Rental housing etc.
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
SD wants to create long-term conditions through competition-creating measures and enable owner-occupied housing 1. The party advocates for maintenance funds to enable renovations without rent increases 2 3 and wants to create moving chains through more small houses 2. SD emphasizes safety in residential areas through BID cooperation, stay bans, and camera surveillance 1. The party stands behind today's utility value system to regulate rents 4 and argues that market rents would worsen the conditions for current tenants 2 as well as lead to higher rents during large migration 4. SD believes that renovations should maintain good quality without the rent skyrocketing 5. SD opposes expanding the step model as it pushes the costs onto future tenants 3. S wants to change the balance for tenants during renovations so that they are tested based on reasonableness 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Speakers (13)
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats' position regarding rental housing issues is that people should be able to afford to demand what is built and the housing that exists on the housing market, and they should also have the opportunity to own their home. We can all build housing that no one can demand, but that does not result in any good housing policy in the end.
We need to create long-term conditions. We need to take competition-creating measures to bring down costs, and we need to enable owner-occupied housing. In that way, we also free up rental apartments as people move into owned housing.
We now have a new migration policy in Sweden, which enables a great deal in the housing policy area. Between 2006 and 2022, according to Boverket, a deficit of 175,600 housing units was built up. This is, therefore, a deficit; in other words, one went in completely the wrong direction. But this we can now change with a new migration policy; during 2012–2022, Sweden's population increased by 1 million people, and it is clear that problems arise when not as much is built as the population increases.
A housing guarantee was given to newly arrived migrants to Sweden, and through legislation introduced in 2016, the municipalities were forced to arrange housing. In this way, municipalities were forced to build a number of homes for which there was no need in the housing market at a later stage. In Eskilstuna, where the Socialdemokraterna and Moderaterna rule, there is now talk of demolishing 2,000 homes.
Madam Speaker! Safety is an important area within housing policy. We are now doing a lot together with the Tidö parties to restore safety in Sweden. The crime policy area has received both major reforms and major resources to be able to achieve this. For a long time, however, the number of vulnerable areas in Sweden increased, from 53 areas in 2015 to 59 areas in 2023. In these areas, 50 percent of the residents feel uneasy about going out at night.
We now need major reforms to make Sweden safe again. In the housing policy area, for example, we are taking actions for area cooperation, so-called BID cooperation, where property owners are to cooperate to create safety in our residential areas. We have introduced stay bans for, for example, gang criminals, and we have introduced security zones. We have also created the conditions to expand camera surveillance in Sweden.
We enable the eviction of criminals who create insecurity in our residential environments. We have also enabled a regulation of the number of occupants in an apartment to counter mattress apartments, shadow societies, and the overcrowding that has developed in Sweden.
Madam Speaker! We face a crossroads, and it is about more than just housing policy. Over the past year, we have heard the Social Democrats talk about mixing the population. Let us be honest: It is about forced mixing. The Social Democrats' vision for the housing market is to move people like pieces in a game and build apartment complexes in stable villa areas. This is dictated directly from the Social Democrats' party headquarters.
They want to break up functioning residential areas to achieve their political goals. They want to dictate the composition of our neighborhoods based on ethnicity and socioeconomic status. But integration requires responsibility, Madam Speaker – not coercion. Forced mixing of people and building housing in villa areas solves nothing.
Instead, we shall build a community based on values, on language, and on the fact that people work, behave correctly, and want to be a part of Swedish society. Instead of giving us people who are frugal and have acquired a villa or a terraced house in a quiet area for their family, we shall build community in our society. Sverigedemokraterna is a guarantee that this forced mixing will not occur in Sweden.
With that, Madam Speaker, I support the proposal in its entirety.
Alireza Akhondi (C)
Madam Speaker! I listened very carefully to Roger Hedlund's speech. I heard talk about forced mixing, crime policy, and migration policy, but unfortunately, I did not hear the word rental housing, which is the subject of the debate.
Being as generous as I actually am, I thought I would give the member the opportunity to tell how the Sverigedemokraterna intend to improve the rental market – the availability of rental apartments – for the million people who today live in rental apartments. That is, after all, what we are to debate. If the member is interested in other policy areas, there are other debates to join.
So: Please tell us what improvements to the rental market for Sweden's tenants the Sweden Democrats have contributed to during seven terms, that is, three and a half years, Roger Hedlund! I believe that very many are interested in hearing that. Eviction of tenants in all its glory, but what other things have the Sweden Democrats contributed to during an entire parliamentary term?
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for your question, Alireza Akhondi!
I note that the Center Party does not think that the debate on safety for those who live in rented apartments in Sweden belongs here. I would say that whoever goes out and asks those who currently live in rented apartments in Sweden will be told that they are, to the highest degree, demanding safe residential areas. That is why the Sweden Democrats focus on that question when it comes to the tenants.
There is an enormous amount to be done here, and the Sweden Democrats, together with the Tidö parties, are taking a number of measures to create safety in Sweden's residential areas. That was what I presented in my speech. The Sweden Democrats have debated the issue many times, and Alireza has been part of those debates and heard this, Madam Speaker. His question is therefore, of course, highly rhetorical.
I could ask the same question back, because when I listen to Alireza – Madam Speaker – I mostly hear that one wants to introduce market rents in Sweden. I don't actually think that is a solution to anything at all in this context, but that was what was implemented – as its most important political measure – in the January agreement with the Social Democrats. Market rents would probably rather have created worse conditions for those who live in rental apartments in Sweden today.
I believe more in introducing maintenance funds to be able to enable renovation, that is, to create conditions so that rents do not rise during renovations. It is about creating a long-term perspective and in that way building away the deficit that has been built up over very many years regarding the need for renovation of our housing.
We also need to create conditions for moving chains, which we do through the Sweden Democrats' and the Tidö parties' policies to create more small houses. We know that people are demanding this to a large extent. Here we have several measures that Alireza – Akhondi, Madam Speaker, can take with her into the debate.
(THIRD DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is good that the member corrects himself regarding the name, as we always use both first and last names in debates in the chamber. We also speak via the Speaker and therefore do not use "you" and "your". With the humble small point from the sitting Speaker, the floor goes to Alireza Akhondi.)
Alireza Akhondi (C)
Madam Speaker! The undersigned appreciates the third Deputy Speaker's humility but not Roger Hedlund's attempt at an answer.
We discuss safety issues in the forums where they actually concern. When we debated the issue of eviction of tenants, we discussed this issue quite deeply and thoroughly. We have also put forward our different views during the committee's handling of the matter.
What was crystal clear in Roger Hedlund's speech was that the Sverigedemokraterna have no proposals to offer at all. Instead, they highlight the Centerpartiet's proposal, which I am, in itself, grateful for.
Centerpartiet is for freer rent setting in new production. That is what we stand for, and we have stood for it for several years. We were also the first party to demand that a housing and real estate commission be appointed to address the serious consequences of the Tidö-led government's policy during this parliamentary term, with an extremely large number of bankruptcies, very many who have become unemployed and so on. We have also, as the only party, opened up for VAT on rent in order to improve the calculations, so that more rental apartments can be built, opened up for more credit guarantees, so that rental apartments can be achieved in the countryside, and so on.
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! We in the Sweden Democrats contribute to creating long-term perspective within housing policy. If the Sweden Democrats had been a party that advocated for high immigration and a multicultural society, we would primarily have ensured that housing was built for the people who had immigrated. But the Sweden Democrats are not such a party.
Madam Speaker! The Centre Party, on the other hand, is such a party. One advocates for free immigration and a multicultural society, but one does not create housing. I think one should ask oneself what one has contributed when one has had influence over Swedish politics to create housing for those who need housing in Sweden. What I can state is that there was a large housing deficit during the time when the Centre Party had influence on Swedish politics. In that, one is itself responsible.
In that context, it is a bit comical, Madam Speaker, to hear questions about what we should do to remedy this problem, which we see in Sweden today. But again: It is about moving chains, about long-term perspective, and about creating conditions for people to demand what is being built. Through starter loans for first-time buyers, efficient private rental, and a number of other measures, we enable moving chains, primarily to create conditions for more people to gain access to housing in Sweden.
Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)
Madam Speaker! It is becoming increasingly clear that the Sweden Democrats' strategy is to blame all social problems on immigration and immigrants. But people know better than that. The problem is a housing policy that has abandoned the tenants. That is what we are going to talk about. But there, the Sweden Democrats unfortunately stand on the wrong side. It is common knowledge that the Sweden Democrats hate immigrants and consider everything that goes wrong to be the immigrants' fault. But that was not what my question was going to be about.
Roger Hedlund mentioned free rent setting when he spoke with colleague Alireza Akhondi. I want to ask a question to the Sweden Democrats about something that many tenants in Sweden are wondering about right now. The Moderates have for a long time pushed to introduce market rents. Now we see how the same ideas are recurring, but under a new name: security rents. Let's be honest: To raise rents significantly in new production through freer pricing is nothing other than market rents in new packaging. We all know that.
You in the Sweden Democrats went to the election on a clear promise, Roger Hedlund. You promised Swedish tenants that you would never support market rents. My question to the Sweden Democrats is very simple: Do you see the so-called security rents that the Moderaterna propose as a form of market rents? Do you intend to break your promise to the voters?
Madam Speaker! Do the Sweden Democrats mean business with their promise to the tenants? I want an answer to this very important and relevant question. I wonder if Roger Hedlund here in the chamber today can give a clear statement to Swedish tenants: Will the Sweden Democrats support any reform that implies freer rent setting or market rents, regardless of what name is given?
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! I thank Malcolm Momodou Jallow for the questions regarding market rents. As the member surely knows by this point, the Sweden Democrats were once in time involved in and initiated a motion of no confidence against Prime Minister Stefan Löfven and also ensured that the Prime Minister was defeated on precisely this issue. It is well a clear sign of where the Sweden Democrats stand and how far we are prepared to go to be a guarantor that market rents are not introduced. During this parliamentary term, they have not been introduced.
Madam Speaker! If I were Member Malcolm Momodou Jallow, I would be more concerned about my cooperation with the Social Democrats. It is the Social Democrats who have broken their promise on the issue of market rents. With the January agreement, they entered into an agreement with the Liberals and the Centre Party to introduce market rents. The biggest problem in this context, Madam Speaker, is something the Member should probably take with him in his discussion with the Social Democrats in – God forbid – a future government with the Social Democrats and the Left Party.
Malcolm Momodou Jallow (V)
Madam Speaker! This is pleasing to hear. I would still like to get a clarification, so that the voters understand exactly what is being said.
My question is as follows: Will the Sweden Democrats support any reform that involves freer rent setting or market rents, regardless of what name is given? It does not matter if it is called free rent setting, market rents, market rents in new production, or security rents, which the Moderates are now repackaging market rents as. When the member answered, he used the word market rents. But market rents can be repackaged, which the Moderates have now done. You cooperate with the Moderates, who have put forward this proposal. Will you stand behind a proposal for something that in practice means market rents but is called something else?
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! I can give a straight answer to that. Regardless of what designation it is, I say this: the Sweden Democrats stand behind today's utility value system, which I believe is correctly designed to create conditions for people to be able to demand the housing that exists. Housing is an important part of society, and everyone needs to be guaranteed an opportunity for housing in one way or another. Since the cost of the housing has such a great impact on household finances, one needs to have some form of regulation that enables us to see where the rent is going.
Madam Speaker! The migration crisis was caused by Vänsterpartiet, Socialdemokraterna and a number of other parties. Had we, in 2016, had a system with market rents, regardless of what name it was given, the rents would have skyrocketed, because market rents are based on supply and demand. When one creates conditions for high demand through a policy of large-scale migration, one cannot have such a system. Given the rapid fluctuations that obviously occur within housing policy and population policy, it is difficult to even look at any other model than today's use-value system.
Markus Kallifatides (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Roger Hedlund for the speech. As Alireza Akhondi from Centerpartiet noted, Roger Hedlund would rather speak about very broad policy areas than about rental apartments and such, which are the subject of this motion debate. But I also intend to give Roger Hedlund a chance to speak about the latter.
I read out Hem & Hyras question to the political parties: ”Are you satisfied with how the system works today, or do you want to see increased influence for tenants during renovations?” Sverigedemokraterna answers through Mikael Eskilandersson: ”We see a need for better balance. Tenants should have real influence during standard-raising renovations, clearer requirements for consultation and assessment of reasonableness. No ’luxury renovations’ aimed at driving out residents with lower incomes should be allowed.”
The Sweden Democrats expressed themselves before the general public in the tenants' own newspaper just recently. In this debate on the issue, we take a position on clear proposals from us Social Democrats based on a completed government investigation regarding precisely changing the balance for tenants in connection with renovations so that they are tested in terms of reasonableness – that word which Mikael Eskilandersson uses.
How is it, Roger Hedlund, that the Sweden Democrats, despite housing policy explicitly being outside the Tidö Agreement, reject sharp proposals to do what the party says it wants to do?
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! Member Markus Kallifatides is asking about luxury renovations. I can only state that when that debate was at its most intense, the Social Democrats governed the country and also the housing policy. If one had wanted to do something for real rather than standing here in the speaker's chair and asserting a lot of things, one would have done it during that time.
Madam Speaker! I can simultaneously state that there is no party that stands behind any form of luxury renovation for our Swedish tenants. If one says that, one should probably inform where they have read it somewhere.
We all agree that renovations shall be based on creating the best conditions to maintain a good quality of the housing while ensuring that the rent does not run away.
When it comes to discussing these issues, and a number of other political areas, the Sweden Democrats negotiate with the Tidö parties to arrive at their housing policy, on the condition that we have the majority that we have in Sweden today.
When we come back with proposals to the Riksdag, they will come from those conversations and not from conversations with the Social Democrats.
Markus Kallifatides (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Roger Hedlund, for a very evasive answer!
Roger Hedlund and the Sverigedemokraterna do not, therefore, want to prioritize during this entire mandate period, including in the positions in this report, that which could make it possible to improve and strengthen the tenants' position in connection with renovations.
They do not want to, even though there are ready proposals and such proposals are on the Riksdag's table. Roger Hedlund and the Sverigedemokraterna have chosen not to prioritize it in discussions within the Tidö government. That was the answer I heard.
It is a clear message. You refrain from doing what your housing policy spokesperson in Hem & Hyra tells the country's 3 million tenants that you want to do. When you have the opportunity, you prioritize other things. If I had to guess, it is about migration policy, crime policy, and other things.
It is about improving things for the country's tenants. I can assure you of this, Madam Speaker: When I speak with tenants, the issue that stands at the top is that they should be able to afford to live and feel secure where they live in terms of the rent not changing by perhaps 50 percent in connection with a renovation and that they should not be forced to move.
It is very high up on the agenda. I note, Madam Speaker, that it does not lie high up on the Sweden Democrat agenda within the framework of rental housing etc.
Roger Hedlund (SD)
Madam Speaker! In Sweden, there is today a step-model for renovations. It works in such a way that it is possible to phase in the new rents.
Going even further with the step model, as the Social Democrats propose, actually means in practice that we push the costs forward. One can, for example, push the costs forward to future tenants.
I do not know in what way it is good for our tenants in Sweden. A step model is quite obvious in my world. But to expand it would not benefit the tenants. It would rather push on the cost issues.
When we talk about these issues, an important reform that could come forward – everything is about economy – is to create conditions for maintenance funds. It is something that we have pointed out for a long time. I hope that it is something that will come forward.
I have also noted that some years ago the Social Democrats hooked onto this idea, perhaps at the initiative of the Sweden Democrats' input in the debate. It pleases me that more are standing behind that proposal. It is a good proposal. Let us start there.
Our tenants demand the conditions to be able to live in their homes. We provide those conditions in a number of different areas. Everything is not always about step models, but it is about creating economic conditions on a broad scale for our Swedish households. There, the Sweden Democrats, together with the Tidö parties, have today created good conditions to be able to afford being a Swedish tenant.
Madam Speaker! With that, I note that the Sweden Democrats' policy in this area has the best conditions to create long-term stability in the housing market. We do not do what the Social Democrats have done. They created a housing shortage for a long period during their time in government.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.