§ (cont. from § 5) Activities in the European Union during 2025 (cont. UU10)

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are addressing the government's communication regarding activities in the European Union during 2025. The past year has clearly shown why European cooperation is so important. Europe faces the greatest security policy challenge since the Second World War. Russia's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine continues, the rules-based world order is being challenged, and authoritarian forces are attempting to advance their positions. In such a situation, Sweden and Europe need more cooperation, not less.

For us Christian Democrats, the EU is a cooperation between free democracies that can together create peace, security, and prosperity. It is also based on these values that we shall judge the union's development. During 2025, the EU has continued to support Ukraine politically, economically, and militarily. Sweden has been a driving force for tightened sanctions against Russia and Belarus. It is the right way to go. Russia must understand that aggression has consequences and that Europe's support for Ukraine will persist as long as it is required. Ukraine's struggle is not only a struggle for its own country's freedom but also a struggle for Europe's security and for international law.

Mr. Speaker! EU enlargement is perhaps the most important strategic investment for Europe's future. The countries in the Western Balkans, as well as Ukraine and Moldova, must be made aware that the door to the European community stands open. But enlargement must never become a shortcut. It must be built on reforms, respect for the rule of law principles, and the fulfillment of the membership criteria. That is precisely why it is important that the EU continues to combine clear support for the candidate countries with clear requirements. Some of us who recently visited Ukraine heard once again from civil society actors how important it is to keep the requirements clear.

When countries implement reforms and strengthen democracy and the rule of law, they must also be met with progress in the process. That is how we build a stronger and more united Europe.

Mr. Speaker! A third question concerns democracy and the rule of law. The EU is more than a market and more than just an economic cooperation. The Union is built on values: human dignity, freedom, democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. In a time when these values are challenged both within and outside Europe, the EU must stand up for them with greater clarity. This applies in relation to Russia and Belarus, and it applies in relation to China. But it also applies within the union. The EU's credibility is built on the fact that the same principles apply to all member states.

Europe also needs to strengthen its competitiveness. We must reduce red tape, deepen the internal market and create better conditions for innovation and entrepreneurship. A strong Europe needs a strong economy. Only then can we finance our defense, our security and the green and digital transition.

At the same time, we must adhere to the principle of subsidiarity. The EU should focus on those issues that are best solved jointly and avoid micro-managing matters that the member states themselves handle better.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has much to gain from an EU that is strong where it needs to be and restrained where it should be. We need an EU that strengthens Europe's security, stands up for democracy, supports Ukraine, and keeps the door open for new democracies that want to become part of the European community.

It is therefore welcome that the committee emphasizes the importance of continued support for Ukraine, a credible expansion policy, and the defense of the Union's fundamental values.

With this, I move for approval of the Committee on Foreign Affairs' proposal in report UU10 in its entirety.

(Applause)

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is still staggering when one thinks that it has been barely one and a half years since the new world order we have today!

It is a world order where the biggest go first and where some, for example Trump and company, take it upon themselves to act according to what seems appealing on any given day. Russia lets its megalomania flourish, and in the background is the, perhaps, great winner: the long-term strategist China.

In that context, we in Sweden should once again send a thought of gratitude to the wise people who laid the foundation for the very long-term peace project that today is the world's largest free trade zone and our home – the EU.

Then, of course, one can go crazy over the fact that the EU can be a heavy-handed bureaucracy. Sometimes democracy must be allowed to take time. But at the same time, the EU must learn to act outwardly not just faster, but also much faster, in order to uphold democracy, the principles of the rule of law, human rights, and our security.

In recent years, time and again, the problem has been shown that the EU fails at exactly this – acting quickly. It concerns Iran in 2022. The branding of the IRGC as a terrorist organization should have been achieved almost immediately. It also concerns the unacceptable development in Gaza that followed Hamas's completely horrible attack on Israel in October 2023. Here, the EU should have quickly managed to think about several things at once: Yes, Israel has the right to defend itself, and the hostages must be released immediately. But the way Israel subsequently acted and still acts is unacceptable, and therefore the association agreement should be frozen. And how long did it take to even begin considering using the frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine!

The most glaring thing has probably been how a single person, Hungary's Orbán, for such a long time could block the EU when it came to precisely the support for Ukraine and delay the opportunity to let Ukraine and Moldova begin the process of becoming members of the EU. Now, thank goodness, that blocking is over.

That the expansion may continue, not only with Ukraine and Moldova but also with the Western Balkans, where for example Albania and Montenegro are currently taking large steps in their EU adaptation, is super important for our security but also for our competitiveness. Here the government should receive praise, as I know it is pushing for this.

It is important that, for Sweden's sake, we continue to ensure that the process moves forward. We shall both demand that the candidates fulfill what is required and cheer on and support where we can.

It is a fundamental systemic error when a single person can block the entire EU and it is required that the country in question has an election which results in that person being replaced for the EU to be able to continue its work. We in Centerpartiet have therefore for a couple of years pushed for it to be sufficient to a greater extent to have a majority when it comes to foreign policy decisions instead of as is today, requirements for total unanimity being imposed.

In the new world order, the EU's collective competitiveness and the ability to defend our security in different ways are becoming increasingly crucial. But at the same time as the power-hungry men in the self-appointed superpowers occupy themselves with dividing the world among themselves, climate change is occurring. It cannot be waved away.

It is therefore becoming all the more important to see that these are connected – competitiveness, security, and climate – and to act based on this. Swedish and European companies need to do more to ensure that both they themselves and their subcontractors have good working conditions, respect human rights, and take responsibility for environmental and climate impact.

It should be self-evident that those who are to sell goods in the EU shall follow the same conditions that our companies need to follow. This benefits both the EU's and the companies' competition and the principles of sustainability and human rights, which we must stand up for at every opportunity given.

We cannot only place demands on the companies, but the same consistent thinking must also apply to the member states themselves. We have introduced a democracy lock, meaning that a member state does not receive any EU funds if it violates, for example, human rights. That is good, and this should be used consistently.

We would also need to introduce a climate lock, meaning that EU funds should not be paid out if a country does not work towards the goals and deliberately violates the rules we have jointly established regarding the environment and climate.

Climate, competitiveness and security go together. It has never been so clear as when it comes to energy supply and transport within the EU. It is still difficult to get the sanctions against Russian gas to work on their own because the EU countries are so dependent on this. Add to this the crisis around the Strait of Hormuz!

The EU is far too dependent on imports, energy, electricity, and transport. We must achieve independence; it is necessary. It requires innovative power, simpler rules for companies so that they can grow, and speed in decision-making. It also requires that all member states follow the sanctions that we have agreed upon.

It is not possible to talk about the EU without talking about the people who seek out the EU to find work or because they are fleeing from war and various forms of oppression. The Migration Pact enters into force next week. The Center Party has stood behind the principle of the pact, as it has been important to reach a settlement between the countries and a cooperation for migration, not least to safeguard free movement within the EU.

However, there are things that we need to review so that the whole thing does not have the opposite effect. One such thing is the conditions in the so-called return hubs. It concerns how children and families with children are treated and how we are to ensure legal certainty for hbtqi-persons coming from countries that are considered "safe". With the strong right-wing winds blowing both in Sweden and in the EU, where deportations are prioritized over legal certainty and common sense, there is a risk that many people will suffer.

Climate change in combination with conflicts and reduced aid will certainly lead to increased migration in the world. Many more will knock on the EU's door. I have asked this before and ask again: What plan do we have for how this is to be handled? And by that, I mean in a way that is both clear and humane.

Migration and aid are linked, but perhaps not in the way the government would prefer: to be able to use aid, both Swedish and EU, to pay countries like Somalia and Afghanistan to be able to deport those we see as unwanted. Aid contributes to stability, better health, democracy, and reduced poverty. But the opposite is also true. Reduced aid leads to increased migration, risk of disease spread, and more conflicts.

Right now, aid in the world is decreasing significantly and at a rapid pace. The more important EU's role becomes, as the EU is now the world's largest aid donor. Therefore, we must ensure that a sufficiently large part of the EU's aid extends to the most vulnerable parts of the world, for example, countries in Africa and the Middle East that directly affect the EU.

Let me conclude with a few words about the so-called MFF, the EU's long-term budget, that is to say the framework that will apply for the period 2028–2035. Here we basically stand behind the Swedish tradition of budget restraint, that is to say that the budget should not become larger than today but primarily be prioritized and reprioritized based on the needs that exist – with one exception: Ukraine. If it is the case that we need to provide extra loans to give the long-term support that Ukraine needs to be able to stand up against Russia and for all our democracy, and then also for reconstruction, we shall not hesitate to borrow the funds that are required.

In other matters, we from Centerpartiet want to press for sufficient investments in climate and energy as well as for safeguarding aid in the EU. As said, the EU is Sweden's absolutely most important foreign policy arena and will become even more important in the new world order that has just begun.

I move for the approval of our reservation number 3 regarding the introduction of a climate lock.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! We are some members of the Riksdag who will be traveling to Armenia to serve as election observers there. They have parliamentary elections on Sunday. I will therefore try to keep this speech somewhat brief.

Let me begin by saying that the overall conclusion one can draw from European cooperation, actually since the Maastricht Treaty and onwards, is that every major crisis or challenge that Europe is forced to handle leads to European cooperation being deepened in one way or another. New institutions, new mechanisms, and new support packages emerge. Cooperation is deepened.

The great migrant crisis of 2015 led to us receiving the asylum package that has now been implemented. The war in Ukraine has led to extensive cooperation to support Ukraine. The pandemic led to new collaborations in Europe. The climate crisis has led to various types of legislation and directives. The financial crisis, the one that began with a mortgage crisis in the USA and then spread over to Southern Europe – particularly Greece was hit hard 15 years ago – led to us getting bank unions, stability pacts, and all sorts of things.

Every challenge Europe faces leads to a deepening of European cooperation. It is completely logical because we are in the same boat. No country that is globalized and open today – I am thinking particularly of the free movement within Schengen – has the capacity to solve all its challenges alone. It is simply not possible. Therefore, Sweden should act to be a member in as many different constellations and institutions as possible within the EU.

What remains for Sweden, Mr. Speaker, is also to join the common currency, the euro. It is the next big step for Sweden. We Liberals have argued for this for a long time. It would be good for Sweden, for our companies, for our trade, for our consumers and so on.

The second thing I want to bring up, Mr. Speaker, concerns Ukraine. Matilda Ernkrans said something important earlier in the debate, actually the most important thing in her speech, namely that one should now as soon as possible open some new clusters, i.e., chapters, in the accession negotiations with Ukraine.

Ukraine applied for membership in the European Union just a few days after the full-scale Russian invasion in February 2022. Since then, this has been pushed forward. For Sweden's part, Mr. Speaker, it took four years of negotiations to become an EU member. In the case of Croatia, it took ten years. No one knows how long it will take for Ukraine. It is necessary to adapt legislation, strengthen the rule of law, fight corruption and reform a number of different sectors, moreover in the middle of a burning war. Ukraine has, however, made enormous efforts.

I also want to particularly emphasize here, Mr. Speaker, that the only thing that can apply in this is full EU membership for Ukraine – not only because it would be an unreasonable signal to the Ukrainians if we were to find some kind of half-measure where they only become members halfway, but also because with what we see Ukraine doing in terms of development, innovation and so on, it would be downright stupid if the rest of the European Union said: No, we do not want to have you in fully.

This is a country that today has Europe's strongest army. This is a country where practically the entire population wants to go this way. They want to be a part of Europe. I perceive that many countries have the wrong perspective on Ukraine, Mr. Speaker, when one only sees different types of risks with, for example, the Ukrainian agricultural sector and wants more regulations and restrictions towards the country. On the contrary, one should see that Ukraine has an enormous amount to contribute. It would be reckless not to act now so that Ukraine can truly become a full-fledged member.

It should be said that we have a much more equal relationship between Europe and Ukraine than many people believe – that is my view. Many still view Ukraine as merely a recipient of economic and military support from other countries, but that is not the case.

When we saw that Iran began firing a lot of drones at the Gulf states, it was Ukraine that was there and helped the Gulf states with how to handle these drones. It is experiences that Ukraine has from the war that Russia has started.

The innovation we see in the defense technology area regarding drone technology, air defense, and much more is enormous in Ukraine. It will be a huge advantage if the war spreads further, if Russia brings the war up towards our latitudes, to be able to help the Baltic countries with the Ukrainian technology.

Ukraine is a quarter of Russia in terms of population. Sweden is only a quarter of Ukraine. We are therefore approximately one sixteenth of Russia, and Finland is only half of Sweden. The Baltic countries are approximately one third of Finland. They are very small countries in this context, and Ukraine truly leads the way in this.

We must also, Mr. Speaker, consider what preparedness Europe and the European Union have in the event that the Russian system collapses. Now the Russian economy is doing very poorly. It is going poorly on the battlefield. There is significant criticism against dictator Vladimir Putin. He holds power through massive repression. If further complications lead to the Russian economy simply collapsing within a few years, it will drag down Alexandr Lukashenko and Belarus in the process. We could see a massive upheaval in Eastern Europe within a few years. Does the European Union, Sweden, Nato, and so on have the preparedness to handle such a situation? We do not know.

It is possible that the Russian system survives for a long time. The Romanov tsarist rule governed Russia for almost exactly 300 years. After that, the communists ruled Russia for just over 70 years, and now Vladimir Putin has ruled for nearly 25 years or something of that sort. But the Russian empire can also fall faster than we think.

I vote in favor of the proposals in the report.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report on the activities in the EU during the past year. It is a debate that can usually be quite broad. There are many issues to raise, but the focus on Ukraine is of course given even in this year's debate.

Let me begin with a fundamental point. The European Union is, at its core, a peace project. After two world wars, Europe's countries chose cooperation over conflict. Through economic integration, political dialogue, and common institutions, a system was created where war between member states became unthinkable. It is no small achievement. On the contrary, it is a historical success that we must not take for granted.

The EU has continued to demonstrate its strength in a time marked by crises. In recent years, the union has acted unitedly in support of Ukraine, in managing the aftermath of the pandemic, and in the work to strengthen Europe's economic resilience. It is a testament to the fact that the EU works and that the EU is needed. At the same time, loyalty to the EU project does not mean an uncritical attitude. On the contrary, it is our duty to point out shortcomings and to contribute to making the union better, stronger, and more just.

One deficiency is that the EU has still not fully succeeded in stopping the import of Russian fossil energy. Despite extensive sanctions, European economies continue to be directly or indirectly dependent on Russian oil and gas. This is deeply problematic. Every euro that goes to Russian energy exports risks contributing to the financing of Russia's violation of international law in the war in Ukraine. This must come to an end. The EU must take the next step, both by closing loopholes in the sanctions and by accelerating the green transition. Reducing dependence on fossil energy is not just a climate issue; it is a security policy necessity.

Climate policy is an area where we see both progress and worrying trends. The EU's Green Deal has been a historically important initiative. It has focused on climate neutrality and strengthened innovation, and it has shown global leadership. But we now see how right-wing forces within Europe are trying to dismantle or dilute this work. Climate goals are being questioned. Environmental legislation is being weakened. Short-term economic interests are being allowed to take precedence over the needs of the planet and future generations. It is a dangerous path, because the climate crisis does not take a break for political fluctuations. On the contrary, more cooperation, more ambition, and clearer leadership are required. The EU must continue to be a global force for climate responsibility. The EU must not back down.

Mr. Speaker! This year, I also want to highlight the EU's role in an increasingly complex geopolitical reality, not least in relation to China and the broader global developments. Today we see how China strengthens its position, not only economically but also geopolitically, often in cooperation with other authoritarian states.

The relationship between China and Russia has deepened, and this has direct consequences for the security of Europe and Sweden. Despite the EU having introduced extensive sanctions against Russia following the invasion of Ukraine, Russia has been able to keep its economy alive. A decisive factor is trade with China. Russia exports large quantities of oil at discounted prices while Chinese actors supply Russia with technical components – many with dual uses – that strengthen both industry and military power.

This is unacceptable. Therefore, we believe that the EU should introduce so-called secondary sanctions aimed at countries, companies, and individuals who contribute to bypassing the sanctions or directly support the Russian war economy. The sanctions must be effective, otherwise they risk becoming merely symbolic politics.

Mr. Speaker! A particularly worrying development is seen in Hong Kong. What was once a relatively open and well-functioning financial center is now increasingly under the control of the Chinese authoritarian state. Reports show that Hong Kong today is used as a node to bypass international sanctions. Trade with countries such as Russia, North Korea, and Iran continues despite clear international regulations.

Exports from Hong Kong to Russia have increased significantly since the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and the city's leadership has openly signaled that they do not intend to follow the sanctions. This means that Hong Kong can, in practice, contribute to supplying Russia's war machinery with components used in the production of missiles and aircraft. In some cases, it concerns goods that can be traced back to Western companies.

This shows a serious deficiency in today's export controls, not least when it comes to products with dual-use. Sweden and the EU must act. We need stricter legislation, better control mechanisms and increased transparency.

Mr. Speaker! We must also look forward. The EU's green transition is crucial, but it must not be built on new dependencies or on the exploitation of people and the environment in other parts of the world.

China dominates today the market for several critical raw materials and technologies that are necessary for electrification, such as batteries, solar cells and rare earth metals. This creates a strategic dependency that the EU must reduce. Therefore, it is positive that the EU has initiated reviews of Chinese subsidies and is working to strengthen its own production. But more needs to be done.

We need to increase the recycling of critical materials, develop European industry, and ensure that our supply chains are sustainable both socially and environmentally. This means that international trade in so-called conflict minerals must be better regulated. Today's system is largely voluntary, and that is not enough. The EU should work for binding legislation and a global certification system that ensures transparency, fair working conditions, and accountability.

Mr. Speaker! Electrification of the transport sector is a key to the climate transition. Here, European car companies have taken important steps, and it is crucial that policy keeps pace. The EU's climate tariffs are an important tool to drive global transition and prevent dirty production from moving abroad. But we must also continue to develop our instruments. Trade and climate policy need to go hand in hand. It is about fair competition conditions but also about taking global responsibility.

In conclusion: The European Union is one of the most successful peace projects in world history. It has created stability, prosperity, and cooperation in a region that was once characterized by conflict. But the EU is not finished. It is an ongoing project that must be developed in step with our time.

We must stand up for democracy and human rights both within and outside Europe. We must be consistent in our support for Ukraine and in our opposition to authoritarian regimes. We must strengthen the EU's sanctions and ensure that they are complied with. We must defend and further develop the green transition. This is something we need to do together.

In a world that is becoming increasingly uncertain, it is clear that it is through cooperation, not division, that we build peace, security, and faith in the future. With that, I move for the approval of reservation 10, which concerns sanctions.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! European cooperation has never been more important than it is today. Sweden needs Europe to assert its own place in the global competition, and Europe needs a strong Sweden.

The year 2025 was the year when Europe was seriously confronted with the consequences of the changing world. Europe was forced more than ever before to take hold of its own security, preparedness, readiness, and economic strength.

The government has, in this, navigated with Swedish interests in the front room. A Europe that stands strong and united in a restless world is a clear Swedish interest. But Swedish interests are also issues that distinguish just Sweden, such as our forestry, our energy system and the unique conditions that Swedish companies and industries need to build competitiveness in an increasingly competitive global market.

For all too long, previous governments neglected Swedish interests in Brussels – no longer. This government has prioritized EU policy from day one. We do it because we know that Sweden becomes better and stronger when we cooperate with others. We are involved early in the discussions with clear Swedish positions, and we push them together with like-minded countries.

Let me explain some issues that are of particular importance for the government and which continue to shape the EU policy agenda.

First of all, we have Ukraine. Ukraine is and remains this government's most important foreign policy priority. Our support is unwavering. Our close ties were manifested this week after the announcement that Ukraine intends to purchase 20 Gripen E/F and that Sweden, in connection with the sale, will donate up to 16 Gripen C/D from our existing aircraft fleet. It strengthens Ukraine's defense and thus all of Europe's.

In the EU, we have received a decision on a loan of 90 billion euro on the spot. It was an important decision, but we know that the loan will not cover Ukraine's needs in the long term. Therefore, we all also need to increase our bilateral support to Ukraine.

From the Swedish side, the Riksdag has recently decided to guarantee a loan to Ukraine via the World Bank of 2.5 billion kronor and a new military support package of 12.9 billion. Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Sweden has contributed approximately 153 billion kronor in military and civilian support to Ukraine.

The EU has also adopted decisions on 20 sanction packages against Russia, which we know are biting. We must not believe the Russian propaganda; the Russian economy is not strong. The sanctions are working, and the government is therefore working intensively to put a 21st sanction package in place.

Mr. Speaker! Regarding the support for Ukraine, I would like to highlight from this rostrum the broad consensus that prevails in the Swedish Riksdag and what a strength it is that we as a country stand united in our support. In this issue, we set party politics aside and put the best interests of Sweden, Europe, and Ukraine first.

Mr. Speaker! The EU's position as an actor in the world is largely determined by our economic strength. Therefore, it is important that we pursue a policy that benefits our companies and industries so that jobs increase and growth becomes higher. The Government is pushing for the work to strengthen the EU's competitiveness to continue at full pace.

It is, however, crucial that all member states also get it right at home. This government has implemented significant reforms so that hard-working Swedes should feel that effort pays off. It is a policy that has taken Sweden from the bottom to the top of the EU's growth table. It has lowered taxes so that those who set the clock and go to work should be able to keep more of their wages. We have fought inflation, and we support households and companies when crises in the world drive up fuel prices.

There is much to do on the EU agenda. We need to continue simplifying regulations. The Government has championed making it easier to be an entrepreneur in Europe. We have conducted proactive work both by developing proposals for simplifications and through hard work on the ground in Brussels. Many of the proposals that the Government has introduced into the discussion have been addressed, including regulatory simplifications in the AI area. In other areas, the work continues.

It has also been a strong year for the EU's free trade agenda. The negotiations with Australia and India are concluded. The free trade agreements with Mercosur and Mexico are signed. Now we must not lose momentum. The remaining negotiations with the Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and the United Arab Emirates must be completed. This would open up new markets and create jobs in Sweden.

We also need to speed up investments in Europe. Companies and startups should not have to cross the Atlantic to find capital. On the contrary, we must ensure that Europe becomes an obvious place for companies that want to start, scale up, and stay here.

The Swedish capital market is seen as an example throughout Europe. The EU Commission is now urging all member states to do as Sweden does and, for example, introduce the model with the investment savings account. We know that it works, and the government continues to be an example through continued reforms at home. We are doubling the tax-free ISK savings to 300,000. It is absolutely crucial for those who want to save for their first home or set aside money to start their own business.

Mr. Speaker! The green transition is absolutely necessary, also as part of strengthening Europe's competitiveness. While some argue that the two cannot be reconciled, it is the government's firm opinion that they go hand in hand. Sweden is an example in the EU. We have among the lowest emissions per capita in the entire union, a world-class business sector, and a broad support behind the climate policy direction within both politics and the business community.

Sometimes it sounds a bit different in the national debate, but when I meet my colleagues in Brussels, it is clear that it is Sweden and like-minded countries that are driving the other countries forward.

The government has been proactive in bringing the entire EU together around an ambitious goal of a 90 percent reduction in emissions by 2040. Now we need to get a competitive climate framework in place that takes us there.

For this government, Swedish forestry is a strong interest in this. It is our hard-working Swedish forest owners who know best how Swedish forest should be managed. The EU must not stand in the way of this, but rather build a competitive bioeconomy and ensure very good conditions and prerequisites for more houses to be built in wood, so that renewable bioenergy shall displace the fossil and so that more materials shall be produced from sustainable forest raw materials.

The government is also working intensively to ensure that the emissions trading system continues to be the backbone of the EU's climate policy. I and the government take every opportunity to convey this to our colleagues in the Council and to the Commission, which is expected to present a proposal on a revised EU ETS in July.

Before the review, a number of countries have stated that relaxations of the system are necessary to preserve European industry's competitiveness, not least against the background of high energy prices. This government does not agree and will work to ensure that the emissions trading system continues to be the transition engine that it is today.

Mr. Speaker! By welcoming more members into the EU, we make all of Europe stronger, safer, wealthier, and freer. Every Swedish government, including this one, has consistently stood up for a merit-based expansion which means that every European country that meets the requirements and wants to become a part of our union shall also be able to do so.

For Ukraine, EU membership means a great deal. The Ukrainian people are fighting here and now for their own independence and freedom and for the Ukrainian people's inviolable right to choose their own path. Europe's democratic community is their choice of path and the strongest contrast to the lack of freedom, the oppression, and the corruption that the Kremlin stands for. The Government is hopeful to be able to open the formal negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova as soon as possible.

In the Western Balkans, we see how some countries are making great progress, while the development in other countries is heading in the completely wrong direction. It is the candidate countries' pace of reform that determines the speed of the process. The same tough requirements for democracy and the rule of law that apply to members, we also impose on those who claim to become a part of our union.

The Government is insistent that the rule of law and democratic conditions have a central place within the expansion policy, as well as towards today's members, not least when it comes to conditioning EU funds in the budget.

In this context, it is very welcome that the Hungarian government signals a completely new direction in the national rule of law work, in the relationship with the EU and in the relationship with Ukraine.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I would like to mention something about the negotiations on the EU's next long-term budget. Sweden's position is well and broadly anchored in the Riksdag. We want to see a better, not larger, budget. The Swedish contribution shall be kept down, and a greater focus shall be placed on competitiveness, security, and rule of law conditionality.

It is a strength that Sweden can speak with a strong common voice in this large and complex negotiation. I repeatedly meet with both colleagues and the responsible commissioner to convey the message that the Swedish line is firm and has compact support in Sweden's Riksdag. The Government takes responsibility for the Swedish economy and for ensuring that Swedes' tax money is used wisely and in a way that benefits Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! I conclude where I began. EU cooperation has never been more important. Sweden needs a strong Europe, and Europe needs a strong Sweden.

(Applause)

In this speech, Fredrik Ahlstedt, Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström, Joanna Lewerentz and Erik Ottoson (all M) agreed.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is welcome that the EU Minister participates in this debate; the Minister raises several important EU issues in his speech.

A question that I noted the minister did not raise in his speech is that Israel has been able to carry out its genocide in Gaza completely without the rest of the world having reacted powerfully. Israel has also, in violation of international law, attacked its neighboring countries: Syria, Iran, Yemen and not least now Lebanon. Israeli settlers and the Israeli military have increased the violence and killing in the West Bank, without powerful reactions and sanctions. And now they have also introduced a law on the death penalty for Palestinians, by hanging – the law does not cover Israelis.

We have reached a point where the rest of the world really must take its hand off Israel's far-right government. Since Viktor Orbán was now voted out in Hungary, the EU finally pushed through some sanctions against Israeli settlers. But in context, they can be said to be extremely marginal; they apply to three individuals and four entities responsible for settler violence and violations in the West Bank.

We in the opposition have long proposed that the EU should do more to suspend the trade agreement between the EU and Israel, an opinion that the Swedish government says it holds but in practice no longer pursues. In Ireland and the Netherlands, they have put forward their own initiatives to stop trade with Israel, something that we in the opposition have also proposed in Sweden.

Instead, a French-Swedish proposal on the differentiation policy has been submitted. It concerns a proposal for measures in the form of increased tariffs on products from Israeli settlements on occupied land as well as requirements for export certificates, i.e., an opportunity for more expensive trade but no stop to trade with Israel. A stop seems to have been reached for the government's proposal, however, as it has not moved forward many millimeters in the EU since it was presented.

I wonder, Mr. Speaker: When will the Swedish government seriously act against Israel's far-right government?

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! Many thanks, Håkan Svenneling, for the question!

Yes, the situation in Gaza and on the West Bank is in many ways extremely concerning. The government has for a long time pushed for further measures to be taken, both to ensure that Israel withdraws from Gaza and for us to achieve a disarmament of Hamas. I can state that we are pushing both to blacklist extremist settlers – there we have come a bit of the way – and to introduce sanctions against extremist ministers, something we have seen examples of in the recent past and which is deeply serious. We continue to push.

Then I can state that in some respects that Håkan Svenneling mentions, for example when it concerns the association agreement, there is no support among the EU member states to freeze or suspend. But I think it is extremely important, and Sweden is pushing for it, so that we can take the measures that we can actually reach a consensus on when it comes to, for example, more sanctions listings, demands for the disarmament of Hamas, and the implementation of trade measures for products from illegal settlements. It is a known fact at this point that the EU circle is quite divided. That can be regretted, but that is how it is. But we continue to push to get measures in place.

When it comes to the bill on the death penalty, I can only state that Sweden, like other EU member states, always opposes the death penalty. We have also, in different ways towards Israel, been very clear that one should not proceed with this and that we are furthermore deeply concerned about the discriminatory nature of the laws, as Håkan Svenneling also mentions. But quite regardless of this, the death penalty is wrong.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Several of these positions are important for the government to take and for Sweden to push for. Sweden has, I believe, ended up in a group of countries that is somewhat in the middle. There are several countries that are pushing much harder against Israel, and there are countries that have held back – where Hungary has been leading for a long time. Now the Hungarian government has been replaced, and sanctions have been accepted. Now the grouping that Sweden belongs to needs to become even more active but also approach those countries that have pushed more.

It is actually about two things: partly decisions that need to be made by unanimity, and partly decisions that need to be made by qualified majority. This is truly a challenge at the EU level that is not entirely simple to handle.

What strikes me when I read reports from the meetings that the EU Minister and the Foreign Minister participate in is how incredibly slowly it goes – how incredibly long it takes to produce proposals and how slowly the Commission works with various initiatives and proposals. It feels like it just rolls on month after month, meeting after meeting, instead of making progress.

I really do not understand why the EU is so bad at acting. The law on the death penalty by hanging came at the beginning of this year. The EU has still not, for example, imposed any kind of travel ban on extremist ministers. The EU minister may therefore explain what it is that is taking so much time.

From what I understood from the latest records, the Franco-Swedish initiative has actually not gone anywhere. The Commission has not worked further with it. There is no concrete proposal on the EU's table right now. The settlement sanctions have been adopted, but right now there is actually no concrete proposal from the Commission to proceed with anything. That is what I would like to see, from the government's side but above all from the EU Commission's side.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is clear that Hungary's new government has brought some opportunities to take more measures, in this issue and many others. At the same time, it is unfortunately often other countries that hide behind the country that is heard most clearly in its opposition. That is to say, just because Hungary has moved away from some positions does not mean that it is now all clear sailing to reach agreements at the EU level; there are other countries that continue to have views. Not least in this issue, we know by this point that a good number of countries stand far apart from each other.

It is clear that it is a challenge when 27 countries are to reach an agreement. This is also the EU's weakness and strength: it sometimes takes time and is difficult, but when we finally achieve success, it can make a difference.

We continue to push forward. I am, as I said, nevertheless glad that we have succeeded in getting more listings and more sanctions against the extremist settlers. We also continue to push forward against the ministers. It is good that the High Representative Kaja Kallas has urged the EU Commission to present concrete proposals regarding the Franco-Swedish initiative before the next foreign ministers' meeting. We are, of course, pushing forward so that this becomes a reality.

Then I can say that I, from Vänsterpartiet, often miss the holistic perspective in this issue. There are, of course, many pressures for actions against Israel, but even less when it comes to, for example, disarming Hamas or dealing with the other party in this conflict. There are two sides to this, and we must act against both, I mean – both ensuring that Israel withdraws from Gaza and ensuring that Hamas is disarmed. There, Vänsterpartiet has a great deal to do, both in its policy and in its party, to clear up the terror romanticism that exists within the party.

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! There is much we agree with EU Minister Jessica Rosencrantz on, for example how closely climate, competition, and security are linked. We now propose that one should do exactly as with the democracy issues, that is, introduce a climate lock: When countries do not do their part, they also do not receive EU money. My first question is whether the Minister believes that this is something that the Swedish government could imagine pursuing.

The second – when dealing with EU issues one really has to be an expert on everything – concerns the migration pact, which enters into force next week, and the immense anxiety that hbtqi persons now feel that they will end up in the category of people who are automatically sent back to so-called safe countries despite being hbtqi persons but perhaps either do not dare to show it or simply are not believed in the screening that is to take place.

Here I wonder a bit how the government is pushing and trying to achieve security – and by that I do not mean only in Sweden, but I am calling for a reasoning on how to proceed in the whole of the EU. It does not only concern the cases where people are sent back to their home countries, but it also concerns the return hubs. It can have very negative consequences for specifically hbtqi-persons if they end up in certain countries.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! There were two major issues, and I have two minutes to answer. But I will do my best.

Climate issues are one of the government's priorities in the EU cooperation. We often talk about our four k's: climate, competitiveness, crime, and the war. Climate is truly a priority in every sense, additionally together with competitiveness. Here we see that there are good opportunities for the EU to lead the development and thus also ensure that our industry and our companies stand strong.

This also applies, for example, to the EU budget, where we welcome that there is, for example, an approach that the budget should "do no harm", as it is called in Swenglish. That is to say that we must ensure that we also use the EU budget to also meet the climate policy challenges. The budget is part of our ambitious framework, where we have now finally put in place a goal to reduce emissions by 90 percent by 2040. That is good.

When it comes to different types of requirements on conditionality towards the different countries, I want to say that the EU is moving in that direction with the new budget, i.e., that a part of the EU funds will be conditioned in a clearer way on the fact that reforms are made in the different countries in a number of central areas. We will discuss how extensive those requirements should be. There is also a national sovereignty to protect to some extent in the national partnership plans that are to be established.

The government therefore has no direct proposal on a climate lock, but we see an expanded conditionality. Not least this regarding the rule of law area is extremely important to hold onto.

Now I have 20 seconds left and may not have time to say very much about migration. But it is important that we have gotten the migration pact in place. It is important that we now also move forward with strengthening returns, including this with safe third countries, because we must have order and clarity, not just in Sweden's migration process but also in the EU, so that we know who is located in our union. When a rejection has been received, it is important with a strong return.

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer regarding climate, competitiveness, and security! It is still partially positive with the possibility of using conditionality and that the government is now looking at this. My addition can then be that one must really ensure to specifically strengthen the conditionality when it comes to how one works with climate and environmental issues. It is so crucial, and we must be on our toes for this throughout Europe.

Then I think that the EU Minister now has the opportunity to return to the issue of rights when it concerns refugees who are hbtqi persons. Their concern is very great, and I believe it is justified.

The entire agreement is based on that one arrives at an arrival center or a return hub where everyone gathers in one place. Creating a safe environment there for an LGBTQI person, who perhaps from the very beginning is very afraid of outing themselves, will be tricky. That was why I asked the question.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! Of course, the processes must be both legally secure and conducted with respect for human rights. They must also, naturally, take into account some of such conceivable problems as Anna Lasses describes. But we must find ways to solve this.

The very basis of the solutions we are talking about – both this with the migration pact and a strong return and the discussion about safe third countries – is that we have had a practically uncontrolled migration situation in Europe, and it has been completely unreasonable. Now that Sweden and the Swedish government have made a major reorganization here at home, many other countries have looked at us to find inspiration for how they want to proceed at home. This has also led to the insight that we at the EU level must do more together.

One can certainly find parts in the migration pact that could be better, but fundamentally, it is important to have a better procedure at the EU's external border where one can fairly quickly determine who has grounds for asylum and who comes from a country where one probably does not have grounds for asylum. This can also enable a faster return, of course with a legally secure process. This is very important, I believe, to maintain confidence in the entirety of the EU's migration policy. A yes must be a yes and a no must be a no.

Of course, we will return to the details. There must always be legally secure processes with respect for human rights. But the foundation of the system is important, that is to say that we must have order and clarity in the EU's migration system, and we must have a strong return.

(Applause)

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

Matilda Ernkrans (S)

Mr. Speaker! EU cooperation has never been more important. Sweden needs a strong Europe, and Europe needs a strong Sweden. Sweden must return, and Sweden must be taken seriously.

With one very important exception – it concerns Ukraine, for in that issue the government has acted very well – Sweden's results are quite poor. It is not to Sweden that others turn when it comes to solving problems in our part of the EU, but they turn to Mette Frederiksen in Denmark or Alexander Stubb in Finland. This prompts me to pose a question to the Minister for EU Affairs.

Ulf Kristersson has promised the Sweden Democrats important ministerial posts, and Jimmie Åkesson himself says that he wants half of the ministerial posts in a future government. At the same time, the Sweden Democrats are Sweden's most EU-critical party. They don't actually even want to sit at the negotiating table. How will this affect Sweden's role and strength in the European cooperation?

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, finally we have a government in Sweden that prioritizes EU cooperation. For the previous Social Democratic government, it was more important to secure support for a seat in the UN Security Council, but this government, therefore, prioritizes our EU cooperation and our work in the near area.

I do not know why Matilda Ernkrans immediately wants to reduce all EU political issues to issues about games. I think that is a pity. I think that European policy deserves better than to be reduced to domestic political campaign rhetoric.

I can state that in many issues in EU policy, we have broad and strong support for the policy that the government is pursuing today. That is how I perceive it. And if I were Matilda Ernkrans, I would be more concerned about the government's own support base. Sitting on the lap of Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet when it comes to the EU's migration policy, forestry policy, and energy policy would make me, as a Swede and a voter, terrified, in plain Swedish.

The previous government neglected important Swedish interests, such as standing up for Swedish forestry. They essentially wanted to classify nuclear power as unsustainable, which would be a direct blow to the entire climate transition. And one also has left-wing parties that very clearly think there should be continued disorder in migration policy.

If anyone is to be worried, Mr. Speaker, it is probably Matilda Ernkrans, and she should be worried about the Social Democrats' own intended government base.

(Applause)

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

Matilda Ernkrans (S)

Mr. Speaker! Speaking of domestic political bickering, I want to say that we are facing an election campaign. We Social Democrats have said that we are ready to lead Sweden, and we are ready to cooperate with all parties except the Sverigedemokraterna. So let us let the election result shape the government.

That is not the case on that side and in the government that the EU Minister is part of. There, Kristersson and Åkesson have already agreed that Jimmie Åkesson shall be part of a coming government and that Ulf Kristersson shall be Prime Minister. Åkesson's party shall have at least half of the ministerial posts. But at the same time, they are Sweden's most EU-critical party.

I therefore return to my question. It is a reasonable question: How will this affect Sweden's role in European cooperation, asks the EU Minister?

We can take an example of something that has happened during this government: the EU Minister tries to assert that Sweden has pushed forward EU's climate work, but we received as recently as yesterday the Commission's report on the review of the 27 member states. In it, it is stated that Sweden's climate work is off track. It is very clear that Sweden, with its current policy, will not achieve the EU's goals for reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

This is in practice just a part where Sweden has not achieved any results. In that case, I haven't even touched upon the fact that Sweden has failed to ensure that the sanctions against Russia actually have an effect.

It would be tasteful if the EU Minister could answer how it will affect Sweden's opportunities and role in the EU cooperation if one has a government together with Sweden's most EU-critical party.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker and Matilda Ernkrans! It is clear that the Social Democrats are trying to escape their own government base by mixing up the cards. As a Swedish voter, I would, as I said, become quite nervous when I realized that the EU policy with the Social Democrats will need to be negotiated and anchored with the Left Party and the Green Party.

We have, as already said, seen the result from the previous years of Social Democratic government rule. We have seen what happens when one does not stand up for Swedish forestry, when one does not stand up for the fossil-free energy mix that we have in Sweden and which has ensured that we have an almost fossil-free energy system, and when one is dependent on parties that would rather have disorder in migration policy than order and clarity.

We already anchor much of our policy in the EU area with the Sweden Democrats. I think that Matilda Ernkrans is trying to warn against something that there is no reason to warn against.

I think it is deplorable that the Social Democrats are constantly trying to blacken Sweden. I understand that one does it because one is in opposition and because one is conducting a campaign, but honestly: When the climate commissioner was in Sweden, he highlighted Sweden as an example. When emissions in the different EU countries are measured, Sweden has the lowest or second lowest emissions per capita of all EU member states. Unlike many other countries, Sweden has an almost fossil-free energy system that other countries look at with envy.

Of course, we need to do more. We have also placed a budget on the Riksdag's table that will continue to reduce emissions. The question to Matilda Ernkrans then becomes: What is the Social Democrats' policy to reach the goals in the transport sector? Is it to raise fuel prices by 10 kronor per liter? What is it that the Social Democrats are de facto proposing? Without proposals, it is just election campaign rhetoric but no substance.

I am proud that many look at Sweden as an example in the EU, both when it comes to climate policy, when it comes to migration policy, and when it comes to the fact that we have moved from the bottom to the top of the EU's growth ladder. It will take four more years to continue on this path.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be made on 9 June.)

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