(cont.) Business (cont. NU1)

Birger Lahti (V)

Mr. Speaker! Expenditure area 24 Business is the committee report we are debating here. Since the parliamentary majority in the first step of the budget process has given the budget policy a different direction than the one I desire, I abstain from taking a position regarding the allocation of appropriations within the expenditure area.

I would like to begin by emphasizing the importance of Swedish industry. Much of what the industry produces is crucial for society, for example, materials for welfare, the construction sector, the green transition, or energy production. Sweden is a small country that is very dependent on exports to the global market, often with natural resources as input. We must start thinking anew so that we can collectively develop and feel hope for the future when it comes to continuing to assert ourselves in a changing world.

Even rural areas that contribute raw materials to the export industry, for example forest products, minerals or electricity supply, must be able to feel that they get something out of the values they contribute. That is not the case today. Only then will we get cohesion and a common project to develop our business sector for the challenges we face when the whole world needs to transition.

We, who have often been able to assert ourselves with quality and durability, must now also begin to assert ourselves in a context where greenhouse gas emissions are something that will be decisive for who is most competitive.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden also needs to transition to innovation-driven growth. That which other countries do cheaper, and sometimes perhaps even a little better, Sweden must meet with higher knowledge content and more resource-efficient production of goods and services that are produced based on societal challenges rather than consumption-driven. The transition of the economy occurs in a new economic landscape where the climate issue and the growing population constitute both challenges and opportunities. Research and development must therefore take place in close relation to industry.

I want to highlight small businesses as an important engine for Sweden's business life. They are important not only because they can grow and become large but also because, at best, they can drive forward new ideas and innovations. Sweden has good conditions to develop entrepreneurship within sustainability and energy efficiency, which in turn can accelerate the transition of society.

Trade with the rest of the world is very important for Sweden's prosperity and development. When it comes to the policy pursued in this area, I would have liked to see a new direction with justice as a starting point. People, social justice, animals, climate and environment should be prioritized. The focus should be on societal gains for everyone, not just on profits for the large corporations.

Trade policy must also not lead to deterioration for people in other countries. In order for trade to take place on fair terms, poorer countries need to be given advantages and greater space to pursue their own trade policy. Trade should also be a tool to spread green technology and encourage countries to strengthen their climate and environmental policies.

Mr. Speaker! It is perfectly appropriate here for me to move for approval of our motive reservation 2 in the report. It concerns the decision point regarding foreign trade as well as export and investment promotion.

In line with the Left Party's budget alternative within expenditure area 24, I believe that the following changes should have been implemented in relation to what the government proposes.

Amendment 1:2 The Innovation System: Research and development should have been increased by 35 million SEK compared to the government's proposal. These funds are needed, for example, for research on sustainable building materials that can replace fossil building materials such as cement and steel.

I further mean that the appropriation 1:3 Strategic competence funds for institutes should have been increased by 73 million kronor in comparison with the government's proposal. It would have enabled support to Rise and to innovative companies so that they can apply their research in state laboratories. There is, in fact, no room for small companies to utilize them.

Even the appropriation 1:5 Business Development should have been increased compared to the government's proposal. In total, 122 million kronor should have been added to finance several important initiatives. Just over half of this appropriation should go to targeted support for women's entrepreneurship, which would consist of two parts. One part would aim to facilitate professional networking between women. The other part would aim to support women's innovation.

I would also have liked to see an increase in the appropriation 1:8 Geological Survey of Sweden by 20 million kronor compared to the government's proposal. In the report Innovation-critical metals and minerals – a research overview, which was prepared on behalf of our committee, it is stated that there is an insufficient bedrock geological and mineral genetic research infrastructure in Sweden when it comes to innovation-critical metals and minerals and that knowledge building is required. However, the money is not sufficient. Geological Survey of Sweden has been tasked with mapping the occurrence of innovation-critical metals, but I believe that the agency needs more resources for the purpose.

I want to emphasize that it is a fact that small companies can have difficulty obtaining bank loans because the banks do not want to take the risk, especially in areas that have had a negative population development. I believe that appropriation 1:20 Grants for business development and innovation should have been increased by 120 million kronor compared to the government's proposal so that Almi can begin work on improving small companies' opportunities to obtain financing. This was something that the Socialdemokraterna took up earlier.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I believe that a new appropriation should have been introduced within the expenditure area for a three-year program for the green transition of the paper industry. It is difficult for the forest industry, you should know – I hope it turns around if we get peace in the world. Vänsterpartiet thinks that 250 million kronor should have been allocated to such a program for 2026. Through that, the paper industry could receive support for investments involving energy efficiency and increased production of domestic renewable fuels. There are great opportunities for the aforementioned industry to contribute further.

In summary, I therefore wanted to allocate 620 million kronor more than the government to the expenditure area.

(Applause)

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating business, a policy area that concerns Sweden's companies, our jobs, and our ability to create long-term growth throughout the country. I want to begin by expressing my support for the committee's proposed decision regarding expenditure area 24 and by rejecting all motions.

This budget bill, just like the previous budget bills that the government has presented, aims for a competitive business sector that can grow, create jobs, and support both welfare and green transition. For us Christian Democrats and the government, it is clear that this requires stable framework conditions, functioning markets, and a clear focus on implementation.

Mr. Speaker! Economic policy is not an end in itself. It is about people's opportunity to realize their ideas, provide for their families, and create faith in the future across the entire country. With this budget, the government, with the Christian Democrats as a clear partner, presents a strong business package of nearly 7.2 billion kronor. We are laying the foundation for a business sector that is responsible, competitive, and long-term sustainable – a business sector where entrepreneurs can realize their potential in their company, for their employees, for the local community, and for all of Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! I listened with amazement to the speech by the Social Democrat Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro. It was like listening to the world of fables. He spoke of the greatness that the Social Democrats had handed over after the 2022 election – a flourishing Sweden. It is remarkable, Mr. Speaker, to claim that Sweden stood strong when our government took over a Sweden with double-digit inflation, dismantled energy production, a lack of infrastructure investments in both roads and railways as well as power grids – infrastructure that is crucial for companies and industry to grow, for the capital market and for jobs – and threats of bankruptcies. That is how it looked.

The Christian Democrats and the government have worked purposefully and intensively to turn around our country's competitiveness. Now Sweden is rising again. We have pushed down the inflation figure to 3 percent.

Mr. Speaker! We give entrepreneurs the conditions they need to run their businesses as we push back red tape, speed up permit processes and reduce administrative burdens and costs. We lower taxes for small and medium-sized enterprises, lower employer contributions for young people, strengthen the growth support and maintain the expert tax so that Sweden can compete for competence.

We are making historically large investments in roads and railways. We are introducing better conditions for private capital and risk-sharing between private and public capital.

We have Industriklivet and Klimatklivet for the green transition. We strengthen the industry linked to the EU's competitiveness with clean industry and technological sovereignty.

We are creating better conditions for industrial establishments with test and demonstration facilities and production in Sweden. Vinnova and Rise will now receive 1.5 billion SEK in increased appropriations.

We have worked intensively from day one for a stable electricity supply, Mr. Speaker, with predictable and reliable electricity. We are cleaning up after the Social Democratic government, which decommissioned six nuclear power plants. We have initiated Kraftlyftet, and now we are enabling nuclear power.

We take the lead within the EU and negotiate so that Sweden stands strong. We introduce the omnibus package, a competitiveness package that will push back red tape for companies across Europe. We participate actively in energy solutions, investments, and the capital market.

I also want to mention the trade policy, Mr. Speaker. We are working hard for the EU's and our independence as we establish agreements on strategic partnerships with countries outside of Europe that share Sweden's fundamental values.

In the countryside, we support production, distribution, and digitalization. New business establishments are occurring in the countryside. We improve for agriculture and farming and for food supply – for our own, for export, and for our preparedness.

We are strengthening the supply of skills with more places in vocational education, where the university college (yrkeshögskolan) is highly appreciated by companies. With a historic investment in research, innovation, and a focus on excellence, we make Sweden strong.

I could continue with more initiatives, but I want to focus a bit more, Mr. Speaker, on simplified rules for the companies.

It was, for example, a great relief for companies when we removed the requirement for paper receipts. We work with digitalization and shorter processing times, which is crucial for our companies. We work systematically through the Simplification Council and the Implementation Council to continue reviewing regulations, agency processes, and digital services. The results are already noticeable: More services, standardized processes, and digital powers of attorney facilitate the everyday lives of companies and free up resources for core activities, innovation, and growth.

Mr. Speaker! At the same time, the authorities shall meet the business community with professionalism and good treatment. Here, the county administrative boards and other state authorities have developed training and guidelines that make processing and service more business-adapted. Through clear information, coordinated inspection visits, and predictable processes, we reduce the entrepreneur's administrative burden. A well-functioning dialogue between companies and authorities is crucial for companies to be able to grow without unnecessary obstacles.

Mr. Speaker! I want to particularly highlight small, medium-sized, and growing companies. It is these companies that account for a large part of the jobs and the regional development in the entire country. For us Christian Democrats, it is obvious that policy should be designed with their reality in mind.

Family businesses build their operations on long-term perspective, responsibility, and care for both employees and the local community. They build value over generations, not just for their own family's future but for the entire local community's welfare and development. To safeguard family businesses, Mr. Speaker, is therefore not just good business policy; it is an expression of a social construction that holds together.

Mr. Speaker! Crime against companies costs companies in Sweden almost 100 billion kronor per year in direct costs, security measures, and loss of revenue. This is also something that we have taken over from the Social Democratic government. An important task we are now undertaking is that we secure the conditions for companies through a strong protection against crime and unfair competition.

The budget contains clear reinforcements in the work against economic crime and unfair competition, including through increased resources to Bolagsverket, strengthened control of ultimate beneficial owners, and more efficient opportunities to liquidate companies that are being abused. It is crucial to protect serious entrepreneurs and maintain confidence in the Swedish business community.

Competence supply is a key issue for Sweden's competitiveness, Mr. Speaker. We Christian Democrats and the government have during the year taken extensive measures to strengthen companies' access to qualified labor. We identify and remove obstacles for international top competence, among other things through improved conditions within the experts tax and by giving eleven authorities a mandate to analyze obstacles for international labor.

Sweden shall be a country that attracts, establishes and retains the competence needed for companies to be able to grow and develop. The competence that comes from outside complements our own talents and contributes to more jobs, more innovations and increased growth.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden also has an industrial policy that strengthens our international competitiveness and contributes to growing exports and international investments in Sweden.

Export is a cornerstone of Sweden's prosperity. Through exports, jobs, growth, and resources for the welfare state are created. The Government strengthens Swedish exports through Business Sweden, the Export Credit Board and targeted support measures, as well as by driving trade issues at the EU level. Through Business Sweden, we facilitate for companies to establish themselves internationally, navigate regulatory frameworks, and find business partners. Particularly small and medium-sized enterprises receive support to reach new markets, which is crucial.

Mr. Speaker! This budget is a clear expression of the government's responsible industrial policy – a policy that stands on the side of companies, which safeguards work, entrepreneurship and innovation and which builds Sweden's competitiveness for the future.

With that, I once again move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision regarding expenditure area 24 and for the rejection of all motions.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Lili André for the speech.

I note that this is the fourth budget that this government base has presented for expenditure area 24 Business. It is also the Christian Democrats who, through Ebba Busch, have held the position of Minister for Enterprise during the mandate period.

There is much in Lili Andrés's speech linked to innovative power, how we can become strong, energy production, who shut down which reactor, and who did what that caused us to end up with high inflation.

When it suits them, this government seems to point to the international situation. Now, however, it is about the past parliamentary term, when they actually held power and also boasted quite a bit about having a stable majority in Sweden's Riksdag, which has meant that they have been able to push through their budget.

Let me ask a question about something that Lili André brings up, namely this issue of risk-sharing. It seems that the Christian Democrats are concerned about this when it comes to investments in our industry. But in what way do the Christian Democrats, in this budget, provide that support to the industry that Lili André expresses from the rostrum?

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro for an important question.

Our policy is not just about state funds for industrial development and investments. It is also about getting private venture capitalists to want to participate and invest in the industry. We are constantly working on bringing in more private capital in combination with public capital. We have different initiatives, for example, Almi is involved when one invests in companies. We also have Klimatklivet and Industriklivet. It is about giving the companies a sense of confidence for the future by telling them that the government is eager and invests in, among other things, nuclear power, green transition, and excellence in research and innovation. Our policy contains many different parts, which gives the companies a security that makes them also dare to invest, and here the private investments come in.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Mr. Speaker! There is much to say, but I shall confine myself to the state's responsibility. Lili André, in her response, raised the Industrial Step (Industriklivet), and in the budget that lies on the Riksdag's table, the support for Swedish industry via the Industrial Step is reduced by 80 percent. As a point of clarification, I can inform the member that those who have primarily received support via the Industrial Step are medium-sized, highly innovative companies that have needed this support to first be able to accelerate and then enter a global market and compete. Now they are denied this support.

Mr. Speaker! I want to try to understand what the Christian Democrats' industrial policy is. Recently, a debate article by Lili André, the party leader, was published in Dagens industri, where she wrote that Sweden needs large state investments, that the state should share the risk with the municipalities that invest, and that strategic projects should be prioritized in the permit processes. This is Social Democratic policy and was included in our guidelines for our party congress. Of course, I welcome everyone who shares the Social Democrats' view, and Lili André's party and my party have, during this parliamentary term, attempted to reach an energy agreement. Therefore, it is strange that in this debate, when we are trying to look forward, there is that high level of tail-following that was seen during the previous parliamentary term when it comes to energy policy. I have nevertheless understood that Lili André's party and my party agree that we must reach an energy agreement.

Now the Christian Democrats are in a government cooperation with parties that would rather wage a culture war than increase electricity production. But now the Christian Democrats are presenting an industrial policy that is in line with the Social Democrats'. Is it not simply that the Christian Democrats are in the completely wrong camp?

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro for the contribution and the extended hand. We are eager to cooperate with the Social Democrats on issues that are important for Sweden.

The Speaker says that both our parties have the same political initiatives for the business sector, for example Industriklivet. But we have actually gone ahead. Imagine if the Social Democrats, even during their time in government, had already started the work on permit processes for a faster green transition, had had a better energy policy, and shown that what the basic industry needs is nuclear power! Instead, you are delivering lots of fine initiatives now, but they are our initiatives. The Christian Democrats have worked hard for this. It is about more than political rhetoric; it is about intensive work together with authorities, private actors, and industry to build Sweden strong.

The Social Democrats consider themselves to stand for a good business climate, but I am reflecting on the Social Democrats' business line. The Social Democrats want to abolish the sick pay deduction (karensavdrag), which might sound empathetic. In practice, however, it is hostile to businesses and out of touch with reality. When the first day of sick leave is fully paid, the cost is shifted directly to the employer regardless of margins. If anything is hostile to businesses, it is precisely this. An abolished sick pay deduction costs up to 40 billion for society and the companies when one includes production losses and increased sick leave costs for the employers. It is not business-friendly policy.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Lili André for the speech.

The government and the Sweden Democrats often speak of nuclear power as if it were to save all of Sweden, and in the speech it was said that the Social Democrats have shut down six functioning reactors. Does Member André and the Christian Democrats really mean that the Social Democrats have shut down all six reactors? Is there, therefore, no best-before date for reactors or anything else that matters? Is it only the Social Democrats' fault that these six reactors are not in operation?

I shall pose a question to. At what price, in today's monetary value, do Member André and the Christian Democrats think Swedish industry should lean towards in 15 years or when a new reactor is in place? A price protection for consumers of 1.50 excluding VAT has been put forward. Can they feel secure that the electricity will cost 149 öre per kilowatt-hour? Is that the dream scenario for the Christian Democrats?

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Birger Lahti for the questions.

Now we come to energy policy. It was a parliamentary majority that decided to shut down the reactors, and I want to remember that Vänsterpartiet was part of that. Nuclear power was shut down without having anything to replace it with. Nuclear power is like hydropower, both base load and regulating power, and it functions 24/7. To shut down nuclear power without a plan B was therefore irresponsible.

We want technology-neutral and fossil-free electricity, and we will build new nuclear power with the help of private investments. We also have Kraftlyftet. This is our guarantee that Sweden will receive sustainable energy and good electricity supply to our companies.

We do not know yet what the price for this will be, but we will ensure that households do not face an excessively high price level. The most important thing about having a stable energy supply is that we get electricity 24/7, every day of the week. When the base industry arrives, energy will also become cheaper.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Lili André, for the answer!

I am glad the member says that it is still not known. One really has no clue. One has two-way reference contracts, and one puts several hundred billion into credit guarantees. But one does not know how much it will cost. One does not even know who is going to pay. It is tragic.

It is said that one should protect the consumers, but who will foot the bill if it turns out that it costs 2 kronor per kilowatt-hour to produce the electricity? Then the industry will not be happy. I am glad that the member is honest and says that it is not yet known. One does not even know who will pay for the party.

I do not think the voters will be happy that in 15 or even 20 years there will be an energy type on site, an old one even. I am waiting for the steam engine to appear again. The technology is old. It has not moved forward at all for 50 years, but it is exactly the same technology that was used 50 years ago, when it was last built.

The chairman himself used the word technology neutrality. Is it technology neutral when one is forced to spend hundreds of billions on support just so the actors will even dare to start building? And one doesn't even have an answer.

I have only one last question: Who will pay the final bill when everything is in place? Who will get the short end of the stick – is it the taxpayers or the consumers?

(Applause)

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Birger Lahti, for your contribution!

Vänsterpartiet looks unilaterally at the cost of a base power that all companies and industries and also households need. That cost, as I said, we will not place on the households and the companies in such a way that it becomes burdensome high.

Nuclear power is an important type of energy. Several parameters are needed for a strong Sweden, so that we can rise again. It is needed for our companies, for our industry and for our delivery.

One can look solely at the cost and how it might look in the future and predict that it will become very high, but that is nothing that we Christian Democrats worry about. The most important thing is that we get base load. The most important thing is that nuclear power is established. It will release revenues, and it will make Sweden strong.

Mr. Speaker! I do not see any dark picture of the future when it comes to the establishment of nuclear power, but I see a bright picture. It is important for Sweden.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! A flourishing Swedish business sector with large and small companies is the very engine of modern society. I note that there are four perspectives for Swedish business policy that we in the Center Party want to see significantly more of.

Firstly: Swedish successes are strongly linked to the axis of higher education–research–innovation–entrepreneurship. We need to strengthen the relationship between these parts, and we must increase the quality of this axis in all its parts.

Secondly: We must level out geographical differences and injustices in order to set our entire business potential in motion in Sweden – growth on equal terms throughout the country.

Thirdly: We must lighten the regulatory burden on companies and entrepreneurs. It must become easier for all our job creators.

For the fourth: We need to get a more growth-oriented tax system where work and green transition pay off better.

Mr. Speaker! If we succeed in formulating a knowledge-oriented industrial policy where emissions go down and jobs increase, we will have put Sweden back on the right course.

Mr. Speaker! I want to devote some extra attention to the first point, the axis of higher education–research–innovation–entrepreneurship. That axis is interesting from a couple of aspects. On the one hand, one can say that the stronger research Sweden has, the better the innovation becomes and the sharper the companies become. On the other hand, one can reverse it and see the relationships as feedback loops. The sharper the business sector we have, the more relevant and sharp the research, even the basic research, can become.

If we also add the part of society that we politicians are in – the public sector – it is instead possible to speak of a triple helix. It is an expression that has a direct kinship with biology and genetic research and which refers to the structure of a three-part DNA molecule. The whole thing is about the interaction that is possible between academia, the business sector, and society, where the parts feed into one another for an efficient development of our economy forward.

One of the secrets behind Sweden's enormous successes when it comes to creating globally active companies is our social structure. It is a structure that is more horizontal than vertical, and where the trust and confidence between academia, the business sector, and the public sector have created levers and shortened the distance from lab to market. We are usually ranked very high when it comes to innovation, for example.

At the bottom, there is a strong civil society where the trust between different actors is great. It is one of the reasons why we in Centerpartiet so intensely safeguard popular education and study associations and build our society from the bottom up. There, every individual's own voice counts. With decision-making power close to the people, both responsibility and trust grow, and in the long run, Swedish business grows.

Mr. Speaker! The global competition, especially regarding technological supremacy, is razor-sharp. USA and China are two economic heavyweights leading the development, and we in Europe are falling behind. It is worrying. Our chance, we in the Center Party believe, is to build our competitiveness on Swedish strengths.

The aforementioned triple helix model needs to be developed and the distance between lab and market shortened. One way to do this is to research, develop, innovate, and build business models completely simultaneously. In the larger research infrastructures, such as European Spallation Source, ESS, outside Lund, this is possible, and it is what is planned for. Furthermore, it is absolutely central that the incubators and science parks that exist across the country step forward and take a clearer role in the simultaneous value creation. Not least, this is important outside the largest university cities.

Mr. Speaker! We in the Center Party are making a very large economic allocation in our budget for artificial intelligence. We want to invest 3 billion to establish a national AI center that will attract international top researchers and become a rocket engine for AI-related growth.

We in Sweden will not be able to lead the AI technology race ourselves, but we can become the best at AI usage. And we can become a central actor in a Europe that is crying out for growth. In the geopolitical structure, we as a small country are completely dependent on a strong Europe, but conversely, Europe is dependent on a strong Sweden.

Sweden needs a unified initiative to strengthen Swedish AI research. Development is moving at a frantic pace, and Sweden and Europe cannot afford to stand by and watch.

We propose that the center be located in Linköping. There are already plans for EU initiatives there, and the supercomputer Mimer is located there. All the conditions exist for very close cooperation with the business sector and for it to become a hub for universities and companies throughout Europe and the world that want to locate their operations in Sweden.

A national AI center should focus on practical testing, evaluation, and application of AI in a European context, something that there is actually far too little of today.

In November 2024, the AI Commission presented a roadmap for Sweden. It contained 75 proposals to accelerate Sweden's AI development. Despite a clear roadmap, the government has not moved forward with any initiative. It is remarkable.

With the Center Party at the helm, we would have seen significantly more emphasis on research–innovation–entrepreneurship. It is in the bustling creative environments where research meets the business sector that the new, economically strong Sweden must take off.

Mr. Speaker! Both our large global corporations and the small and new companies are completely dependent on knowledge growth and on competent labor. Unemployment digs deep holes in people and deep holes in the Swedish economy. It is a doubly risky situation that our government has placed Sweden in. We need to close the skills gap, and we need to attract international top-tier expertise here. The idea of kicking people out of the country hampers our growth and shrinks our economy.

Centerpartiet instead advocates for an industrial policy that is rooted in us lifting each other up, based on Swedish strengths that have been built from the bottom up and horizontally, closes competence gaps and once again makes Sweden attractive internationally.

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, Sweden really needs more liberal reforms; I agree with the previous speaker.

We need to strengthen our competitiveness, and we need to create better conditions for Swedish business and for Sweden's companies and entrepreneurs. Therefore, I and the Liberals believe that the overarching goal for industrial policy needs to be to strengthen Swedish competitiveness in order to create conditions for more jobs in more and growing companies. We do not do that through subsidies, but we do that through international cooperation for continued free trade, a strong export industry, a reconstruction of the Swedish energy system, investments in infrastructure expansion, and relief from bureaucracy and administration.

There is quite a lot that can be improved regarding the possibility of running businesses in Sweden. Sometimes we unfortunately see that the public sector stands in the way of the private sector. The authorities' task should not only be to control and stop errors but also to help the people who want to become entrepreneurs and who run businesses to do things correctly.

In the same way, the rules we have should be for the companies and help them do right, not hinder business and entrepreneurship. For a number of years, we have seen that companies' costs have increased as a result of the Swedish regulatory framework. Some calculations say it is by several billion, and that is not reasonable. It also underlines the need we see for regulatory simplifications. We need to reduce both the regulatory burden and the administrative costs – this is so that companies and entrepreneurs can focus on their core activities.

Mr. Speaker! We recently debated Sweden's energy situation and concluded with broad agreement that a larger energy production still needs to be built up in Sweden, not least in the southern parts, and that we need to work for more reasonable electricity prices. I would believe that this is the single most important thing that we in this chamber and we in politics can do for the Swedish business community and for the Swedish export industry.

At the same time – and here is my pet issue – we need to ensure that Sweden does not fall behind in the infrastructure investments being made in various parts of Europe, which will be of decisive importance even for Swedish exports. This applies in particular to the Fehmarn Belt link between Denmark and Germany, which is currently being built and will be completed within a few years. It will further shorten travel times between Sweden and the continent. The bottlenecks on the Swedish side must be built away. For a small, export-dependent country like Sweden, it is absolutely necessary that we do not fall behind when other countries in Europe build their markets closer together.

Mr. Speaker! I was very pleased when several colleagues, from everything from the Sweden Democrats to the Centre Party, earlier highlighted the need for education, research, and innovation. I think it is wonderful that the importance of education and research facilities – not least ESS, which was mentioned just now – is brought into a debate on industrial policy. That is exactly it – if we do not have the foundation to stand on, it will be very difficult for those who want to run companies and corporations in Sweden.

With that said, we naturally need to invest further, not least in STEM subjects. Mathematics and technology education is completely central to getting more engineers and more people with the competence that is needed – not least in the global AI upgrade, where Sweden must not fall behind. It is pleasing that many of us here in the chamber emphasize the importance and necessity of it.

What also needs to be repeated and what has been mentioned here earlier concerns the issue of equality and how this is relevant even when we debate the business sector in Sweden. Men still have significantly more capital than women, and men invest more and run more companies. There is something unhealthy about these large imbalances. Potentially, it is destabilizing when it concerns capital and ownership.

Work is ongoing within the government but also, as I perceive it, within the financial world to try to level the differences we see. How can we get more men to work for equal boards and management teams? How do we get more women to want to take a place in the rooms where decisions are made? We still have a long way to go. I look forward to what will happen in the future. I also believe it is important that politics and the business sector join forces in this issue.

Mr. Speaker! Free markets, free companies and free individuals are prerequisites for the free, open, democratic society that I believe we all want to live in.

Our worldview within the Liberals is based on the idea that entrepreneurship is best carried out by the private sector and that it is best for the citizens and for the companies themselves, but also for Sweden as a free, strong and prosperous country.

I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal under expenditure area 24.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Business policy is a broad issue that is not only handled in this committee area, namely number 24. If we are to continue to have a strong and sustainable business sector in Sweden, many parts need to hang together and many committee areas need to cooperate. Labor market, energy, taxes, transport policy, climate policy, education, migration policy – all affect business policy.

Today we will only talk about a small part of all this. But there are common denominators that almost all business owners highlight as major challenges when we meet, and they are no news for any of us in the Committee on Industry: the lack of skills supply, secured energy supply in the near term, clear and fast permit processes, and not least long-term perspective, where clear political goals and reduced volatility within politics are of very great importance.

It is just the long-term perspective that Svenskt Näringsliv reacted to when the government presented its budget during the autumn. Their analysis was that the government in this budget is too focused on short-term cyclical stimuli rather than measures that make the economy grow in the long term. They express themselves as follows: ”Long-term good growth requires a good climate for both companies and individuals. That it pays to invest for the future, take risks and create new innovations. The business climate must be better than in our competitor countries and be nurtured and developed at all times.”

Svenskt Näringsliv thus desires long-term and stable conditions, which is not at all strange when large investments are required when one transitions, modernizes, or develops new technology for the future.

Clarity and long-term perspective are, however, an area of concern when it comes to the Tidö government's business policy. For example, the green transition depends largely on our long-term climate policy. If one wavers on the goal and puts measures on pause, the transition will stall, and then our competitiveness can be lost when we are overtaken by others.

Last week, the influencer Henrik Jönsson was invited to the Riksdag by the Moderates to talk about whether the green industrial transition is a bubble, apparently to create uncertainty and suspicion towards the climate transition of Sweden's business sector and the necessity of it. The same uncertainty is unfortunately very clear in the Tidö government's budget.

To reach the environmental goals and the goal of net-zero emissions by 2045, while maintaining our competitiveness, investments in sustainable industrial technology are required. Multilateral companies all over the world are now investing enormous resources to ensure their green transition in order to maintain and strengthen their competitiveness on the global market. This must also apply to the Swedish business sector.

In 2021, an opportunity was introduced for companies to apply for credit guarantees for large green industrial investments. This is intended to contribute to facilitating companies' opportunities to finance long-term investments. The Government has, as we have heard earlier today, abolished these credit guarantees in the budget bill for 2026, which is regrettable to say the least. These are funds that should have remained with long-term perspective even after 2026.

Miljöpartiet considers at the same time that the support from Industriklivet and Klimatklivet should be increased to be used for the green transition and not as the government does when it reduces, moves around and changes the conditions for the support from day to day.

The Green Party also wants to introduce a new circularity step to increase the industry's opportunities to create circular flows and critical metals and minerals, as well as a climate protection agreement that guarantees a fixed price on carbon for a certain period of time for companies that want to make large climate investments.

If one desires a clear signal from the Moderates to the business community as to whether the green transition is prioritized, I interpret it as a fairly clear no. The green transition is not the government's priority today. If one listens, however, to the Acceleration Office, which has the government's mandate to support the green industrial transition, it becomes a different tone.

I also thought I would read a few words from the Acceleration Office's report Develop or decommission – socio-economic analysis of scenarios where investments do not materialize. The background to the text is that the Acceleration Office this spring released a mapping that identified 155 ongoing major Swedish business investments totaling 803 billion kronor spread across all Swedish regions.

The Acceleration Office writes as follows: The Swedish industry's transition is taking place here and now across the entire country. This report helps us understand why the transition is happening. It is not just about legal requirements or a reluctant adaptation. It is about the fact that the alternative of doing nothing is very unattractive and associated with great risks. Particularly significant are the local economic effects if existing operations do not transition. There are great values to manage and develop that otherwise risk being lost. The report shows how the effects of missing investments spread like ripples in a pond beyond the individual company to the rest of the business community and the local society.

So, that is what the Acceleration Office writes. If the government has not read this report, I would like to recommend that one takes note of this work, as there is much that needs to be done to ensure the green transition and thereby simultaneously strengthen the competitiveness of Swedish business.

As I said earlier, most of us know what is needed. Electricity was needed in the short term. We want to deliver it with improved power allocation, expansion of smart grids, increased flexibility, and by creating good conditions for new production of renewable electricity that can be established in the short term.

To shorten permit processes, we believe in better and clearer cooperation between authorities, better resource allocation, and clearer criteria for a permit process. We want maintained clear requirements and high environmental requirements. When it comes to shortened permit processes, we want simplifications, clarifications, and reinforcements of resources, not weakenings of our environmental legislation. In our overall budget, we make investments in all of this.

When it comes to skills supply, better conditions are needed to recruit the skills that are needed from across the country but also from the rest of the world. We have a great need for staff, and that is why it is a harsh blow that the government instead chooses to complicate and worsen labor migration while the government pays those who want to leave Sweden.

When the business community, companies, and several industries cry out for more staff, the government turns down the tap. This is serious. When I visited Norrbotten earlier this autumn, this was something that was highlighted by most of those I met: Every addition of a person makes a difference, and every employed person who disappears creates a hole that needs to be filled.

I believe that is also why people in northern Sweden so clearly say no to contributing to and paying for more people to leave Sweden. They want to keep people in the area. They do not want to throw them out.

To secure the supply of skills, we also need new educations. We need housing construction in expansive municipalities and socially important infrastructure that is being expanded. This is something we are investing in in our overall budget proposal, and it is an important part of the industrial policy.

Sweden's business sector is one of the world's most prominent. It is known for its adaptability and its innovative power.

As we all now find ourselves in a climate and environmental crisis, the business sector plays a key role in the green transition. Society-critical industries such as, for example, food production and the forestry industry need to be particularly reinforced for the new conditions in a new climate. At the same time, the industry's work to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions represents a driving force for innovation, technological development, and sustainable societal development throughout the country through new jobs and companies.

As we all know, Sweden has large and unique industries that contribute to our self-sufficiency and our export revenues. They provide jobs and money and can contribute to our environmental and climate goals if we take care of them in the right way. This applies in particular to our forestry industry, our food production, and our mining and steel industry. We must be very careful with them. Everything is connected. None of these activities can stand outside a sustainable industrial development or a wise, long-term path forward.

The green climate transition needs to happen now and in a way that is long-term beneficial for all of us. The state needs to play an active role in the industry's climate transition, while at the same time it is important that politics supports the development and does not throw sand in the gears. Swedish companies are and will be crucial for Sweden's climate work and for our competitiveness.

I would finally like to say that I, of course, stand behind the Green Party's budget in its entirety, and it is there that our most important business policy measures are located. I therefore refer to my specific statement in the report. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of the Green Party's reservation 3.

For us in Miljöpartiet, it is important that trade policy contributes to strengthening the environment and climate, human rights, and the global sustainability goals in Agenda 2030.

I am now finally back where I started. Business policy covers a large and broad area. Both business policy and trade policy are parts of the societal development that we create together. For me and Miljöpartiet, it is obvious that we must all together build a sustainable society. I truly hope that the direction forward can be secured long-term by more parties.

With that, I would like to thank you for the last business debate with the Committee on Industry in 2025.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the speech, Katarina Luhr! It was interesting. This is classic environmental party politics with planned economy proposals for the most part, so I am not surprised.

The Chairman mentions that there are problems with permits. I would then like to ask if the Green Party is on board with reforming the Environmental Code to make it easier for companies to open mines and establish new industries. We have many such things underway in Sweden now. That is one question.

Question two concerns the member's criticism of Henrik Jönsson, who is a free commentator and who questions very many castles in the air when it comes to financing and such. I think it is good that we have a free debate and that we have people who dare to question, because everyone has been running on the same ball now – and we have run into a wall. We in the Moderaterna have partly been part of this. Northvolt has crashed totally, and we have Stegra which is currently shaky. We hope that they manage.

I want to ask if the member is critical of the fact that we scrutinize and criticize things, when billions in tax funds have been poured into industries.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Kjell Jansson, for the questions! I can start with the last one.

I am very open to a free debate. I went and listened to Henrik Jönsson myself. What is challenging with Henrik Jönsson is that he is not an expert – and he says that himself. He speaks from his gut feeling about how things are, and many people come and listen to Henrik Jönsson's gut feeling.

When we have business enterprises that are in a very uncertain situation – companies that could contribute to the Swedish economy in a very good way and which we actually need for our preparedness and for our green transition – I find it a bit surprising that the Moderaterna invite a debater who in some way wants to cast suspicion on certain types of companies.

If we then move on to this matter of reforming the Environmental Code, the question is whether I will stand behind different types of proposals. A list was started. I will not stand behind them straightforwardly.

What I and the Green Party want to do is to clarify, simplify and speed up permit processes. It is also about providing increased support to the authorities that need support, getting more to cooperate and setting timeframes for how long permit processes may take. But we absolutely do not want to see weakenings and removals of legislation that is intended to protect us.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Madam Speaker! It was clear and plain, namely that Katarina Luhr is not on board with reforming the Environmental Code.

When I have another question. Henrik Jönsson observes and criticizes that the state pays out billion-dollar subsidies without having a handle on who are the shareholders in the companies. One has zero control over that while at the same time one is supposed to combat crime against companies. The government is now strengthening the budget, and yet one does not have control over the shareholders. That is what he has observed.

Does Member Luhr, Madam Speaker, believe that it is okay to distribute billions in support without having a handle on the shareholders?

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Madam Speaker! I would like to question in what capacity Henrik Jönsson is invited. As a free debater, yes, but to have him testify and examine when he himself says that he is absolutely not an expert in the field is a bit surprising. Do the Moderaterna think that those who know nothing are best suited to testify and examine? That is something I cannot stand behind.

That is my answer. I think Kjell Jansson will be held liable because he does not have the right to a further reply. We can talk more later.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Katarina Luhr for her speech.

Katarina Luhr raised many important areas for the climate, namely the green transition, industry, permit processes, and secure electricity supply. I mean that the government has worked intensively and purposefully so that Sweden can stand strong, and many good results have been achieved.

Katarina Luhr wants to speed up the permit processes. They are to go faster. Before we took over government power, when Katarina Luhr's party sat in the government, one had to wait 10–20 years to get the permit processes completed.

How is one supposed to speed up the permit processes according to the Green Party's way of working, when during the last parliamentary term they failed to speed up the permit processes? It is important that companies can quickly carry out their green transition, and it is something that the companies want to do. In that case, politics must provide the conditions.

What do you mean by a secure electricity supply and that permit processes should go faster than they do today?

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Madam Speaker! I thank Lili André for the question.

When the Green Party sat in government together with the Social Democrats, we commissioned several inquiries on how permit processes should be improved. These were inquiries that I understand have not been used later by the Tidö parties, but the Tidö parties have commissioned their own inquiries.

I mentioned both in my speech and in the exchange of remarks with Kjell Jansson some of the things that Miljöpartiet considers important for shortening permit processes. It is about providing extra funding to our authorities. We want, for example, a climate task force that can be placed at some county administrative board and help those who are struggling to keep up. We want to review whether it is possible to set timeframes for authorities for how long they may process a case. There can be problems when resources are too poor or there is too little staff. In that case, an authority cannot guarantee the time factor for a process.

What we are worried about is that, in order to shorten permit processes, one cuts back a little without thought or that one reduces environmental and climate requirements that were once established to protect us, our health, and our environment. It would be devastating if permits were allowed through for things that should not be allowed through without modification.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Katarina Luhr for her answer.

Katarina Luhr thinks that this government should resume the investigations that the Miljöpartiet submitted during the previous government. We saw nothing happen during that time, despite an investigation being submitted. Miljöpartiet also wants to provide funding to authorities.

I just want to inform Miljöpartiet that allocating funds to the authorities is not enough; it is about the authorities needing to understand where the bottleneck lies when a company or an industry has to wait 10–20 years for a permit to carry out a green transition.

That is why we have established the Acceleration Office, which shall be a strong party – an intermediary between the authorities. What the authorities do is look at applications; it is a Catch-22 for the entrepreneurs. The Government shall ensure that a uniform regulatory framework is created that harmonizes. We have established an environmental goals preparation group that shall guide the work with the permit processes. In the regulatory letter, it is stated that authorities must cooperate, not appeal each other's decisions. This shall occur without making cuts to the environmental and climate goals that already exist. It is possible.

What I want to bring up, Madam Speaker, is that when an investigation is not practically feasible, a different way of working is needed.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Madam Speaker! I believe that in my speech I raised the issue of strengthened cooperation between authorities.

I think the Acceleration Office is doing a good job. I do not always agree with all of their ideas, but there is much of what they have presented that I have included in my work and which is included among our proposals on how to shorten permit processes.

I also hope that the government listens to the Acceleration Office. I do not see that much of the proposals they have put forward have been released. There, I send back to the Tidö parties' representatives and the government to listen to the Acceleration Office, read what they write, and consider whether they are right that the green climate transition is absolutely crucial for Sweden's competitiveness.

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! The regulatory burden weighing on Swedish companies is massive, but it is not a law of nature. It is ultimately the result of political decisions and can therefore also be reduced through political decisions.

Several measures have been taken during this parliamentary term to push back unnecessary bureaucracy. I particularly want to highlight the change work that has been initiated, i.e., the large-scale efforts to broadly and long-term dismantle unreasonable regulatory burden and make it simpler, safer, and more profitable to be an entrepreneur in Sweden. It is an absolutely necessary work.

For decades, Swedish bureaucracy has been allowed to grow. Both here and in Brussels, the regulatory burden has become a serious brake on growth and competitiveness. Rules that hinder development without providing social benefit have long been commonplace. The amount of such rules creates both additional costs and insecurity for those entrepreneurs who, in some cases, have nearly 1,000 rules to keep track of.

At the same time, the inability to judge conflicts of interest to an excessively great extent has characterized both legislation and the exercise of public authority. There must be a stop to this.

With a simplification council to clear out the existing regulatory flora, an implementation council to counter gold-plating of EU directives, and an acceleration office with a focus on transition and growth, structures have been built to achieve the change that is required. In addition to that, authorities have received clear mandates to simplify, not complicate, for the entrepreneurship that builds Swedish prosperity.

The government's measures to reduce the regulatory burden and unreasonable bureaucracy is a transformation work that is completely necessary for Sweden, not only to accelerate growth but also to stand strong and resilient in a changing time and an uneasy world. It is a decisive cultural change, which has been initiated, that must be allowed to proceed and which must be scaled up moving forward.

Change or die! It is a well-known exhortation not to stand still in development. But for Sweden and Europe to keep up in times when change has become a normal state, the exhortation should rather be: Simplify or die!

The Moderates' objective is very concrete. The regulatory burden shall be reduced by 30 percent. It is a clarity that we alone have in the Swedish Riksdag. But our vision of more reasonable rules and relevant legislation is shared by our coalition partners within the Tidö coalition.

Madam Speaker! That means there is a strong political force to ramp up the simplification work even further. It is a consensus that is completely lacking within the red-green parties. A shift in power would, in other words, mean an abrupt return to the volatility and short-sightedness that characterized the previous mandate period. Back then, budgets fell, cooperation agreements collapsed, the Prime Minister was changed, and the government's decisions hung, in the most extreme case, on the daily mood of a Marxist wildling.

Now the government's budgets are passing with a secure majority. Through the Tidö cooperation, the government has pushed through nearly 50 proposals and reforms that strengthen the Swedish business climate and thus deliver exactly what Swedish entrepreneurs demand: predictability, long-term perspective, and stability.

Madam Speaker! This is simply an important observation ahead of the election next year. Only on the right side is there a united force, will, and plan to create better conditions for Swedish entrepreneurship. Only with a continued right-wing government can it become safer, simpler, and more profitable to be an entrepreneur in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report and against all motions.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 17 December.)

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