack work; that is almost 100,000 more than when the government took office. While unemployment has decreased in the rest of the EU, it has increased in Sweden. If we had had the same development as the eurozone, almost 100,000 more Swedes would have had a job to go to.

In addition to this, there are 100,000 more people in our country who are unemployed. These are people who want to work more but who are not given that opportunity. Unemployment is a fundamental failure. Ultimately, it affects everyone who can no longer support themselves and their families, but it is also very expensive for Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! What has the government done to create more jobs and to get more people into work? The reforms are conspicuous by their absence, also in this spring budget. It appears that the Ministers for Employment are replaced more often than new reforms are presented by the Ministry of Employment. In this final budget, the government even scales back the labor market policy when 500,000 people are becoming unemployed.

It is not only with unemployment that the SD government has failed. Growth under this government has been lower than under previous governments. It has, in fact, gone even worse over the last four years than when Sweden and the rest of the Western world underwent a pandemic.

Furthermore, the Swedish economy has underperformed in relation to its own potential. Throughout the entire parliamentary term, the Swedish economy has lagged behind the trend. This means an enormous loss in GDP and a large shortfall in tax revenues. No matter how you turn it around, the conclusion remains the same: The Swedish economy has underperformed under Kristersson, Svantesson, and Åkesson. Sweden has become poorer.

Mr. Speaker! A wave of bankruptcies has also washed over Sweden. 30,000 private companies have gone bankrupt since the government took office, and over 75,000 people have lost their jobs due to these bankruptcies. We must go back to the 90s crisis to find similar levels. Still, the government continues to say that Sweden is on the right track, but I believe that many workers and business owners across the country find it difficult to recognize themselves in this rather cheerful description of reality.

Gustav Möller is often credited with the quote "Every wasted tax krona is a theft from the Swedish people." As we now approach the end of the mandate period, I believe many Swedes are asking themselves: What did I actually get? The government has borrowed hundreds of billions of kronor, but what was the result? High unemployment, low growth, and high prices. It costs more to buy food, and it costs more to pick up your medicines. It is simply harder to make everyday life work.

The SD-government has burned the Swedish people's money, not primarily on shortening healthcare queues, improving schools or giving ordinary people more in their wallets, but on lowering taxes for the people who earn the absolute most. In this way, Åkesson and Kristersson have received 6,000 kronor more per month. While ordinary people struggle, the government lets tax money leak out to the black and criminal economy and to profits that take precedence over schoolchildren's education.

I mean that the SD government has prioritized incorrectly. Ordinary people have not been prioritized. I am completely convinced that it is possible to pursue a more ambitious policy and at the same time keep better order on the state's finances. Therefore, we have presented a budget for this year where nine out of ten Swedes get more money in their pockets.

Mr. Speaker! Just a few months ago, Elisabeth Svantesson stood at a press conference and said that the money was gone. She did not only admit that the Sverigedemokraterna and the Moderaterna had emptied the state treasury for this year, but also that there was almost no money left for new reforms in the next parliamentary term.

The Fiscal Policy Council has presented its most serious criticism to date against any government, regardless of political color. This criticism should have caused a responsible Finance Minister to at least reflect a little. But the serious criticism did not seem to affect the Finance Minister because she did not care to comment on it.

Now Svantesson presents yet another budget where she borrows billions. For me, it is clear that Sweden unfortunately has a weak Prime Minister and an irresponsible Finance Minister, because when the Sweden Democrats come with demands, the others cannot hold back. The result is the largest deficits in a generation. The costs are borne by hard-working families. When the deficits lead to higher interest costs, there is less money for teachers in schools and fewer nurses in healthcare, and when general interest rates are raised, mortgage loans become more expensive for everyone who owns their home.

To keep their government cooperation together, they are letting down the barriers, and I mean that it is dangerous for Sweden. I do not recognize the Moderaterna. It used to be a state-bearing party. Now I cannot draw any other conclusion than that they are yielding to the Sverigedemokraterna in their eagerness to retain power.

Mr. Speaker! Today the government presents its final spring budget, and I see nothing in it that will reverse Sweden's negative development – on the contrary. Growth is revised downward once again, and the deficits are increasing from already record-high levels. This summarizes the mandate period quite well. Time and again, the Finance Minister has presented rosy calculations, and time and again, reality has caught up and the forecasts have had to be revised downward. We have a government that plans for the best but whose policy results in something else. In this budget, there is nothing new. Once again, there are no reforms to kickstart growth, and there are no structural proposals to get more people to go to work.

Sweden could have been in a better position. But let me be clear: I believe in Sweden. We are a country with great potential. We have competent people, world-leading companies, and an industry at the forefront. We have time and again shown that we can transition, grow, and meet difficult times together. There is enormous potential in our country, in our companies, and not least in our young people, who want to educate themselves, work, and contribute. But that requires a policy that takes advantage of this potential, that provides long-term rules of the game for the industry and the companies, that invests in education, welfare, and future technology, and that ensures that more jobs emerge and that more people work. Sweden deserves better.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs a policy that kickstarts growth, that pushes back unemployment, that strengthens the finances of ordinary people, that strengthens the community and increases security in a restless time, and that stops the waste of our Swedish tax money.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The Tidö parties inherited a historically high inflation and a growth rate at the absolute bottom of the EU. Now, almost four years later, the situation is essentially the opposite. Inflation is at the target level, and Sweden has a growth rate in the top tier of the EU. The interest rate has more than halved over the recent years, from 4 percent to 1.75 percent, which of course benefits the vast majority who own their homes.

We have had a focus on fighting inflation and on implementing measures that strengthen households. Overall during the mandate period, we have pushed through reforms and tax cuts that have strengthened a completely ordinary family with two children by over 5,000 kronor per month. It is about lower tax on income, on electricity, on fuel, and on food, but also about lower preschool fees.

It was the ordinary wage earner who had to step back during the period of high inflation and saw their purchasing power eroded because prices increased faster than wages. Therefore, it is reasonable that it is the ordinary wage earner who should benefit from the reforms and tax reliefs we have decided and are deciding on. In recent years, the ordinary wage earner has also experienced real wage increases, i.e., seen their purchasing power strengthened, not eroded, because wages are increasing faster than prices.

During this mandate period, child poverty has also decreased. This is shown by new statistics from SCB. The goal is, of course, zero child poverty; the concepts child and poverty do not belong together in any reasonable world. That it is decreasing in comparison with previous mandate periods is, of course, important steps in the right direction.

The total budget policy of the mandate period has also resulted in a narrowing of income inequalities. Purchasing power has been strengthened most in the lowest income decile and least in the highest income decile – this is in contrast to what we heard from the previous speaker. These are not opinions; these are measurable, quantifiable data. This may be worth keeping in mind, because a considerable amount of disinformation is obviously being spread by the opposition, but also by certain parts of the media.

Mr. Speaker! At the same time, the tax burden in Sweden is now 41.2 percent. It has not been that low since 1975. We therefore have the lowest tax burden in Sweden in over 50 years thanks to the reforms that the Tidö parties have pushed through.

It is therefore possible to lower taxes, reduce income inequality, and reduce child poverty at the same time.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has a very low public debt. It is well in line with the so-called debt anchor of 35 percent – plus minus 5 percent, a tolerance interval – which is a supporting part of the fiscal framework. We must hold onto this, because there are so many clouds of concern globally: the war in Ukraine, the war in Iran, trade wars, tariff threats and so on. This affects the prices of electricity, gas, oil, synthetic fertilizer, etc.

It is precisely our low debt level that gives us here in Sweden the freedom of action to counter and mitigate the worst effects of these price shocks, and that is also what the government is doing. Now we are lowering the taxes on fuels once again, down to the EU's absolute minimum levels. We also request that the EU Commission grant an exception from the minimum levels so that we can go even further – 3 kronor more on both petrol and diesel. We await the decision from the commission in this regard.

We are also moving forward with a new electricity support that will also apply retroactively, for January and February. As you may remember – it was not so long ago – it was both cold and fairly calm in January and February, at least in the part of Sweden and the world where I live. Consequently, it became expensive. Other countries, Mr. Speaker, do not have the same opportunities to implement such measures for the simple reason that they have too high a level of debt.

Speaking of calm winds, it does not need to be much more difficult than this: Do we want an energy system based on us being lucky, that is, that it blows just enough in practically exactly all the time? Electricity has the characteristic that it needs to be consumed practically at the same moment it is produced. That it blows in the morning does not help if one wants to consume electricity in the afternoon or in the evening.

Either we hope that we are lucky and that it blows exactly enough exactly all the time – a rather poor strategy, if you ask me – or we build an energy system that delivers whether it blows or not. In that case, it is nuclear power we are talking about. That is what is at stake, and we are in full swing there. The first application in over 50 years to build new nuclear power in Sweden was submitted to the government just a couple of weeks ago.

Give the Tidö parties continued confidence for at least four more years so that we will get this across the finish line! The opposition parties have made it clear that there will be no new nuclear power with them at the helm. The opposition – at least parts of it, not least Miljöpartiet – does not even understand the connection between, on one hand, the electrification of not least the vehicle fleet and, on the other hand, a stable and continuous supply of electricity. They do not understand that the two things are linked.

I say as my own party leader said on TV a while ago: You have had your playground. That is enough, because we know how it turned out and how it went. Now it is time for adults to solve the problems. And that is exactly what we are doing, but we need at least four more years.

Mr. Speaker! We on our side – the Tidö parties – are united. We have delivered for nearly four years. We will form a four-party government – Tidö 2.0 – if we receive the confidence of the voters in the election in September. On the other side, we have some kind of left-wing experiment that does not impress. The only thing they seem to agree on is that it will become even more expensive to fuel the car and that we will return to an irresponsible line in immigration policy.

In other respects, it is truly the pig in the bag that one is buying. There is no plan whatsoever for how they are to succeed in forming any stable government base, for how they are to get their budget bills through here in the chamber of the Riksdag, and definitely not for what these budget bills would contain in such a case or what policy that is to be pursued in general.

(Applause)

In this speech, Erik Hellsborn, Martin Westmont and Eric Westroth (all SD) concurred.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! Rarely has the world been so shaky. Even Sweden is affected by the horrors of war. Today, the government and the Sweden Democrats present our bill for the last time. Soon election day is here, and then we can take the country in a different direction. Sweden is more fragile than it has been in a long time, and the need for a government that makes Sweden hold together, that does not pit man against man and that protects households and arms the welfare state is great.

Mr. Speaker! I do not belong to the happy and cheerful crowd of politicians who celebrate every rise in opinion with a selfie on Instagram. One should not take things for granted, at least not victories. No matter how poorly this government has behaved, one best secures an election victory on one's own merits. One should not shout "hurrah" until one has crossed the river, my father always said, and I do not intend to declare any victory prematurely.

But of course Sweden needs a new government, Mr. Speaker. It has been four hard years. Crisis after crisis has been dumped on the citizens. The costs for food, rent, and energy have skyrocketed. Single mothers have had and have it the toughest, and a large part of the workers lack any margin. The savings that existed are long gone, and now there are no margins left. The money in the households' wallets is finished.

Mr. Speaker! A Swedish government can, of course, not stop global crises. Trump's whims and Putin's dream of world domination leave the Minister for Finance little opportunity to influence. The economy is affected not only in Sweden but in our entire surrounding world; it would not be serious to claim otherwise. But a government can choose how to handle the crises that hit the Swedish economy and Swedish households. A government can prioritize whose side one stands on when the wind blows. Is it on the business banks, whose profit margins are sky-high, or is it on the households, which are burdened by yet another interest rate hike?

The Tidö government has not acted to distribute the burdens of the crisis equally. Households have consistently been left to foot the bill while poorly functioning markets take the opportunity to make money from the crisis.

Enough, says the Minister for Finance to the banks and the food giants, who drove up inflation and let prices spiral. But obviously, agitated words do not help, and those who want to do something about the situation of the squeezed households know that only action counts. Pressure the banks to lower the interest rate, act for increased competition among the food giants, ensure that the lowered food VAT does not become a gigantic Ica subsidy, introduce Sweden prices on electricity and stop the cables!

In times of crisis, the burdens should be distributed equally, but that has not been the case. Households have had to shoulder an all too large part of the cost, and it is unreasonable. The government is somewhat reminiscent of the Titanic. You cannot do much about there being an iceberg that you crash into, but you have neglected to bring lifeboats for those who are on the lower decks. For the children, it is not just about a missed birthday party, about excursions that didn't happen, or about not being able to afford summer shoes; for many of them, it is an entire childhood that has now been lost.

What would have been best for Sweden, growth, and families with children would have been if the government had acted during the recession. Despite the fact that it would have been best for the Swedish economy if the households with small margins had received more so that the economy was stimulated, the government chose the opposite: to prioritize the absolutely best-off households.

The economy has stagnated, the recession has deepened, small businesses have too few customers, and the government has not stood by their side. At the same time, the government was there for those who have a monthly income of 120,000 kronor and who, through political priorities in this chamber, received several thousand extra in their wallets every month. There were no rational reasons to prioritize tax cuts for ministers' salaries, and yet the government chose to do so, for the sake of the Moderate core voters, not for Sweden's and for the families with children.

Mr. Speaker! Why is it that the one who has the least should always get less in order to create desire and energy, according to the right-wing government? It is argued that families with children who have to turn over every penny in reality benefit from the removal of their child allowance, and that lowered social assistance when we have mass unemployment will make the one who cannot afford the rent feel more motivated.

There is a difference between people and people. When it comes to the richest, we don't hold back on anything; only the best is good enough. Here, one must indulge. It is the group that always seems to need subsidies and extra support to manage to work. We cannot prioritize the child allowance instead, because then the directors won't get out of bed on Monday mornings. If they don't get lowered capital taxes, they snooze all week long. The Finance Minister empties the state treasury solely for their sake – not when families with children are evicted or when pensioners end up with the Enforcement Authority, but so that those who are already wealthy can get even more.

Sweden has record-high unemployment. Growth is low. Poverty has doubled, and a record number of children are being evicted from their homes. At the same time, we have a group of billionaires and a concentration of wealth that is clearer than ever. Ordinary wage earners pay a significantly larger share of their income in tax than the richest percent.

Sweden was previously one of the world's most equal countries, with high employment, strong welfare, and redistribution. Today, we stand out in the opposite direction. We have overtaken countries like the USA and India in wealth concentration. Those who have claimed that equality hinders growth while inequalities favor it have been wrong. That some become very rich does not benefit Sweden's economy, does not provide any jobs, and does not create any growth.

If the Swedish economy is to grow, we need an active economic policy where the state invests and redistributes. But this government's priorities are once again clear. "Don't touch my billionaires!" it says on Svanteson's banner.

The view of humanity is somewhat deplorable. If we asked the billionaires to contribute a little more when Swedish families with children are poor, healthcare is at its breaking point, and war is raging in the surrounding area, then they would recoil, says the right. The slightest tax increase and they flee the country with the billions.

It can't be possible, I think. It is clear that Swedish billionaires do not flee abroad when they need to be here and protect households and defend the country. What prejudices there are against the economic upper class! If, despite everything and against all odds, it were so, yes, then we can introduce such an exit tax as many countries around us have. It is time to tax the billionaires. It affects no poor person.

Mr. Speaker! There is an enormous waste of Swedes' tax money going on. Swedish welfare has become a playground. Healthcare, the railway, and the school are being run internationally. But the Tidö government cannot manage to do anything about it. Ideologically blinded, they reject all rationality to avoid dealing with the gigantic failure that the privatizations have entailed.

Sweden has become a "låtgåland" [a land of slackers], and the government is marinated in its slacker attitude. Schools are run by Saudi capital owners. Health centers are used to launder money. Online doctors drain the state treasury, and at the same time, the queues at the health center are endless. The teacher density is reduced so that the profits will be larger. Hard bread for the toddlers and gangsters who run treatment homes – that is what Swedish welfare looks like in 2026, and it is the citizens who have to pay. Children cannot cope with school. Crime is growing. Despite all this, no one is pulling the emergency brake.

The profits in welfare must go. It is game over. Arbetsförmedlingen and the railway need to be cleaned up and rebuilt.

Owning welfare companies is no art. It doesn't require a work shirt for that. It doesn't take many skills to make a profit on welfare, because it is a profit every time and it is the taxpayers who pay.

When I think of entrepreneurs, I think of people who work hard and who have started and set something in motion on their own initiative. My father ran a shop and worked twelve hours a day on the shop floor. My grandmother was the first woman in Sandviken to start a cleaning company.

Mr. Speaker! We must start over and build Sweden strong and equal again. I will return in the next speech and propose the Left Party's priorities.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Honored members! This is a debate about Sweden's budget. I will shortly speak about this in depth.

But I actually want to take the opportunity, while I stand here in the rostrum the day after an absolutely historic election result in our European, now again sister- and brother-country Hungary, to truly salute all the, not least young, voters in Hungary who took their country back to freedom, to democracy and to Europe from the brink of becoming a Russian puppet state. Hats off to the Hungarian people! Hats off to all these Hungarians, not least the young! I believe that their decision will have great significance moving forward, even for the Swedish economy.

Here at home, there are moments when one knows that the end is approaching. It has reached the end of the road. You can feel it. I do not think I am alone in feeling that; I believe that many who are watching feel that it will not be more than this.

Elisabeth Svantesson's swan song, the 2026 spring budget – not even that, not even in the midst of the Iran crisis, not even with Europe's third highest unemployment, bid for anything. It did not bid even an inch of everything that was promised.

The Finance Minister has said several times that she pushed through eight budgets. But none of them solved unemployment. None of them solved the low growth. None of them solved the fossil fuel dependency. And every single one of them had a worse balance than the previous one. The Tidö government will end as it began: without a plan or an idea for growth, for jobs, for entrepreneurship, or for the climate. It will end with 100,000 more unemployed.

I believe many of you remember the poster from the last election, before this government took office. It showed Ulf Kristersson hanging on some kind of bridge, and it said: "Europe's fourth highest unemployment should make the government unemployed." It also said: "Now we will get Sweden in order!" Now we have the EU's third highest unemployment, and the Tidö government will become unemployed.

It is so obvious that the Government does not want us to see the unemployment, that we should somehow be a bit blind to it. It is just someone else, someone we don't know. Maybe it's just immigrants. They probably don't even want jobs, actually.

But someone watching this – perhaps even someone sitting here in the chamber of the Riksdag and listening – knows someone who is unemployed because every fourth youth in Sweden is unemployed. Someone here or among the viewers might even know an academic or some other person in the middle of life who, despite long studies and many efforts, is unemployed, because academic unemployment is at record-high levels.

One might not know a single unemployed person. One might live in one of our rural areas, often in northern Sweden, where a robust industry has defied the gravity from Tidö that has created a shortage of jobs. But even if one does not know a single one of Sweden's half a million unemployed, I believe that one understands the enormous cost. I believe everyone understands how much it costs socially when children do not see their parents go to work and when they see them worry about the economy and dream of finally getting a job. I believe everyone understands how much it burdens the Swedish welfare and the Swedish economy.

Just the gap between the EU's average unemployment and our Tidö unemployment costs 45 billion per year. That is 9,000 kronor per Swede that we lose in money for welfare. That is 100,000 nurses or 60,000–70,000 teachers.

In its very last budget, the Tidö government adds an additional 7.7 billion, despite having said that the reform space is exhausted. But even then, when one takes reform space that one does not have and in a situation where the Iran crisis is washing over Sweden, one fails to achieve the policy that we have historically always associated with the bourgeoisie in Sweden – the job policy that is growth-oriented and future-oriented and the liberal economic policy that gives growing small businesses, jobs, and consumer confidence. It was that policy that we had under the Alliance and actually also under the January Agreement. All that constituted the liberal force in Sweden has been buried in some kind of ultimate resignation over everything. The spring budget is like a kind of gloomy testament of resignation.

It is no secret why it is like this. In Ulf Kristersson's Sweden, Elisabeth Svantesson does not decide. In Ulf Kristersson's Sweden, Jimmie Åkesson decides, and Jimmie Åkesson's priorities are not growth, not the companies, and certainly not the climate. It is completely different things.

In this budget, jobs receive 32.5 million, and 150 million is spent on education, while 1.4 billion kronor continues to tick away year after year to a repatriation grant that we know does not work. It is an idea that is as sick as its economic construction, and we furthermore deport people who work and who could contribute to taxes and welfare in Sweden.

Let us be clear: This is a crisis created by the Tidö policy. No matter how you twist and turn it, we have underperformed. Under the alliance government and after the January agreement, we had twice as high growth as the average in the EU, but under the Tidö government, we now have half as high growth as the average in the EU. There is talk of a recession. There are other countries in the EU that also have a recession, but only Sweden has the Tidö-recession that has been created here.

Now that we have reached the end of the road and have the last chance, the government is allocating the equivalent of 65 kronor per unemployed person. That corresponds to two plain cups of coffee per unemployed person – that is what they are prepared to stake. In Stockholm, that will probably only suffice for one cup of coffee, considering how expensive it is here nowadays.

But hold on, friends! The change is coming soon. There are 153 days left until the election. The Center Party will work every single one of these days for the boost in jobs that Sweden so urgently needs and in which small businesses are given a completely different chance to create jobs. This shall, for example, happen by small business owners being exempted from employer contributions for the first ten employees. We shall not have a pure employment tax on hiring young people, those with low incomes, and the unemployed who want to return.

We will also clear away the regulatory burden that 93 percent of companies believe has increased under the Tidö government. We will have a school that does not knock out young people, we will invest in continuing education and in vocational paths for many of those guys who do not keep up in school all the way, and we will invest all the way up to vocational adult education, vocational colleges, and continuing education with transition study support.

When the Iran crisis now hits our wallets, we must clear out all these fees. This government has, with one hand, lowered taxes for the people – something we actually would have wanted to do more – but with the other hand, let through fee increases that have caused electricity prices to soar. Everyone can see on their electricity bills that prices have soared more than what is due to the blocking of gas in the Strait of Hormuz.

Finally, we are now back at square one. It cost approximately 1,650 on election day to fuel a Volvo V70, and now it costs approximately 1,650 again to fuel a Volvo V70. We are very stuck in the fossil dependency, and it hits our wallets. I will return to that in the second part of the debate.

We do not recognize our Sweden, Mr. Speaker. Our Sweden should not have the EU's third highest unemployment. Our Sweden should not have return grants and competence deportations, and our Sweden should not have skyrocketing emissions. Let us take back Sweden – the sensible, normal, non-extreme, and functioning Sweden.

We have finally started investing in defense and in Ukraine – there the government has continued to drive the policy in a good way – but we have not defeated unemployment.

Now we must take back the Sweden we recognize!

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is on the right track in an at least uneasy world. The debate we have today on the government's spring budget is naturally overshadowed by the war in the Middle East, which, for example, has driven up energy prices, but also by Russia's continued war of aggression in Ukraine and recurring threats of tariffs. That we then have public finances of absolute world-class quality also makes it possible with a room for maneuver to support the economy.

Mr. Speaker! When we took over government power, the inflation rate was approximately 10 percent. Sweden was at the bottom of the EU when it comes to growth, but the number of evictions hit record highs. When the government and the Sverigedemokraterna today present the last spring proposal and the budget amendment of the mandate period, inflation is just under the Riksbank's target of 2 percent. Sweden is expected to belong to the top tier of the EU when it comes to growth, and the number of evictions has been halved. We are on the right track, but we are not there yet.

The global situation makes it more important than ever that we continue to build a strong Swedish economy. In our government bill, the Government points emphatically to the importance of continuing to safeguard public finances, prioritizing that effort must always pay off, and ensuring that the Swedish economy is competitive.

Mr. Speaker! As a Christian Democrat, I am naturally a little extra proud that in this spring budget amendment we can present investments of over half a billion kronor in health and medical care. Here are investments in more state-funded IVF attempts, summer staffing within health and medical care, and a vaccination package for the elderly.

It is almost summer, and I could sense it was on its way this weekend when I was at home in Örebro. Sunshine and warmth were accompanied by the birds' chirping when I took a long walk with the dogs and played the year's first round of golf with my youngest son Linus.

Summer is also the time when our fantastic healthcare staff are to have well-deserved leave and recovery. This creates major staffing problems every summer while the healthcare need remains or even increases in some places. Last year, one-third of Vårdförbundet's elected representatives stated that there were unmanned work shifts in the summer schedule. It was therefore necessary to hire agency staff to meet the staffing requirements. In order to be able to maintain good staffing and ensure that good care continues to be provided, the government is now allocating extra resources to the country's regions.

Mr. Speaker! My wife and I have been blessed to become parents to three sons, but it is a gift that not everyone receives. With IVF treatment, a medical method to help people have children when pregnancy does not occur naturally, we can, however, actually give more hope of becoming parents.

We know that involuntary infertility affects approximately one in six couples, and with this can come stress, anxiety, and depression. Today, the regions offer up to three IVF attempts to enable the first child. After that, the couples must pay for these attempts themselves, and on average, one IVF attempt costs about 50,000 kronor. In other words, not so many have the means to continue if the first three attempts do not succeed.

The government is therefore creating a new state grant of just over 300 million kronor to the regions. This makes it possible for the number of publicly funded IVF attempts to now be doubled. This means that more can keep the hope of one day becoming a parent.

Mr. Speaker! Last but not least, there is also an important vaccination package here to strengthen the health of the elderly and prevent serious infections. The Public Health Agency recently updated its recommendations for pneumococci. The agency now recommends a completely new type of vaccine, which is more effective than the previous ones. This is important because such infections can cause both pneumonia and sepsis. We also know that not everyone over 65 has been vaccinated against pneumococci and that some of those who were previously vaccinated have not received the required booster dose.

A higher vaccination coverage is naturally and primarily important for the individual elderly person, but in the long run it will also reduce the number of serious cases of illness and thus also relieve the healthcare system.

(Applause)

In this speech, Yusuf Aydin (KD) agreed.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! For the last three and a half years, the Tidö Government has held power in Sweden. Unfortunately, we must conclude that they are, in many ways, lost years. Emissions and unemployment have increased, the recession has set in, the healthcare queues are still long, and all too many children are not coping with school and risk becoming easy targets for gangs.

Putin's continued war against Ukraine and Trump's bombings in Iran are causing skyrocketing prices for fossil fuels and creating unrest in the world economy. It is an unrest that is also spreading to Sweden. High food and fuel prices, together with high rents and eroded safety nets, have already previously left far too many Swedes with far too little money left at the end of each month.

It is certainly a rare and difficult situation, and certainly one can, and should, blame Putin, Trump and others, but it is also the policy that the Tidöre government has pursued that has worsened the situation. It is not just an unfortunate development that lies completely outside the government's power to change. Much of our situation is a direct result of the policy pursued by the government.

Now this parliamentary term is finally coming to an end, and it is time to take stock of the government's results. And it is hardly anything to be proud of; regardless of how well the Finance Minister wants to make it sound.

The fact is clear: Unemployment has remained at high levels. Child poverty is increasing. More and more people are being evicted from their homes. Families with children are forced to turn over every krona, and the differences in living conditions have increased in recent years and now risk being cemented. At the same time, the government has spent 70 billion on tax cuts. Most for those who already have the most.

During this time, emissions have also increased. Instead of investing in the green transition, the government has used its years in power to fuel the climate crisis – instead of doing everything in its power to halt it. Electrification has slowed down, they have almost waged a culture war against the companies that are at the forefront of the transition, and the government's policy has weakened the conditions for both the climate transition and the business sector. During these four years, they have therefore succeeded in both reducing Swedish competitiveness and increasing emissions.

Now we see the result. Now jobs are disappearing, investments are being lost, and Sweden is on its way to backing into the future. Last week, Volvo's CEO stated that development work could be moved from Europe to China if nothing changes, and he is far from alone. When the Swedish government deprioritizes the transition, it has consequences for Swedish jobs and companies.

In addition to having increased emissions, hindered the business sector in the transition, and killed the market for solar and wind power, the government has almost completely deprioritized environmental and nature policy during this mandate period. Now they are putting back a small shard to make it sound like an investment, but it is the same numerical trickery we have seen throughout the entire mandate period. It simply is not enough. Sweden deserves better than that.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has everything to gain from a rapid and just transition. During the past weeks, it has become painfully clear that – in black and white – how incredibly vulnerable our dependence on fossil fuels makes us. War and conflicts in the Middle East have a direct impact on Swedish wallets when oil prices rise. The need for oil makes us vulnerable and dependent on rogue states. The crisis clearly shows right now who are the winners of the world's fossil dependence. Besides the obvious ones, Russia and Iran, it is also the powerful and resource-rich oil lobby that does everything to delay the climate transition and instead fuel the climate crisis. And this we see at the same time as nature is destroyed and our common resources are depleted. Even this government cannot reasonably think this is good.

Still, that is exactly what is expressed when one meets the oil crisis by locking the Swedes even more firmly into the dependency on fossil fuels. In order to reduce the vulnerability of Swedish households and companies to global price shocks on fossil fuels, we must get rid of the fossil dependency, not increase it.

Shall we then leave those who must have the car and who see their finances being shattered to their fate? No, of course not. It is, in fact, entirely possible to support households here and now without lowering the fuel taxes. Furthermore, it is an incredibly blunt tool where a large part of the money goes to high-income earners in large cities where there actually are alternatives.

Miljöpartiet already presented a targeted transport support for people in rural areas in the autumn budget. But the government said no to that. We have a proposal that would make it possible for everyone to switch to an electric car, but this government has instead caused the electric car boom to stall.

A just and effective climate policy also needs to go hand in hand with a strong distribution policy. Sweden has all the conditions to be a good country for everyone, regardless of where you come from, who you are, or how much money your parents have. Sweden can be a country that stands up for equality, that reduces wage gaps between women and men, that provides increased opportunities for single mothers to put food on the table for their children, and that provides robust funding so that the women's shelters can do their important work.

But today the reality is different, and we see how the gaps are growing. During the last decades, we as a country have had an enormous economic development, but it is all too obvious that it has not come to everyone.

One of society's most important tasks is to give all children and young people a good education, a secure upbringing, and a fair start in life. To achieve that, large investments in welfare and an active distribution policy that levels economic inequalities instead of increasing them are needed. One of our most important tools to reach that is that Sweden gains confidence in the future and new jobs in the transition, but also an active labor market policy that gives more people the conditions to get a job – their very first or a new one if they have lost their old one.

This government likes to say that it should pay to work, but it is not simple in a society where unemployment is historically high and with a government that has given up. Whatever the government may believe, jobs are not created by pressing people harder or making them poorer. Sky-high youth unemployment and cuts in the welfare system do not create more job opportunities; instead, jobs are created when companies dare to invest, when people receive education, and when the climate transition is used to build the future's industry, transport, and energy systems. Job opportunities are created in the welfare sector when schools, healthcare, and elderly care receive sufficient resources. More people enter the workforce when they are given the right conditions, not when they are threatened with poverty.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs a new direction and a new government. In a time characterized by war, conflicts, and economic unrest, leadership is required that can tackle multiple crises while simultaneously building Sweden stronger and more resilient. With political will, we can build together a country that has been torn apart by class divides and privatizations, while at the same time quickly and fairly reducing emissions, strengthening the protection of nature and the environment, and carrying out a just transition.

Sweden can invest its way out of the dependence on fossil fuels and build a transport system and an industry that is cleaner, more robust, and long-term competitive. Sweden must not leave people behind when bombs in the Middle East, trade wars with the USA, or Putin's gas taps drive up prices on electricity and fuels. But that requires both will and the power to act. The government lacks both, but there are alternatives.

In the coming years, we want to see massive investments in infrastructure, electric cars, green base power, material recycling, climate adaptation, and energy storage. We want to see measures that strengthen nature and our preparedness for climate change. It is about preventing drought, floods, and loss of biodiversity, but it is also about building a society that lasts in the long run.

We can build a Sweden that is better for everyone, not just for a few. We can build a society where every child gets a fair start in life and where the welfare system works in the entire country, where new jobs emerge in the wake of the green transition, where the groups in school and preschool are not larger than that all children receive the support and the help they need, and where the elderly and the sick get a time at the health center in a reasonable time and avoid being cared for in the hospitals' corridors.

It is a Sweden that dares to be a voice for all those who cannot be heard, for freedom and for democracy in the world – for a better world we can only build together. It is a world where everyone has what they need and where those who have the most also contribute a little more. That is the country we are prepared to fight for, and we in Miljöpartiet stand ready to do the work.

Sweden needs a new government, and Sweden wins on green politics.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! This year is an election year. I think it might be difficult to know what to believe when listening to those who have stood here in the speaker's chair before me. Very different pictures are being painted of how Sweden is doing.

I still think it is important to stick to the facts as much as possible. The speaker just before me said that child poverty is increasing. According to SCB's website, which was updated in March 2026, child poverty is decreasing. During the period 2014–2024, it has gone down from 10 to 6 percent. It is still far too much, but nevertheless a decrease.

I want to urge you as a listener not to take everything said here for granted, but to form your own opinion now ahead of the autumn election and read up for yourself!

Mr. Speaker! I think it is clear that Sweden stands in two realities simultaneously. We see a recovery that is gaining momentum. But we also live in a restless time. Energy markets and fuel prices are moving quickly, the uncertainty is great in a world that is shaking and we do not really know where it will lead.

In such a situation, it is important that the state is capable of taking action and can act quickly if and when it is needed. We shall stand firm. We shall act when the costs in everyday life hit people. Therefore, the government's spring budget is aimed at strengthening the resilience of the economy, as an important complement to the budget that was presented to the Riksdag in the autumn.

Mr. Speaker! I want to start by speaking about electricity. I have said it before: When electricity bills become unreasonable, politics must be able to step forward. This applies to the whole country, but many times it is felt first and foremost and most in southern Sweden. Now the government is delivering a new temporary electricity and gas support for January and February 2026. The support is based on actual consumption and is paid out without application. The compensation is clear per electricity area. That predictability is important for households. The support will be larger where the costs have been toughest. And it is not either-or, Mr. Speaker. It is a supplement to other decided tools to keep the burden down when it comes to electricity. For example, we announced in the 2026 budget that we are lowering the electricity tax. It is important for the transition and for the households' economy.

Mr. Speaker! The same applies to the price of gasoline at the pump. The Government intends to implement a temporary reduction of the energy tax on gasoline and diesel in this spring budget amendment. If prices remain stuck at a high level, there is a readiness to potentially do more.

I will probably be told here that it is the wrong measure, because it affects emissions negatively. But let us speak plainly. We must be able to act in acute situations, such as the one we face now when prices increase significantly in a short period. But we must also be able to combine it with other things. Therefore, we announce, for example, that 500 million kronor shall go to state agencies to choose fossil-free electric alternatives in vehicles, work machines, and ships. That support shall cover the additional cost when fossil is replaced with fossil-free.

We are also increasing the electric car premium. More households should be able to take the step to drive an electric car. The premium is aimed at households with lower incomes and in areas in Sweden where public transport is poorer.

Mr. Speaker! The household economy is not strengthened in the long term by only support and tax cuts. It is also, of course, strengthened by jobs and knowledge. Therefore, the government also invests in ensuring that more people move from unemployment to education and jobs. Arbetsförmedlingen receives funds to map out educational needs and actively refer to education, and Jobbsprånget is strengthened. Municipalities with high unemployment receive support to create summer and youth jobs, and SCB receives a targeted assignment linked to how AI affects unemployment among academics. It is a clear work line with education as a tool to effectively meet the needs of the future.

We also continue to strengthen the school. Knowledge is the most important competitive advantage Sweden has. In the budget, we propose language breakfast for the youngest students in vulnerable areas, more homework help, and more money for books. It is a clear direction. More children shall crack the reading code, build vocabulary, and receive support to succeed, regardless of background.

We make a difference by ensuring that Sweden becomes wealthier, greener and safer. The focus is on work, knowledge and a transition that people can afford to bear. That is the direction that this spring budget, together with the autumn budget, points out.

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Now I have listened to the four representatives from the opposition parties here in the Riksdag. There are a few things that become very clear. When the world around us is turbulent and when the world order is partially being redrawn and people feel great anxiety, the four opposition parties choose to only blacken Sweden. I believe that creates more anxiety.

Mr. Speaker! I expect no applause and no pluses on the sidelines from the opposition parties. But I believe that we together have a large and important task: to also say it as it is, that Sweden stands firmly, on a stable economic foundation and on a stable political foundation. It is actually exactly as it is.

(Applause)

Perhaps it is so, Mr. Speaker, that reality is the opposition's worst enemy.

Another thing becomes very clear to me. Despite the rhetoric and the high tone, Mikael Damberg sits in one stand and shouts and jeers, and Martin Ådahl screams on the other side. We hear the opposition screaming out on the pitch. Yet, they manage once again, with five months left until the election, not to agree on a single issue. It is five months until the election, and if you listen to the opposition, all of Sweden is about to fall apart. Still, the four party leaders are not even able to have a coffee together and point out a direction for Sweden.

On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, there are our four parties. We have decided to continue on the path we have begun to build a safer, more secure and wealthier Sweden. The Swedish people should know this when they choose in September.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is interesting how the situation in Sweden is described. Sometimes a government has the ability to describe that everything is going in the right direction, that things are brightening and getting better. And the opposition would like to point out a number of problems in society. That is quite normal.

But however you turn it, one must still say that this parliamentary term, these four years, has been characterized by a recession. We have had weak growth and increasing unemployment, and Swedish households have been pressed very hard by that. We should be quite in agreement on that.

My question is more about the forecasts. There have been many optimistic calculations these years. That could be one of the explanations for why the government has misjudged its economic policy. Now the Finance Minister presents a forecast for a growth of 2.8 percent this year. Is it really likely that we will get 2.8 percent growth this year? Or will this also become an optimistic calculation that the Finance Minister will have to revise?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Since I like to speak as it is, I shall say: It is not likely. Right now, a war is ongoing in the Middle East. The question is what the world leaders have decided there, but what we know is that oil and gas prices have risen significantly. And we know that the stock markets are shaking.

This applies to Sweden, and it applies to every country. We are all affected by what happens. That is my point. Sweden must be well-equipped – Trump-proofed, as I usually say. What does that mean then? Something I would like to emphasize is the importance of us having a low national debt. The national debt is lower today than when Magdalena Andersson finished her job as Finance Minister. We are now using that strength to be able to continue supporting the Swedish economy and hard-working people. That allows us to get through this recession together. The second Donald Trump stepped onto the scene, he extended the recession in Sweden. That is a fact.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! We were right, then. It may not be the case that everything is heading in the right direction and that there will be 2.8 percent growth this year. It may not be as good as the Finance Minister wanted to make it out to be just a moment ago.

Repeating an incorrect fact several times does not make it truer. When Magdalena Andersson finished as Prime Minister after managing a pandemic, she left behind a surplus in the public finances. Elisabeth Svantesson will hand over enormous deficits – budget deficits that will characterize not only this year but also the next mandate period. That is the truth.

It is not just about forecasts but also about scenarios. Is there a safety margin in the budget so that we do not reach a 3 percent budget deficit this year, Finance Minister?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I will honestly admit that over the past few weeks I have found it extremely embarrassing and sad to listen to the Social Democrats. They are trying to obscure their own policy. Both Mikael Damberg and I know that Sweden is in a recession and is highly dependent on what happens in the rest of the world. We also both know that the Swedish economy stands strong. Both Mikael Damberg's party and other opposition parties have in principle exactly the same deficit as the government in their budgets. One should not pretend that the Social Democrats' budget has a surplus when it is precisely the same thing. You are doing exactly what we do, because in a recession, one must stimulate the economy.

It is a high tone. I am thinking about the Swedish households and asking myself the questions: When did the Social Democrats lower the tax for ordinary people – for workers and civil servants – for three years in a row? When did you halve the fuel prices? When did you halve the food VAT? When did you lower the preschool fee last? All of this and much more we do to make things easier for people. It is a fact. This will help us out of a tough time.

(Applause)

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! I will not go into much detail regarding how the Minister for Finance has spent the money, but I intended to address the distribution profile itself.

We have a recession that has also deepened, Finance Minister. Is it then reasonable to have the distribution profile that you have had during this mandate period, where the largest investments and measures have gone to those who earn the most? That is also the case if one looks at all tax cuts. The group that is doing best has received the largest share.

Would it not have been better for Sweden's small businesses, the economy, and families with children to, for example, invest in increased child allowances and strengthened welfare and ensure that the economy got moving and that households managed?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would recommend that Ida Gabrielsson read the budget annexes and the bills. There, we report clearly and distinctly, as previous governments have also done, what the distribution profiles for different budgets look like. It is crystal clear: during these years, most has gone to those who earn the least. That is due to several things. Many of the compensations we have indexed. During the inflation period, they were indexed quite significantly. That was very good, because it created a buffer for those who had it toughest. Additionally, we have lowered the tax for everyone – both everyone who works and everyone who has a pension. We have now also ensured to increase the housing allowance – the ceiling has been raised for the first time since 1997.

I can only state that the member is wrong and that we ensure that most goes to those who earn the least.

(Applause)

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! Unfortunately, homemade diagrams cannot hide that when one makes a tax cut which, even if it is broad, has a distribution that targets only those who earn over 120,000, it will end up in the highest income deciles with the most money. Indexations that have been in place previously secure the value of the compensations, so that people always have the means to buy milk, belong to the foundation of a country that calls itself a welfare state. It is not an investment.

What has de facto happened is that the allowance has been lowered despite mass unemployment. Sweden is also the only Nordic country that has not increased the child allowance. At the same time, 6,000 kronor more per month has been invested in those who earn over 120,000. Is that good for households and for the Swedish economy?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! My and the Moderates' basic position is that we should not collect more tax than is required. I usually say that it is only lazy governments and politicians who cannot reprioritize and must constantly raise taxes as soon as a problem arises that requires funding. Here, we have shown a different way.

During these nearly four years, I have truly had households before my eyes, with hard-working people, seniors, and families with children. Let me ask the same questions to Ida Gabrielsson – they will be rhetorical questions, as she does not have the opportunity to answer: When did Vänsterpartiet last lower the tax for hard-working people for three years in a row, or for pensioners? When did you last lower the electricity tax? When did you halve the food VAT? When did you carry out a major dental care reform for everyone over 67?

We know the answers to the questions. You and the other opposition parties have not done this. I have full respect for the fact that one may think there are other tools that are better. But during these years, which have been very tough for very many, we have prioritized hard-working people all over Sweden to mitigate the effect of a tough recession.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I am going to ask a question concerning the Swedish economy and which is related to what the Minister for Finance says he stands for.

The Moderates and the Finance Minister say they stand for the work principle – that people should work and behave properly in Sweden. I wonder how this is compatible with us deporting people who work and contribute with taxes and skills, often in Swedish healthcare. I am referring to so-called "skill deportations" – a terrible word. I also wonder how it can be compatible with the work principle and a wise economic policy to deport teenagers who have had their entire education paid for in Sweden, which has cost millions of kronor. When they turn 18 and want to continue their studies or work, they are deported, even though they are actually Swedish in every sensible way.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Fundamentally, I believe that Martin Ådahl and I share the view that those who come to Sweden and are involved in working and contributing in different ways should also have the opportunity to be here. What Martin Ådahl mentions is that we have raised the limit for the wage level from 13,000. That was a level that led to many people ending up in exclusion and trafficking. It was truly the dark side of the labor market. This is what we want to clear away, so that people receive reasonable incomes and have something to live on. It is not harder than that.

It is true that different types of boundary-setting problems can arise. That has always been the case with the migration legislation. Fundamentally, we have a labor migration that we will continue to have. But we strengthen it and make it better in order to protect people from abuse.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Now we have this situation in Sweden. People who worked for the industry's contract wages were promised that they would be allowed to stay. They play an important role, not least in healthcare and elderly care, sometimes even in schools. But they continue to be deported from Sweden.

We have the situation that we have hundreds of young people who, despite the government's claims that it has solved the problem, have decisions that they are to be deported from Sweden. They want to work and study. There are even two nursing students who are sitting in war-torn Iran who could have become nurses and entered Swedish healthcare.

How can this be compatible with the work line in the Moderates' Sweden? How can it be sensible to spend 43 times more on a return migration grant, which everyone knows does not work, than what is done in the spring budget on job initiatives in an extremely vulnerable job situation?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! There were many questions at once.

I can state that Martin Ådahl fundamentally knows that we are reviewing the issue regarding teenagers and younger persons. We intend to resolve that issue as soon as possible. I share the view that a number of situations arise in the boundary issues that we need to resolve, as I said earlier.

Martin Ådahl could have mentioned the largest subsidy reform that we are now implementing in a very long time historically speaking. It ensures that many of the people who have come from other countries, who have been unemployed for far too long and who have been hidden and forgotten in statistics or sat at home in a kitchen in a suburb somewhere, will now come closer to the labor market.

It is an activity requirement so that every woman and man who has a subsistence support must be fully active and come closer to the labor market. It is a benefit ceiling that ensures that for a large family with several children where the parents are unemployed, it will always pay off for the parents to go to work.

There are two important things to strengthen the work line in this country, which has been built on a strong work line. We continue to strengthen it.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The green transition is not a freely chosen task. We all know that emissions must be reduced. The transition is something that Swedish industries and companies must do so that we can all survive in the long term, but also so that Swedish jobs and companies can remain strong and competitive in relation to those in the rest of the world.

We have for a long time, not least during the Green Party's time in government, worked hard to create exactly the right conditions for the business sector to make the transition that must take place. These are conditions that the government has actively destroyed during the last mandate period.

Now, the electrification has slowed down. Internationally active companies are moving away from Sweden. Those who pay the price for the government's climate betrayal are not only future generations but Swedish employees and employers here and now.

My question to the Minister for Finance is: How does the government intend to secure Swedish jobs and Swedish competitiveness in a time of climate crisis?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Janine Alm Ericson, for a very important question!

Swedish industry, Swedish companies, Swedish households and Swedish politics are, despite everything, at the forefront and are far ahead of many others when it comes to the green transition. This also applies to electrification and generally to reducing emissions. We are one of the strongest countries in Europe. We know that emissions per person are lower than in many other countries. We should be proud of that, and we must continue to develop it.

One thing that our four parties are working hard for is, as you know, to expand nuclear power. I can only state that the environmental and climate policy that the Green Party would prefer to see is the one that Germany has implemented. They have shut down all nuclear reactors and are betting everything on wind power. See how it is going in Germany now. They are not only struggling with emissions, but they are struggling with their economy.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! It was not entirely unexpected that the Minister for Finance would turn the climate issue into a question of nuclear power. The government's unilateral focus on it has settled like a wet blanket over the development of wind power, solar power, and other types of renewable energy that could have helped to lower prices for Swedish households and Swedish companies and, above all, ensured that there was cheap electricity now.

It is clear that the government has stopped running the climate race. They no longer want to achieve the goals that exist, and this before the race is even won, with the justification we often hear that Sweden is the best in Europe. First and foremost, that is not true. But if it were, what athlete stops running in the middle of the race just because they are in first place at that moment?

The future is uncertain, to say the least. But we know that the climate crisis is at the door. Then I must ask: Why have the Moderaterna already given up? Is it really so important to lower taxes together with Sverigedemokraterna? Is it more important than giving a future to our children?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you again for the question!

The spring budget contains two important initiatives that I would like to mention. One is that we are strengthening the electric car premium that we have already introduced this year. There is a great interest in applying for it. We see how many applications are coming in. It is important precisely from the perspective that Janine Alm Ericson now mentions.

Furthermore, we are making an investment of 500 million towards the authorities to influence fuels. It is simply about cleaner fuels in state vehicles. It also significantly reduces emissions. Sometimes it is as if the environmentalists do not really want to see what we are doing. These are two important investments in the budget.

I must still say that it is stomach-turning that one constantly wants to run away from the question of nuclear power. If the two reactors at Ringhals had not been shut down, the situation would have been different now. I think that one must take responsibility for the politics that one has pursued.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is perhaps not strange that the final budget debate of this parliamentary term is about the entire parliamentary term. It has been a parliamentary term characterized by a recession, all too low growth, higher unemployment, and a cost crisis.

I have pointed out that the government has repeatedly presented rosy calculations that it has subsequently had to back down from. Today, even the growth forecast did not survive the day the budget was presented. Now the Finance Minister says it is not likely that we will reach what is stated regarding growth in the budget bill.

How should we then handle this period? One thing that the Finance Minister himself mentioned was the statement about a Trump-proof economy. I have signaled against that several times. For almost a year, the Finance Minister has said it. It is not true.

It is clear that we have a low national debt, but we do not have a Trump-proof Swedish economy. It is enough to see how it is when you fuel the car, pay the electricity bill, or see how the Swedish economy is affected on the stock market. We are constantly affected by what happens in the rest of the world.

We Social Democrats have proposed that we should have a protection pact for Sweden. We must go through the new global situation and see what we can do to stimulate growth, protect companies and protect jobs, but also ensure that we emerge stronger in a very uncertain world.

Now it's getting strange. First, the Finance Minister says that we are Trump-secured. Then, at the press conference today regarding the spring budget, it is said that the reason why the Swedish economy is doing worse is Trump's various announcements. I believe the Swedish people are becoming quite confused. They understand that the Swedish economy is not Trump-secured. They would need a government that secures the Swedish economy in an uncertain situation.

Then the budget on the margin also becomes a bit strange. There are no structural reforms for increased growth. There are no structural reforms for more jobs. Rather, it is savings on export promotion that meets small businesses that are going to try to export in the changing world, and additionally cuts for active labor market policies.

It is to back into a world that is increasingly uncertain and where Sweden has all the prerequisites to stand strong with the right politics.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I mentioned freedom of action in my first speech in the debate. It is about the freedom of action to move forward with lowered fuel taxes, the freedom of action to move forward with electricity support for households when war and other miseries drive up the prices of electricity and fuel, and the freedom of action to lower the food VAT.

This freedom of action is based on having low indebtedness. If we are to maintain the freedom of action in the future, we also need to have low indebtedness in the future. If we are to have low indebtedness while maintaining a high pace of reform, we need to become significantly tougher regarding priorities on the expenditure side of the state budget.

Then it does not bode well that two of the opposition's four parties want a deficit target instead of a balance target. One is therefore not even behind the fiscal framework. One wants to run the state's finances with a deficit.

It also does not bode well that the opposition wants to invest tens of billions of kronor more of the Swedish taxpayers' money in international aid instead of directing the money to the needs we have here at home in Sweden.

It is also not a good sign that the opposition wants to send billion after billion straight into meaningless so-called climate measures. These are funds that go straight into the pockets of greedy subsidy contractors, for example Northvolt etcetera. In the worst case, it is directly counterproductive, that is to say that it destroys the free market's way of functioning. In the best case, it is a luxury that we definitely cannot afford.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I read an interesting interview with Oscar Sjöstedt before I entered the chamber, where he took the opportunity to comment on the question of whether Elisabeth Svantesson is Tidö's finance minister candidate. I interpret that as Sjöstedt himself or the Sverigedemokraterna perhaps aspiring to the post.

Otherwise, one can note that the Sweden Democrats, during this parliamentary term, when you have nevertheless been allowed to decide the content of the budgets, have chosen to push through targeted tax cuts for those who earn over 66,000 kronor a month. You have made it more expensive to collect medicine, you have worsened the cash register, and you have cut back on services all over the country.

I have a question for Oscar Sjöstedt now that he is his party's finance minister candidate: If you get the chance and if you become finance minister – will you then make medicine cheaper and remove the unfair deductible, or will you continue to lower the tax for those who have the most money?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The reason I am avoiding such a question is that it is a question that becomes the subject of negotiations after an election. It is therefore inappropriate to precede the negotiations in the media before an election. That is the answer. We have, therefore, not begun to negotiate about ministerial posts. That is done after an election and not before an election.

I was on this in my first speech. It is, therefore, the exact opposite that applies. I also said that disinformation is being spread, not least from the opposition. If one looks at the overall budget policy during the mandate period, one sees that income inequalities have decreased as a result of all the budget bills that the Tidö parties have presented here in the chamber. Income decile 1 has been strengthened significantly more than income decile 10.

Again: These are quantifiable data. Mikael Damberg can come up with a lot of opinions, but these are, therefore, quantifiable data. I am right.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I interpret it as that the Sweden Democrats, in a negotiation regarding the position of Minister for Finance after the election, will set quite reasonable demands because they are the largest party in the constellation. You should not be so modest, because I understand that you have those ambitions.

I note that no clear answers were given to the voters regarding the future of these important issues. If one aspires to such heavy positions, one must also look at reality. It is enough to see how people are faring in our country. Unemployment has increased, and many pensioners are under great pressure when they are to collect their medicine. The care deduction has not been abolished despite it being an issue that the Sverigedemokraterna spoke about in the last election. You promised to lower the government if you worsened the situation, but you have not done that.

Those who have small margins have been somewhat cheated by the Sweden Democrats during this parliamentary term, and they therefore deserve an answer. Do you intend to do things differently next time, or are continued tax cuts for those with high incomes still on the menu for Oscar Sjöstedt?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We have already acted differently. Mikael Damberg can stand there and make up whatever he wants, but I note that the income inequalities have decreased with the tax cuts and reforms that have been fully implemented through the budget bills that we have presented here in the chamber.

Mikael Damberg can stand here and smirk, but it is true. This can be measured; it is quantifiable data. Income inequalities have decreased. Income decile 1 has been strengthened the most, and income decile 10 – the 10 percent who have the highest income – has been strengthened the least, relatively speaking. We have already done things differently, and we have strengthened the welfare system twice. The Social Democrats did not manage that during eight years in power.

The price of medicines is not determined by politicians. I do not believe either that it is a path we want to take that the price of medicines should be decided here in the chamber, but it is determined by a free market. The price of medicine has unfortunately gone up, and I absolutely regret that. On the other hand, we decide on the subsidy level for medicines, Mr. Speaker, and it has increased.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! If one speaks in percentages and the person who has a krona receives another krona, the increase in the support obviously becomes 100 percent. If someone has a few million, they obviously do not get a few million more, but the fact is that the tax cut that the government has implemented essentially corresponds to an annual income for the person who has sickness benefit. In kronor and öre, those who have the most have received the most, however one chooses to play with the figures.

The question is whether it is reasonable to cut the allowance and ensure that people are once again excluded from the sickness insurance. Is it reasonable that pensioners have to manage without increased pensions while the person who has a monthly salary of 120,000 receives 6,000 kronor more per month? Is it a reasonable prioritization for households and the Swedish economy?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I understand the distinction between absolute and relative terms, but if one is to measure this in a sensible way, one must measure it in relative terms. There is no other feasible way. We are both right, one could say.

The government has not weakened the allowance but strengthened it. The ceiling has been raised, and more people are covered by it. We have strengthened it in two different stages.

Let me ask a question back to Ida Gabrielsson. If one wants to do more regarding the cash register from the Left Party's side, which I suspect one wants to – together with whom or which ones does one want to do it with? In what way is one to achieve 175 mandates in here, that is, more than half, and be able to push through such a reform? It would be interesting to get an answer to this.

Pensioners have received a tax cut in full parity with wage earners, that is to say, three times during the mandate period. I am quite satisfied with that. It is of course that one always wants to do more, but a tax cut for pensioners three times during a mandate period would we never have seen if Ida Gabrielsson had been involved in the decision.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet raised the pensions by 1,000 kronor when we were in government.

When the member now describes what is happening, he uses a lot of imagination. We can discuss in kronor and öre, and then you have allocated the most money to those who have it best. The A-kassa becomes worse after three months, and those who are really struggling are those who are long-term unemployed. That is when it begins to be felt and noticed.

Vänsterpartiet can absolutely get through an improvement of the akassan. Will the Sverigedemokraterna vote it down if Vänsterpartiet and Socialdemokraterna submit such a proposal? It will probably work out; we will see how it goes. But one can at least try, and that is something the Sverigedemokraterna have not done.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Since we are on this: The prerequisite is therefore that the Left Party and the Social Democrats are to get their own majority. It is well and for itself good to be optimistic, but there are no opinion polls that point in that direction right now.

The question remains: With whom does the Left Party intend to push through this policy? It is somewhat unclear.

The government and the Sweden Democrats have strengthened the housing allowance on two occasions. We have raised the ceiling, and more people are covered by the housing allowance. These are quite important reforms.

We have had this exchange before regarding the issue of tapering. I think it is reasonable and justifiable that a tapering of the unemployment insurance occurs, because the purpose of the unemployment insurance is that it should be a temporary transition insurance. If one has a job and, for various reasons, loses that job, one has unemployment insurance for a period before finding a new job. The purpose of the unemployment insurance has never been that it should be a lifelong means of subsistence.

This will be a rhetorical question, but how long can one be able to have deficits without a phase-out in Ida Gabrielsson's world? Is it for one, five, or even ten years? It becomes insane.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats' candidate for Minister of Finance seems really very satisfied with the situation after four years with the Tidö parties. There are no problems with the state finances; one has actually held onto a huge amount of money, despite there being large deficits. One has delivered everything that was desired, despite there being very high unemployment and there has been quite low growth. It is very good. So we know what to expect for the next four years if we get Oscar Sjöstedt as Minister of Finance.

I would still like to take the opportunity to ask: Will it continue as it is now – that we spend 43 times more on repatriation grants, 1.4 billion, than what we spend on job measures in a spring budget during a deep job crisis and that we deport people who work and contribute tax to the welfare in Sweden – with a Ministry of Finance controlled by SD?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I am absolutely satisfied with what we have done and achieved. One has to go back a long way before finding a government basis and a majority that has had such a reform pace in such large and important issues as we have had. I am absolutely satisfied with, and actually also proud of, what we together within the Tidö parties have accomplished during the mandate period.

It is not synonymous with being satisfied with how things are. We live in a world that leaves a great deal to be desired. There is a bit too much war on this planet in general. It is terrible in itself, and it also affects the situation in Sweden. That I am satisfied with what we have done is, therefore, not the same thing as being satisfied with how things are.

I do not know what Martin Ådahl means when he talks about people being deported because they work. That does not usually happen. I suspect it has to do with the fact that we have raised the wage requirement for labor migrants, and we will absolutely not tear up that reform. It will remain in place even in the future.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I do not think that the small business owners who saw the employer contributions for their young employees first raised for a period and then lowered – and now you are going to raise them again next mandate period if you retain power – feel that the pace of reform has been so very high. I believe that very many of the additional 100,000 people who have become unemployed do not feel that your pace of reform was really at the level they had counted on.

The question was: Will you continue with the repatriation subsidies, an initiative that is much larger than almost all the job reforms you are proposing – especially compared to what you do in the spring budget for small business owners and jobs? It is nothing, in large terms – 65 kronor per unemployed person. Will you also continue with the deportation of people who contribute to the welfare if you get to continue for four more years with SD in finance?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The reforms that we have negotiated and pushed through, we will of course not tear up, so I do not quite understand the question. The reforms that we have pushed through or will push through before the election are obviously here to stay. Of course, that is the case.

Now we have a fairly well-balanced policy for labor migration. We have not had that for a long time in this country. We have had a really bad policy when it comes to labor migration. Now we have a functioning, well-balanced policy for labor migration.

Since then, I have full respect for the individual entrepreneur who perhaps wants a wage floor of zero kronor per month, just like that. I have full respect for that. But there are also other interests. I try to look at the overall interest and not just at the individual entrepreneur.

There is talk about the employer contribution, which is now being reduced somewhat. Martin Ådahl wants to lower it even more. Together with whom then? Together with Ida Gabrielsson? Good luck!

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats are happy to talk about safety and about standing on the side of ordinary people. Before being bought by the large school corporations, they also wanted to remove profits from welfare. They were to increase the allowance, but in the budget they have now submitted, it is a deterioration.

Now people are beginning to fall towards bottom levels in the compensation in a Sweden where unemployment has increased. At the same time, the government has worsened the high-cost protection for medicines so that the sick have to pay more out of their own pockets. In a previous exchange of remarks, it did not sound like Oscar Sjöstedt was particularly concerned about that.

There is a different tone in the economic policy now than before the election. My question to the Sverigedemokraterna is: What actually distinguishes your economic policy from the Moderaternas when the result is that the rich get large tax cuts and that the unemployed, the elderly, and the sick bear the cost?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Number one: Skip that talk and rhetoric about being "bought" by one or the other! It is truly just tiresome and unnecessary. Otherwise, we can have relevant, adult discussions, but skip the talk about being "bought" by one or the other! I am not bought.

Excuse me, now I almost got a little angry and was about to say something inappropriate. I won't do that. I'll stop there. Skip that talk, just!

As I stated in my first speech, regarding the overall economic policy: All the budget bills that we have submitted, including today's, have led to the income gaps in Sweden decreasing as an effect of the policy we have pursued. Child poverty has decreased. Both the proportion and the number of poor children have decreased with the economic policy and family policy that we have pursued together. That is something I am a little proud of.

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! First, I just want to say that SCB's statistics, which several of the government parties have now referred to, only go up to 2024. New statistics have emerged showing that the inequalities and child poverty in Sweden are now increasing again. Civil society says this, among other things, but there are also figures.

Oscar Sjöstedt does not want me to say that the Sweden Democrats are bought by someone. But let me then give Oscar Sjöstedt the opportunity to explain how it happened that the Sweden Democrats changed their minds about profits in schools. How is it that one still stands behind a system where the school, which is supposed to strengthen the children for the future, is eroded by the profits of limited companies? We receive report after report that the money for the school does not go to the school but to shareholders' profits. Can Oscar Sjöstedt give a reasonable explanation for why one still stands behind such a system – if it was not the case that one was enticed by something else, for example, government power?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! That I should report SCB's figures incorrectly is absolutely not the case. SCB has provided new statistics that extend several years back in time and clearly show that child poverty has decreased during the parliamentary term. We can sit down and look at this together later. I am certain that I am completely correct.

When it comes to the fact that schools should not operate for profit, we, just as it works in most parties, had a discussion at our highest decision-making congress, the landsdagarna, over a decade ago – it might have been 2014. All representatives were allowed to say their piece. Some thought this, some thought that, and then we had a vote and made a decision. This was, therefore, quite a long time ago, over ten years ago. Nothing new has happened. We decided this ourselves in good democratic order.

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

Ida Gabrielsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! I received rhetorical questions, but I still want to say that different measures are being used. The national standard that Oscar Sjöstedt is so proud of has been eroded and diluted, and therefore one gets a certain result. The income inequalities are the largest in 40 years, even if 2025 and 2026 show some form of stabilization. It is best to check in reality whether what is said seems to be correct.

Mr. Speaker! Much is at stake ahead of the upcoming election campaign. If we are to succeed in replacing today's right-wing nationalist government, where the Sverigedemokraterna will also take a place after the election, it is required that we who today constitute the opposition succeed in uniting.

It is not about who takes whom. It is not a reality show or entertainment we are talking about, but the future of the whole of Sweden. In that case, one cannot stare down at the floor and hope for the best. Do we want a government that does not pit human against human? These are important matters it is about. Shall we continue the line where teenagers who have lived their entire lives here are sent out because they are not considered part of Sweden, or shall we go another way?

The citizens deserve that we do our best so that Sweden moves in a different direction. Households that have been broken by the government's policy need to feel that it will be different with us. With Vänsterpartiet, a new red-green government will not empty the state treasury to benefit those who have the most. It shall assist ordinary households, abolish the "carens" (the care-free zone), lower housing costs, increase child benefits, and strengthen the health insurance and the unemployment insurance. Other parties certainly have other priorities.

If we are to win the election, we must do it on our own proposals, not on the opponent's failures. I hope that we can put forward our proposals in the election campaign, because Sweden needs a new government.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to use my second opportunity to speak to talk about the fossil trap that Sweden is currently in. It is deplorable. Norwegians and Danes today have many more electric cars, hybrids, used electric cars, used hybrids, plug-in hybrids and other eco-friendly cars and are in a completely different position. They almost laugh at us Swedes because we stand here with very high fuel prices. In those countries, ordinary people, ordinary households in the countryside, have been given the opportunity to switch to another fuel. They can charge at home, at work or in the housing association.

We must become free from the volatility – regardless of whether it is due to Trump, Iran, or some other madness out there in the world – which often hits just the gasoline prices because they are dependent on dictators' oil. It is utterly deplorable that the best the government can manage, alongside many years of enormous investments in fossil fuels, is a bonus that is a fraction of our neighboring countries' and not even half as large as the Centerpartiet proposes – and which is furthermore intended to target quite few people when we need to give hundreds of thousands of households in Sweden a chance to switch.

We understand that some are dependent on the car and cannot afford to switch today. Those households must be given a break. The tax must be lowered, temporarily, during this terrible oil crisis. But we must simultaneously give these households an opportunity to become free from the fossil swamp in a completely different way than what the government does today, as the Centerpartiet proposes and as several of our neighboring countries have managed. They are in a much better position now than Sweden is regarding both emissions and economy.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The war in the Middle East has led to increasing energy prices, and it risks hitting the finances of households and families with children hard. Therefore, the government is now moving forward both with an electricity subsidy and with reduced tax on fuels. All households will be able to take part in the electricity and gas subsidy which, according to plan, should begin to be paid out during the second half of June. The subsidy is based on the households' monthly consumption during January and February and is paid out without anyone needing to apply for it.

We know that many households, not least families with children, are dependent on the car to make the puzzle of life work. Therefore, it is important that the government, in this situation, implements further tax cuts on fuels. The government proposes that we align with the EU's minimum level. For those of us who refuel, this will make both diesel and gasoline cheaper. But the government is not satisfied with this and has also applied to the EU Commission for a further opportunity to lower the tax in a situation with continued elevated fuel prices.

During this mandate period, a family with two children living in a house has had a total of over 5,000 kronor more left in their wallet every month. Statistics Sweden, which has its headquarters in the beautiful city of Örebro, recently noted that child poverty in Sweden is the lowest in ten years. I understand that it does not fit into the opposition's black-painting narrative. But strengthening households and families is obviously yielding results.

(Applause)

In this speech, Camilla Brodin and Larry Söder (both KD) concurred.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Both of the recent speeches were very appropriately about fuel prices. I wonder if the member from Kristdemokraterna does not think it is quite tricky that after these four years we are back almost at square one. It is about as expensive to refuel now as when the government won the election on the promise that a liter of diesel would become 10 kronor cheaper.

We agree that one must help families who are stuck in the fossil trap and are affected by very high prices. There is no question about that. But isn't it a bit problematic that of the new and used cars, 97 percent in Norway and 80 percent in Denmark are electric and rechargeable, while the figure in Sweden is only 40 percent?

We have ended up in a situation where many cannot afford to buy a car that provides lower costs. Why does the government not do more than to inject an additional 100 million kronor into this in its spring budget?

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It would undoubtedly have been interesting – or rather purely devastating – if the previous government had been allowed to continue with its policy.

The Riksdag's investigation service has looked into this. It turns out that the calculation is that diesel would have been at least 5 kronor and up to 10 kronor more expensive per liter if the previous government had been allowed to continue with the policy they pledged at that time. Now that sounds really different, I must say.

That policy could also mean that the price becomes even higher than 10 kronor, because if one vacuums up the entire world market for biofuels, it drives up the price. This is therefore calculated low.

One can absolutely say that it is dull that the price of petrol and diesel is not lower. But it is incredibly much lower compared to if the previous government had been allowed to continue with its fuel policy. I am therefore not concerned about that. I am more concerned about us losing the election.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! We are not running the same election campaign again. What is on the table now is that all other countries manage to give ordinary citizens the opportunity to switch to electric cars and to charging at home, at work, or in the housing association. You are not anywhere near. You are not even in the game. Why? That is the big question.

We must not return to high fuel prices, but we cannot have a situation where they become high anyway because of Iran, Trump, and damn it and his aunt. Forgive me for saying this in the chamber of the Riksdag – and furthermore in front of His Majesty!

Furthermore, the fees have been increased. You have released fee increases and unit monopolies that are larger than the electricity support you are now introducing. Electricity has also skyrocketed – that is what happened as a result of the electrification.

I am just wondering what the plan is.

Furthermore, it is also not good that we have no production from the Swedish forests to speak of at a time when we must become much more independent of dictators' fuel. Indirectly, we are even dependent on Russia today.

None of this is a problem for the member from KD.

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Mr. Speaker! One can stumble over words sometimes, Martin Ådahl, so it is no danger.

The opposition is quickly switching here as well to electricity prices. As our Energy Minister has stated, we have halved electricity prices during the mandate period. You can shake your head as much as you want, Martin Ådahl, but you have sat in this chamber and prematurely decommissioned Ringhals 1 and 2. Energiforsk has stated that it has led to up to 45 percent higher electricity prices. Sure, one can shake their head and fuss like Martin Ådahl, but if you take responsibility for the policy you want to pursue, I take responsibility for this one.

This government has halved electricity prices. For the first time in 50 years, we have an application to build new, predictable nuclear power. We have made that possible. This is the melody of the future if we are to manage the energy supply.

(Applause)

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

Janine Alm Ericson (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has everything to gain from a swift and just climate transition. Even though the transition is an absolute necessity, it is also our greatest opportunity, an opportunity that this government has done its best to throw away. For the fact is, despite what everyone says in the chamber today, that electrification has stalled, the expansion of renewable electricity production has been abruptly halted, and the resources to protect nature have dwindled.

Now Sweden appears to be missing all climate goals at the same time as the situation is acute and the need for both emission reductions and climate adaptation is great. While the government continues to turn a blind eye to the climate crisis, dream of nuclear power and lower the price of fossil fuels, Sweden is quickly being overtaken by other countries whose governments have increased the pace of the transition instead of working against it.

When we reduce emissions and transition Sweden, we build a stronger country where new jobs emerge as a result of large investments in the energy transition and in the expansion of renewables. We build a robust society that stands firm in a restless world, gives companies long-term rules of the game, and ensures that green industries have the right conditions to grow.

Mr. Speaker! It is now that we must choose whether we are to invest and win or whether we are to back down and lose, whether we are to take the leap into the future or whether we are to be overtaken by the rest of the world. For us in Miljöpartiet, the answer is clear. The time for a just transition has never been better. So let us do just that, in order to lower emissions and gain greater faith in the future. Sweden deserves better than this.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! School is not just a welfare issue. School is Sweden's most important freedom reform and our most important competitiveness reform. When more children learn to read, write, and count properly, both the individual's freedom and the country's opportunities grow. But we have a literacy crisis. One in four 15-year-olds does not read well enough. According to Ungar & medier, only 20 percent of young people read every day. This is not a statistic that we can accept.

The Liberals care about equal life chances, integration, and future jobs. In that case, school is the most important key. Therefore, we continue the investments in school, which we have done in every budget this mandate period. We allocate money for language breakfast in preschool and grades 1–3 in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. We strengthen homework help, and we strengthen the state grant for the purchase of literature, which the government assesses corresponds to approximately 250,000 new books. In total, it means that we have theoretically allocated resources for over 6 million books to the country's schools this mandate period. It has resulted in more language, more reading time, and more support.

Mr. Speaker! It is with real tools in the classroom that one strengthens a knowledge school. Our vision is crystal clear. We shall have a school with knowledge at the center, early interventions and strong Swedish, and every student shall be met with high expectations and the right support at the right time. When the school functions, then Sweden also functions.

(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)