Business

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! When we gather today to debate the Committee on Enterprise's report NU1 Expenditure Area 24 Business, we do so in the midst of an extremely turbulent time for the Swedish business sector. Unforeseen events on the international scene have affected the business sector's conditions during the past years, including a global pandemic, a blockage of the Suez Canal, and war in Europe.

This has led to restrictions and closures that have affected both tourism and the hospitality industry as well as the manufacturing industry and the supply of skills. At the same time, major shortages and complications have arisen in supply chains, which means that the Swedish business sector has at times been left without central input goods.

Putin's war of aggression has also strained the already tense energy market in the EU, which has contributed to driving up Swedish electricity prices, which in turn burdens Swedish business. In symbiosis with this, inflation is rising while trade wars seem increasingly inevitable and protectionism is increasing all around the Western world.

In summary, much has happened on the international scene which results in major problems for the Swedish business community. All these problems, or challenges as they are often called, have however not been beyond the reach of Swedish politicians to influence. Certain political missteps have persisted for decades. Many, both individual politicians and entire parties, bear great responsibility for the situation in which the Swedish business community finds itself.

The energy issue is perhaps the most current example. In a calculated and deliberate manner, a number of parties, with Miljöpartiet at the forefront, have actively contributed to dismantling the Swedish fossil-free nuclear power. That, together with Russia's war of invasion, has in turn caused the unsustainable situation with electricity prices that now limits companies' competitiveness and sends private individuals to the enforcement authority.

Another area where political failures have caused significant limitations for the business sector is undeniably crime. Crime is estimated to cost the Swedish business sector up to 100 billion annually. Almost every fifth entrepreneur has considered ceasing their business activities as a consequence of the crime they have been exposed to.

No entrepreneur can be held responsible for the insecurity in society, yet they still have to bear a large part of the bill. Nor can global factors be blamed. It is the fault of Swedish politicians that the business owners find themselves in that situation.

In both of these cases, it is about actual actions from leading politicians and parties in the form of political decisions that have been made. But there are also challenges for the business sector that could have been remedied if decisions had been taken. Sometimes it would have been about tough decisions that would have required political will and courage, but sometimes quite simple decisions that just never happened.

Madam Speaker! The previous government completely missed the opportunity to utilize the crisis that the pandemic represented to, in the long run, strengthen the competitiveness of Swedish business. It is often in connection with crises that there is room to act to implement more far-reaching changes in the market.

During the pandemic, there was mostly shouting for crisis measures and support, which also were implemented – not infrequently encouraged and pushed for by the then opposition. That was naturally good. What was however needed, but which was completely absent, was structural work and the creation of better conditions for recovery once the pandemic was over.

Now, as is known, other obstacles have intervened, and despite the fact that the pandemic's impact on the business sector has subsided, there are at least many other clouds of concern in the sky. Regardless of this, it should be considered given that an active effort should have been undertaken long ago regarding, among other things, regulatory simplification, competition issues—not least concerning the public sector's unhealthy competition—and the Public Procurement Act. There, the previous government chose not to take the chance to act during the pandemic. Measures were not taken that could have constituted an opportunity for the business sector to recover faster without it having entailed a cost for the public sector.

After this perhaps somewhat lengthy description of the problems, Madam Speaker, I believe it is obvious to most that there will be plenty of work for the newly appointed government in both economic policy and other areas. The new government, which came into power thanks to the support of the Sverigedemokraterna, has already begun that work.

In the initial work relevant to this debate, the measures presented as recently as today to push back organized crime can be mentioned. It does not only affect individual individuals but also lies like a wet blanket over serious business operators. One such example is a payment authority that will now be established, where it will likely be possible to catch a number of unscrupulous actors who today are destroying market mechanisms.

Furthermore, it can be mentioned that energy issues constitute a large part of the Tidö Agreement. The Government has, with high speed, initiated the creation of better conditions for Swedish business.

The Tidö Agreement also emphasizes the need for a reduced administrative burden, and in that regard as well, the government's work to establish a simplification of regulations has been initiated. That work has been completely absent during several parliamentary terms. Furthermore, the permit processes are to be simplified and shortened, and the Swedish supply of cement, steel, etc. is to be guaranteed. A new golden age for the mining and mineral industry is the ambition. Free trade is protected, and several trade-promoting trips have already been carried out.

When we debate this report again during the next parliamentary session, I feel confident that the government basis has already made an impact on parts of the business community and that a number of initiatives are underway and others are already completed. More on that then.

I would like to conclude by highlighting the Sweden Democrats' role in this context. We have agreed on the Tidö Agreement and the budget that will be renegotiated next year. In addition, there are a number of issues that are relevant for the business community but are not included in the Tidö Agreement or are not yet included in the budget. There, it will naturally be the Sweden Democrats' ambition to ensure that we from the Riksdag pressure the government to implement what we have agreed upon, but also seek support for other solutions to facilitate the Swedish business community.

I envision a good mandate period for Sweden's business sector where the Riksdag has a central function, and I look forward to the debate.

I would like to conclude by moving for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats can be sure that we Social Democrats will scrutinize their influence on the government, what they actually get through, and how they conduct their policy. We shall not hesitate on that.

Today, we dealt in the committee with the submission regarding the state-owned companies, a subject that was also taken up here in Tobias Andersson's presentation. It was about strengthening Swedish companies, the export industry, and the tourism industry.

At the same time as the Sweden Democrats are submitting motions to strengthen Visit Sweden's role and ensure their important mission, one sees in the budget, which the Sweden Democrats have been involved in negotiating, that the appropriation to Visit Sweden is being cut. How did that happen? Is it the case that on one hand you say that this is very important and on the other hand, at the same time, you cut it?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to urge Isak From to be careful about referring to closed meetings in matters that have not yet been finalized. It is not common practice for us to choose to account for what has been said or discussed within the framework of the committee's meetings in public, and certainly not when it concerns matters that are only under preparation. It is, of course, a different matter to discuss matters based on the finalized report once they have been made public.

The Sweden Democrats have consistently been driving to expand Visit Sweden's mandate, not least to emphasize "svemester," which we have now established after the Sweden Democrats pushed forward on that issue. It is a mandate that the Sweden Democrats also want to make permanent for Visit Sweden so that we always also turn to the domestic tourism industry.

With this said, I look forward to having a constructive cooperation with both the Social Democrats and the government parties to promote the Swedish tourism industry during the coming years.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Anyone can go to the Riksdag's website and navigate to the Sverigedemokraterna and Tobias Andersson's motions. They are completely public. I did not refer, for the most part, to decisions or to what has been presented during committee meetings.

When I read the committee reports from the Sweden Democrats, which are public, I noted that they think this activity is very important. We Social Democrats also think so; that is why we have a budget increase. At the same time, however, they are actually cutting the budget. On one hand, they say one thing, and on the other hand, they cut. That is the reality of the Sweden Democrats' policy.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Isak From began his previous speech by referring to today's committee meeting and a discussion that took place there.

Our motions are absolutely public, and we stand by them. However, it was here that requests were reported that have not yet been handled by the Riksdag in any motion report. I look forward to being able to have this discussion when they are handled in the committee. Possibly we can gain traction so that the Social Democrats choose to join Sverigedemokratiska requests in cases where this could be relevant.

It is naturally the case that the tourism industry is an area that is very limitedly affected by the Tidö Agreement and which is only to some extent affected by the budget processes. There are conditions for the Social Democrats to join Sweden Democrat demands and act together to pressure the government on the issues that both parties consider important.

My conviction is that this government takes the conditions for the tourism industry very seriously and will do so, but every push in the right direction from this Riksdag is, of course, to be appreciated. I look forward to a constructive cooperation with Isak From and his colleagues from the Socialdemokraterna.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! I shall begin by saying that it is interesting that "svemester", which the Green Party has long advocated for and which the V-S-MP government introduced, is now also being highlighted by the Sweden Democrats. It is however regrettable that one does not act on this in their budget.

What I reacted to in Tobias Andersson's speech was the claim that MP would have actively dismantled the energy system or something in that direction. During the time we have been in government, Swedish electricity production has increased. Sweden is today a large net exporter of electricity in Europe. Despite this, households and companies are now being affected by the high electricity prices as a result of Putin's dreadful invasion of Ukraine and the energy war being waged in Europe.

Then the government and the Sweden Democrats choose to exclude the entire northern part of Sweden from the electricity price support. Companies and households in half the country are left out in the cold by the Sweden Democrats.

We in Miljöpartiet have worked actively for a green industrial revolution, and we see that Sweden has all the potential to become a world exhibition for new technology, innovation, and sustainable community building. The climate policy and the active industrial policy can create fantastic opportunities for Swedish entrepreneurship, innovative power, and competitiveness.

We see now that this government, with the support of SD, is deviating from this work. Therefore, my question is partly why the Sweden Democrats are dismantling the functioning industrial policy when it comes to the green industrial revolution, and partly why companies in northern Sweden are being left out in the cold when it comes to the electricity price support.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I pointed out that Miljöpartiet has been at the forefront of dismantling Swedish nuclear power - the fossil-free nuclear power. It is objectively true that this has been the case. It is even to the extent that one has chosen to boast on social media about decisions taken in this chamber and to celebrate with cake when one has gotten what one wanted in this area.

We will not escape the situation we find ourselves in, that is, the energy situation that this government inherited from Miljöpartiet and Socialdemokraterna. It is a Sweden that does not have sufficient production of electricity. This means in practice that we are in a situation where both individual individuals and companies have difficulty making the finances work out. We see a risk that investments move abroad. We see how private individuals risk having to go to the bailiff. We see how people on social media scream for help and will likely be grateful when it finally comes from the new government in the spring.

If we had been in a different situation and had not, as a consequence of the Green Party's policy, shut down well-functioning nuclear power, the supply would naturally have been greater. Then we would not have needed any electricity support to begin with.

The austerity measures that are now coming from this government, which the previous government otherwise initiated and which we inherited the form of, would not have been needed if Sweden had not had an energy policy signed by Miljöpartiet. Then no one would have had to freeze to that extent, and the competitiveness of Swedish industry would have been higher.

But we find ourselves in the situation we are in, and we are trying to fix it step by step.

I look forward to us in the committee and within the framework of the Riksdag and cooperation with the government being able to secure support that guarantees the conditions for Swedish businesses and private individuals to cope with the situation that the Green Party and the Social Democrats have put Sweden in.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! I note that Tobias Andersson did not answer why the Sweden Democrats are abandoning northern Sweden and in no way emphasizes that northern Sweden and its entrepreneurship, business sector, and households should be included in the support. He also did not answer the question regarding the negative effects that the dismantling of climate policy entails for Swedish business and Swedish competitiveness. Instead, he stuck to nuclear power and electricity prices.

Sweden has less electricity production today since the nuclear power plants were shut down. That we have high electricity prices in Sweden is due to the terrible war in Europe and to the open electricity market, which means that even we here in Sweden are affected when prices rise.

With that said, all parties in here agree that a significantly increased electricity production is needed in Sweden, not least to meet the green industrial revolution and the fantastic business development that it brings with it. For this, we can choose whether we shall have a 100 percent renewable electricity system or an electricity system that is strongly dependent on nuclear power.

The Green Party's vision is a 100 percent renewable electricity system. There was a broad, cross-bloc agreement to have this by 2040, and that is what we in the Green Party want to continue working towards.

Then substantial investments are required, not least in offshore wind power, which the Sweden Democrats, together with the government parties, are now pulling the rug out from under. There is a fantastic opportunity to quickly get electricity in place, in the near term, in a situation where we have a great need for new electricity production and energy efficiencies and a great need to manage the high electricity prices. In that case, the government and the Sweden Democrats say no to quickly getting electricity production in place. They do not support the energy efficiencies that would be implemented. Why?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! We do not say no to more energy production, but we say no to the public sector financing it. These are two different things.

I shall answer the questions that Elin Söderberg considers I did not answer.

Northern Sweden is not part of the electricity support that has now been communicated for the simple reason that this support is paid out retroactively. They are therefore looking at previous consumption and the prices during the preceding year. At that time, northern Sweden did not have prices at the same level as southern Sweden. This in itself is reasonable given that the government's ambition is to motivate individuals to reduce their electricity consumption in solidarity with others in order to get through this together.

If the government were instead to base it on consumption this winter and subsidize the same in some way - I have, moreover, not heard any proposal at all from Miljöpartiet on how we should compensate - we would be inflating consumption in a situation where we have an electricity shortage. It benefits no one.

When it comes to climate policy, it boils down to the fact that one cannot have both a green industrial revolution, which Miljöpartiet claims we oppose, and a 100 percent renewable energy system. It simply does not work. There is no chance in the world that Sweden can manage to produce the equivalent of all of Finland's energy production to northern Sweden within a ten-year period through wind power, for that is what we are talking about. To manage the industrial steps Elin Söderberg highlights, we need to expand the electricity supply in Sweden within a few years by a volume equivalent to what all of Finland consumes. Doing that with only renewable sources is impossible.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! I was pleased when Tobias Andersson raised the issues of safety in the debate, as it was one of the most important issues for the Swedish people during the election campaign. Many small business owners have for a long time experienced increased uncertainty for themselves and their business.

My question to the Sweden Democrats is short and clear: How do the Sweden Democrats and the government intend to work to increase security for small business owners?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! This is the issue that has made me and many other Sweden Democrats become Sweden Democrats, and I am grateful that during the election campaign I had the party's confidence to be responsible for the justice policy. On election day, the Sweden Democrats had by far the highest confidence among Swedish voters in issues of law and order. I believe we were 11 percentage points above the second, and almost one-third of Swedes considered that the Sweden Democrats had the best policy to solve these issues.

When we talk about small businesses, it is often about trade because they come into contact with the more absolute insecurity. We can talk about subsidy fraud, and that is where the proposed payment authority comes in. We can talk about different types of cheating, incorrect invoices, scam invoices and so on. But the more acute problem is often the one that politicians have to take to heart. Then it is about trade, the tourism industry and others who come into direct contact with criminal elements.

We view the ban on access positively. However, it has not functioned in practice, and therefore we pushed for it to be adjusted already during the previous parliamentary term so that it would become more applicable.

We also look forward to establishing a police force that has sufficient resources to assist the business community to a greater extent, not least through its presence.

In recent days, there has been communication regarding visitation zones, and it would be one of a multitude of tools for the police and the justice system to act against those who today create insecurity all over Sweden, which spills over onto the business sector.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! There is actually no political conflict regarding the fact that organized crime must be combated; I believe that most voters have understood that. More police and more employees within the Police Authority are necessary, not only so that there are more police out there but also so that crimes can be solved.

As always, when the Sweden Democrats talk about security, economic security is forgotten, which is quite alarming in the situation we find ourselves in. The previous government commissioned an investigation which resulted in the report *A better security system for small business owners*. One of the proposals was that the determination of sickness benefit-based income should be based on historically declared figures. Another proposal was that a safety valve should be introduced that companies could request in cases of varied income, which many small business owners have, in their contact with Försäkringskassan – something that would have shortened the processing time at Försäkringskassan.

These proposals would have increased security for entrepreneurs and encouraged more people to take the chance to start companies. The risk now is that we will lose out on important innovations, which Tobias Andersson raised in his speech, and that fewer people want to start companies.

Tougher measures are not the solution to all safety problems, even if the Sweden Democrats seem to believe so. It is only part of the solution. Economic security is at least as important, and I believe we are all aware of that in the situation we find ourselves in now.

The palace parties have had the proposals served, and they are on the table. The Ministry of Enterprise was positive towards the proposals that the investigation suggested.

Will the Sweden Democrats, who safeguard the security of small business owners, push to increase the security for small business owners?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I could save time and just answer yes to the question. Of course, we safeguard these.

But one might perhaps have somewhat too high expectations of the government if one thinks that in about four months it will have managed to do what the previous government failed to do in four years. We may need a bit more time to be able to get to work, but the proposals are interesting. I look forward to cooperating on these issues.

It is true that the previous government investigated the issue, but nothing was implemented. But this is perhaps another issue that we can discuss within the framework of the Swedish Riksdag and then, in a joint effort, call the government's attention to in those matters where it is relevant.

I do, however, object to the statement that the government has failed so early in a mandate period, while it is clear that you yourself did not succeed in getting things in place during four years.

If we give the government a little more time, I am convinced that it will get significantly more things in place than the previous government managed – furthermore, many things that will surely be appreciated by the parties that have sat in the government in recent years.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of our reservation regarding a goal for foreign trade, export, and investment promotion. My colleague Aida Birinxhiku will speak more about this later, and Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro will speak about the security of entrepreneurs.

Our budget alternative has fallen, and our proposal for a special statement can also be read in our party motion.

Madam Speaker! It is cold here today. Despite a warmer climate, we have a colder world in all parts due to Putin's unjust war against Ukraine. The effects are high inflation and a cost shock for households. The right-wing government's policy does not inspire much hope.

Let me look back. During the pandemic, the S-led government presented 14 extra budgets with various supports so that Sweden could get through the pandemic. These supports were equal across the entire country and went to all companies and employees based on the companies' circumstances. At that time, it was not a question of cutting the country in half.

I believe that part of the problem with the government not having been able to present an electricity price subsidy to companies is the EU's competition rules and state aid rules. It must be so that companies in the union are to have the same conditions, and then certain companies cannot receive support twice while others perhaps do not receive anything at all. We have not seen this on the ground, and right now it looks difficult, to say the least. But it is to a very high degree an injustice, which has been made clear to present: Half of the country is not included.

For us Social Democrats, jobs are by far the most important for households' resilience. Having a job to go to is the foundation for the Social Democratic good society and the foundation for the welfare state. With the added value created through jobs, we finance the welfare state.

In our society, industry is the engine. After eight years with an S-led government, a social democratic government, industry is here and now. It is industry that is leading the climate transition. Far away are statements that industry is basically gone. It is now just a bad story.

Now the industry is reinvesting, and the industry is moving production home. Sweden has a strong industry. It is world-leading in many parts.

Unfortunately, the government's at least deficient attitude towards rapidly expanded energy, perhaps in the form of offshore wind power in southern Sweden, creates doubts in the same way as the government's deficient attitude towards biofuels does, causing Södra Skogsägarna, SCA, with several others to signal that their intended investments may not materialize. This is something that in the long run can result in fewer jobs, less growth, and higher unemployment.

Mr. Speaker! The permit processes are a matter of debate. They should go faster, and we agree. It would then have been reasonable to have strengthened the county administrative boards. It is actually the case that many of the applications submitted by companies are at a fairly high level with new innovations and new methods. If the authorities do not have the same opportunities, it becomes difficult. But in this area, expenditure area 1 The State's Board, the right-wing government is cutting back. At the same time, it is said that the permit processes must go faster. But the competence of the authorities apparently does not need to become better. It is counterproductive, so it's just a mess.

There are, however, good examples of that it is possible. Both Northvolt and H2 Green Steel are examples of companies that have worked systematically, had high competence, had dialogue with the authority and received permits in time. So it is already possible today. But in several places we need to have different consultations. When it is appealed regarding power transmission, wind power or mines, it is about the trust in the companies. That is what people are worried about. Then the authorities need to have the right competence.

Mr. Speaker! A major industrial transformation is currently underway. It started in northern Sweden. It exists in more places. It is growing downwards. In this case, I think it is good that the government has extended Peter Larsson's coordination assignment for the industrial establishments in northern Sweden. It is welcome. It is also welcome with something concerning a budget area that was debated here earlier: Several of the right-wing parties that were previously against Industriklivet and Klimatklivet have now changed their minds. They are fundamentally in favor of the industrial revolution that is taking place.

Right now, it may not be within that area where the greatest differences lie, but it is about housing supply, skills supply, and labor market policy. For people to be able to take the new jobs that emerge in the industrial development, it is required that there are homes. In that area, the right-wing parties are cutting. Education places, skills supply, and labor market training are needed. In that area, the right-wing parties are cutting. In area after area that is important, they are actually cutting.

Now that we are heading towards a recession and when we should have export-promoting measures, strengthen Visit Sweden and build housing, the right-wing parties are cutting back. It is clear that, now that the construction industry announces that they will begin to lay off people, a policy and a government that stands firm is needed. Construction is the single most important measure to get society moving. Then one should not cut back. Then one should invest. Then one should say: This is the future.

We have a skewed distribution in the country. We have a major skills shortage in some parts of the country, in northern Sweden, while at the same time we have a relatively high unemployment in other parts of the country. A matching policy is needed here. Here, the assignments that the S-government gave to Arbetsförmedlingen need to continue, so that the unemployed in, for example, Sörmland or Skåne get the opportunity to move to northern Sweden and take the jobs that are emerging within healthcare or industry.

We also think that another part is very important. When strong growth occurs, unfortunately, work-related crime also follows in its wake. It was very good with the coordination mandate that the S-government gave to the police, Arbetsmiljöverket, and Skattemyndigheten. In the wake of the growth in northern Sweden, work-related crime has emerged that has damaged trust. People are being exploited. It is security breaches, prostitution, and drug trafficking. It is such things that we must combat. We want this to continue, and we want to ensure that it actually does. We want to ensure that we do not bring in a lot of new labor immigration under poor conditions, because the opportunities lie in the industrial jobs. It is the future.

Mr. Speaker! Jobs and industry are the future. Jobs are the foundation of Social Democratic policy.

With this, I wish the Chancellery, my colleagues in the Committee on Industry, and the Speaker a Merry Christmas. I also wish that all children get the opportunity to meet Santa Claus at Christmas. Merry Christmas!

(Applause)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I noted that Isak From, in his speech, did not speak at all about rule simplification, which I will not make a thing of, as I know that it is contained in the Social Democrats' specific statement in the report. The reason I mention this anyway is that the previous government made a big media fuss out of the work on rule simplification. They went on a tour among Sweden's business owners. It was the so-called simplification trip, which the then Minister for Enterprise, Ibrahim Baylan, carried out. They traveled around the country and really wanted to signal that this was an issue that was taken seriously.

It resulted in one or more investigations, and there are definitely good proposals there that this government can take forward and actually succeed in implementing.

But my question is simply whether Isak From can give any example of a rule that the previous government either removed or simplified for the companies.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! This is of course very important. We have been very clear and in every context highlighted that when a company has reported measures in one way, it should not have to report the same measures on several other platforms. Not least in the EU cooperation, it is important that we stick to that line – that we should not increase the administration.

The former Minister for Enterprise Ibrahim Baylan's simplification journey also involved creating a way in to the authority. I may have referred to it poorly in my speech when I spoke about strengthening the competence at the authorities and especially at the county administrative boards. Unfortunately, resources are also required for that, and it is another part that we see is completely crucial.

Companies can submit applications of very high quality regarding new innovations in a way that the authorities are not familiar with. In that case, we need to learn from each other's good examples. That work was started by the Social Democratic government, and naturally, that work needs to be continued. Resources are also needed at the authorities.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Isak From! Naturally, one does not have time for everything during eight years. I and the Sverigedemokraterna will certainly become increasingly humble before this fact the longer time passes and we have influence over the government power.

At the same time, one might think that over a period of eight years, you should at least have succeeded in simplifying or abolishing a rule that burdens the Swedish business community. I would therefore like to once again pose the question to Isak From whether there is any such example.

The resource issue is naturally central. That is why the new government is allocating 10 million to be able to work with impact analysis and truly put a stop to poor legislation that risks limiting Swedish business and its competitiveness. I want to repeat the question regarding an example in the area of regulatory simplification from the eight years that the Socialdemokraterna were in power.

I also see that the Social Democrats, in their specific statement, write that they believe in a substantial expansion of fossil-free electricity. I believe that is a deliberate choice of term, i.e., that they do not speak of renewable but of fossil-free and thereby include nuclear power as a natural part of the Swedish energy mix. Good so - positive and welcome!

The question then becomes whether Isak From believes that the Social Democratic Party, during these years, will stand behind the advancements occurring in the energy sector regarding nuclear power specifically, so that when we go to the election next time, we have a large and broadly anchored support for nuclear power in the Swedish energy mix, where the Social Democrats are among those who praise the energy push and stand behind it.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Tobias Andersson, for the questions!

We come from an election campaign where the right-wing parties, perhaps especially the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates and the Christian Democrats, had nuclear power as the only recipe for all societal challenges. If we are to return to the election campaign, it sounded as if we were to build nuclear power already the day after.

Now we will see if there is even a proposal for new nuclear power when we go to the election next time, because just as it has emerged from others, one says one thing before the election, then reality catches up with you, and then you have to say another thing after the election. That is apparently the reality with this government.

We Social Democrats take responsibility and stand up for the whole. We stand behind the industry's demand to actually settle. But that requires that the Social Democrats receive an invitation with the full arm. It is not possible to just invite with half an elbow and say that you can join if you think exactly like us. It has shown itself, not least from the business community's own preferences, to be quite difficult. They want new energy pretty soon, after all.

As I referred to in my speech, there are today developed models for faster environmental assessments, not least from the County Administrative Board in Västerbotten, and then agreements are required between the authorities and the industry organizations on what should be included. This has been initiated by the S-led government and must continue. Competence is also needed at the County Administrative Boards to handle it.

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! How nice that as a new member I get to stand here and respond to Isak From, who has quite many years of experience here in the Riksdag!

I want to raise some of the things that Isak From spoke about. I am thinking about the regions' growth capacity, to promote growth, competitiveness and internationalization for more jobs.

Isak From spoke about the importance of the authorities, and the authorities, for example Tillväxtverket, do work closely with the regions. What is the right competence? What solutions do the Social Democrats have to achieve a stronger growth potential and more jobs in the regions? What have you done so far to secure the support that the authorities need?

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Lili André! I tried to refer to this. We submitted a budget in 2021 including, among other things, support for the county administrative boards, but it was unfortunately voted down by a majority in the Swedish Riksdag. We need to increase the appropriation to the county administrative boards so that they have the right competence, can retain the right competence, and can also work long-term.

I believe, Lili André, that when we have seen how the curves have turned and how the industry is actually reinvesting in Sweden now, it is a very clear indicator that something has happened. From having been something forgotten or a bad story, it is the industry in Sweden that is driving the climate transition. It is the industry that sets demands on politics. It is the industry that says: In order for our products in Sweden to be competitive, we must have equivalent rules of the game, because we do have that opportunity.

All over Sweden, large investment projects are currently underway that create new jobs and represent the future. If we want to be part of that journey, we must continue to boost the green industrial transition. In that case, we cannot cut back on the areas of labor supply, skills supply, and housing construction.

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Isak From says that we need to increase the appropriations to the authorities so that they can obtain the right competence. I agree that the authorities in some way need to undergo a transition to ensure the regional growth capacity that we are both concerned about.

But the question is why you have not done so much earlier. In order to know what we need to do to ensure that the authorities do the right things and have the right resources, we also need to evaluate the authorities. I have not seen that it is that much that has been evaluated during your mandate period, unless Isak From wants to tell us that now.

The question is therefore whether it is sufficient to increase the appropriations to the authorities. Do we not need to ensure the resources in a better way?

Isak From talks about the industry, and then I think that we have known that permit processes need to be expedited so that the industry can contribute to the climate transition and be part of the transition journey. Why have the Social Democrats not ensured that the permit processes have become faster? The need is great.

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! I believe it emerged quite clearly during the former Minister for Enterprise Ibrahim Baylan's simplification journey that a major problem with the permit processes is that the companies themselves withdraw the application to supplement it, because new findings emerge that need to be included. Naturally, the companies have the right to do so. But we can hardly blame the legislation, or the authorities for it, for the fact that the companies want to do the right thing and need to supplement their applications.

It has been pointed out in various respects that it is the Environmental Code or the interpretation of the same that is wrong. But it is actually the case that in large part all the legislation that exists in the Environmental Code exists in EU law through directives and regulations - everything except possibly the shore protection, which is a separate part of the Environmental Code.

All other parts for companies, whether it is the mining industry, wind power companies or nuclear power companies, must comply if there is legislation linked to EU law through a regulation or directive that is implemented in Swedish legislation, in order for the conditions to be the same throughout the union.

In order to be able to ensure this, the authorities must have the right competence. Therefore, it is unfortunate that the right-wing parties have cut the funding to the county administrative boards.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by expressing my approval of the committee's proposal in the report and the rejection of all motions.

Some regard private enterprise as a dangerous tiger that must be shot. Others regard it as a cow that is there to be milked. Too few realize that it is the horse that pulls the whole load. Winston Churchill.

Until the end of the 1800s, Sweden was a very poor country. My grandfather was born in 1882, and he had to go to sea when he was 13 years old. They could not afford to have him at home. He was away for seven years. It is perhaps not the childhood one wishes for one's own children, but it was that tough at that time. Almost a million people fled Sweden, that is to say migrated to USA to get a better life.

How has Sweden lifted itself? Yes, through education, hard work, entrepreneurship and innovation. There is an enormous entrepreneurship in Sweden, and it has created many jobs.

Companies are the root of a state with a market economy to keep prosperity up. When I was a boy, they always said that the forest and the ore are the root. That was always heard in school. And it is still so.

Swedish export industry is unique and extremely successful internationally. It brings in 52 percent of the gross national product to Sweden, which is completely outstanding in the world. I do not know if any other country has such fantastic export companies. A comparison shows that the other Nordic countries lag far behind.

A major competitive advantage for the export industry has been cheap electricity and robust power systems that provide electricity every hour of the year regardless of the weather. This has unfortunately been phased out.

Approximately 900 billion of the tax revenues come from the companies. In addition, the payroll taxes in the companies are added. They are therefore not included here.

What can we parliamentary politicians in the committee do to improve the conditions for companies? We have looked into regulatory simplifications. The permit processes must be simplified. They take far too long, and there are many horror stories that have been raised here in the chamber.

Energy is, at the current moment, the most important thing. There must be a robust electricity system to maintain the industry's competitiveness. Historically, it has always existed. In the 70s, it was planned for 24 new nuclear power plants in Sweden. It became a referendum with three lines. This resulted in the Moderaterna and Socialdemokraterna agreeing in a responsible manner to build twelve reactors, and they were in complete agreement on that. Therefore, it is my hope that the Socialdemokraterna join us to build nuclear power again.

The red-green government closed six reactors. I can agree that it was time to close Barsebäck because it was not situated on rock. But the closure of the other four was an incredibly bad decision because there has been no replacement energy when they were closed. First they were closed, and then it was said that wind power would be built. It is extremely naive to believe that it will solve the problem.

Sweden has a surplus of energy during the summer, but not during the winter - in particular not when it is windy and cold. Then Sweden instead buys brown coal power from Germany and Poland. Then Karlshamnsverket is operated, which consumes 140,000 liters of oil per hour. Is that green transition? In my world, it is not, but in my world, it is brown transition.

The most important task we have now is to accelerate the expansion of nuclear power as well as change and simplify permit processes and regulations to get started. It is possible to start with smaller modular nuclear reactors. One does not need to start with the large ones all at once. The smaller reactors can be located near industries with large electricity needs - the paper industry, etcetera. This also applies to other industries, for example battery factories.

Two new nuclear power plants were needed in Ringhals, and one new plant was needed in Forsmark. There is plenty of space in Forsmark. It was originally planned to build 15 plants up in Forsmark - three are built. Additionally, one can implement small modular reactors.

I want to point out that it is the same regulatory framework for small companies as for large ones, for example Volvo and ABB. There is an incredible difference in running a small company; I have done it myself for 26 years.

One goes up to Åre and goes skiing with the staff - as many do - and one breaks a leg. If there are four at the company, then 25 percent are gone. Then it is a wage cost for 14 days but with lower revenues. Some things need to be reviewed. I am not saying that one must do exactly this, but it was an example.

Mr. Speaker! We need to simplify the regulatory framework for entrepreneurs. We also need to review the authorities' regulatory letters. Many authorities are not particularly friendly towards entrepreneurs and hinder their operations. There have even been instances of threats. I have examples, but I do not intend to bring them up here.

Taxes need to be reformed. Let us look at the Stockholm region. Approximately 70 percent of the inhabitants pay 70 percent in tax. First, one pays municipal tax at an average of 30 kronor. Then, one pays state tax of 22 percent. Then, one pays VAT, congestion charges, and so on. Many will thus reach just over 70 percent.

Is it a reasonable tax burden? Personally, I do not think so. I think there should be lower taxes on labor. Then there can be point taxes, for example, VAT. I think that is completely okay. But the tax on labor specifically must be lowered. I agree with Isak From that the foundation is labor and industry. But then there must be favorable tax systems for those people who get up at 4-5 in the morning to work hard.

It must also be profitable to run companies. It is not ugly to run companies. One risks capital. One might even put one's villa up as collateral on a loan that one needs in order to be able to invest. It is in the small companies that jobs are created - significantly more than in the large ones. But there are exceptions, for example Northvolt.

Mr. Speaker! We should be proud of our fantastic companies in Sweden. I want to highlight this. There are many world-class export companies. Let me mention a few: Scania, Volvo, Electrolux, ABB, Sandvik, Atlas Copco, Assa Abloy, among others.

We have also had fantastic industrial leaders who have built up these companies. They have been industrial leaders who have not looked at the quarterly economy but have worked long-term to build the companies strong and ensure that there is profitability and new jobs in the companies.

Leif Östling was fantastic. He has, in fact, modernized Scania during his 27 years and increased production fourfold. It is a completely fantastic job, and he has created an enormous number of jobs. Scania is the world's finest truck manufacturer.

Curt Nicolin built up Asea, which gradually became ABB. Then it was Hans Werthén in Electrolux.

It sometimes feels like not everyone in the Riksdag appreciates these people. One takes everything for granted and thinks that it is obvious that it is like this, but it is not at all obvious.

We must also have a favorable business climate with fewer regulations and burdens as well as lower taxes on work. I touched upon this earlier. 3:12 needs to be reformed. We must make it easier for companies that take responsibility and risk money to also receive some return.

Mr. Speaker! We in the Riksdag should also consider mining more minerals. I believe that it could be a major industry both in Norrland and in other parts of Sweden to mine more minerals. We have mines, but there are more minerals to be mined. Today, the legislation is so rigid that it is practically forbidden to do so. I believe that a review of the legislation needs to be conducted.

Infrastructure is another part that needs to be improved. Trafikverket is not managing its assignments regarding the maintenance of either the railway or the road network. It is altogether too poor maintenance. Out in the countryside, the roads are so bad that it is even traffic-dangerous in parts.

Many road constructions must have their procurement tightened up. The construction of new large road systems stands still from Thursday to Monday morning. During the summer half-year, when it is light and reasonably good weather, I think one should require two shifts to shorten the processes so that the construction goes faster.

Arlanda must be expanded. If we are to manage to be a competitive country, we must expand Arlanda and ensure that we have more direct flights out into the world, to the USA and Asia and so on.

We have lost direct flights. This means now that if one wants to fly to Chicago, one must first fly down to Kastrup and change there to continue. I do not think that is okay. If our export industry, which needs to go out into the world and do business, is to have easier contact with the rest of the world, Arlanda must be expanded and more direct flights must be brought there.

The road network to Arlanda also needs to be reinforced with a four-lane motorway.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, member, for the speech!

I have a question for the member in connection with the part of the speech that dealt with the conditions for export and for companies.

The goal of Swedish trade policy has long been that we stand up for free, sustainable and fair trade. Fair trade is a prerequisite for rule-based and sustainable trade. It is also a way to strengthen and anchor the legitimacy of global trade worldwide.

I note that the government no longer wants to talk about fair trade and is changing the wording of the objective. The objective of fair trade is not about semantics but about the design of the real and concrete trade policy, and it is worrying that the government no longer wants to stand up for fair trade.

This concern can, of course, be mitigated if the government declares itself ready to continue acting for fair trade worldwide. This involves, among other things, safeguarding the environment and climate, health, animal welfare, and workers' rights. It is about contributing to achieving the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030. It is about working for a feminist trade policy that serves men and women equally well. It is, not least, about working to have Global Deal expanded and developed and highlighting it in Sweden's bilateral contacts.

My questions to the member are whether this is something that the member and the Moderaterna will advocate for, what measures will in that case be taken, and whether the Moderaterna stand up for fair trade.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question, Aida! We do not stand for that.

We consider that there are rules for foreign trade within the EU that apply, and we want to follow those rules.

We do not want to add more surcharges. I want to warn against adding more surcharges on the export industry. Then we will have to sell less out in the world. We cannot sell less; we must sell more. If we want to maintain our prosperity, we must do more business, not less. The more surcharges that are added, the harder it will become to do business.

The answer is therefore no to your question.

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, member! I note then that the Moderaterna do not stand up for fair trade. I note that the Moderaterna do not stand up for a policy that provides more sustainable, long-term and predictable growth. I note that the Moderaterna do not stand up for fair trade in times of increased protectionism, when it is more important than ever.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! We stand up for the regulatory framework that exists within the EU, but we do not make special rules in Sweden. That is why we say no. We do not want special rules, because it will become worse for the export industry.

The company that does not have ethics today must not be allowed to sell any goods. It is that simple. That is something the market forces will handle. We do not need to add more burdens here in the chamber. It will not make things easier for the companies. There are already far too many burdens.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I took the floor because I noted that the member mentioned Karlshamnsverket and coal in his speech. It feels as if we are lingering on the energy debate that we had a few days ago.

When the member mentions Karlshamnsverket and that it is unfortunate that we have fossil emissions from coal combustion or fossil activities, it gives the impression that we agree here in the chamber that the fossil emissions must be significantly reduced in the near term so that we can manage to reach our climate goals and the Paris Agreement and avoid the serious consequences that climate change entails for people's lives, health, and property.

But the government, together with the Sweden Democrats, is presenting a budget where they lower the carbon tax for combined heat and power and remove fees. This will lead to us getting increased fossil emissions from combined heat and power plants and district heating plants in Sweden. That is to say that the government is actively pursuing a policy to get more Karlshamnsverk and more fossil emissions.

How does the member respond to this?

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question, Elin Söderberg!

How do I see it? It is a consequence of us having shut down nuclear power too fast and too early and that there is a lack of energy. Then one must facilitate the energy that can replace it now that it is winter by burning in district heating plants and everything. Then one must lower the energy taxes, otherwise the prices will become even higher. It is absolutely necessary to regulate it with taxes. That is the answer to the question. But we will not get past having fossil-fueled heating plants as long as we have a shortage of electricity. We have that during the winter, not during the summer.

That wind power will solve this is a dream that does not exist. Wind power today provides approximately 3 percent of the electricity 50 percent of the year's hours. We need to have electricity 100 percent of the year's hours, which nuclear power provides - and hydropower, not least, which you also want to review. The government has stopped it for the time being.

To reconsider hydropower in this situation, when we have a shortage of electricity, would be terrible. It is a matter of thinking all the way through. Here, one has started at the completely wrong end. One has started by shutting down nuclear power. Now that one has done that, one is to electrify Sweden. Now one is to build battery factories. Then one has no power for that. One has not thought all the way through – one has had a bit of bad luck when thinking.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I note that both the Moderates and the Green Party were part of an energy agreement in 2016 stating that we should have a 100 percent renewable electricity system in Sweden by 2040. The Green Party has worked actively towards this goal. It has also resulted in increased electricity production in Sweden in recent years, a successively increased electricity production that now makes Sweden one of the largest net exporters of electricity in Europe in a situation where we have a large energy demand. It has been an active and well-considered energy policy.

In the situation where we need to increase electricity production in the near term, all the conditions exist to quickly push through increased wind power production that can deliver. There are also conditions to work powerfully with energy efficiencies.

We in Miljöpartiet include in our budget major investments to quickly implement energy efficiency measures that would solve the situation for individual households and companies, which risk high electricity bills, but also contribute to social benefit by making more energy available to others.

However, this does not support the Moderaterna and the government. Instead, one systematically aims to make it cheaper with fossil emissions - fossil emissions that lead to increased climate change and thus increased consequences for people's health, lives and property and increased societal costs for all of Sweden if we do not halt the climate changes.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, one can exaggerate everything, but until we have nuclear power, we are forced to use what we have. It is during the winter time that we need to have this running. During the summer time, we have a certain surplus – I agree with that. But we have not increased the total production; that is false. Wind power accounts for approximately 3 percent of Sweden's electricity. Significantly more terawatt-hours are definitely being decommissioned, primarily in Ringhals and also in Oskarshamn 1 and 2. It is, therefore, false.

If Member Elin Söderberg cares about reduced emissions, I recommend that she take a trip to India, the world's largest country, next year. There, they are currently building 300 new coal-fired power plants. In Germany, they are now starting 27 new coal-fired power plants. If we now have some district heating plants and oil plants that are running, I unfortunately do not believe that it saves the world if we shut them down.

Sweden accounts for 1 per mille of the world's emissions. The forest absorbs more. Net, we are therefore net emitters. But if one wants to split hairs and swallow camels, one should continue with this policy.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Kjell Jansson, what you said about entrepreneurship was very good. It was almost as if you also said that four out of five jobs are created in companies with fewer than 50 employees.

I am nevertheless forced to comment on something regarding the energy issues. I have two concrete questions.

First, I would like to make a clarification. If I read Svenskt Näringsliv's figures correctly, 166 terawatt-hours were produced in 2021 and 134 terawatt-hours in 2009. We are therefore producing more energy in Sweden today. We even produce 51 terawatt-hours of nuclear power compared to 50 terawatt-hours in 2009, so more nuclear power is also produced today.

I would like to ask a question about the small, modular nuclear power plants, which could be constructed so quickly. I would like to understand which they are and how quickly it will be possible to build them. That is my one question.

My second question concerns the price caps for the companies. For some of the companies, especially the very smallest, the electricity costs have been very large. For a bakery or a pizzeria, it is difficult to fully recover this on pastries and bread, so for some of them, it is absolutely life-saving that they receive this income. How are they supposed to do it? Most of them have ten days until the closing of the accounts. How are they supposed to book this perhaps-income from the government? Is it a Busch-income received or a Busch-debt? In what way are they supposed to survive the turn of the year?

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist, for the question! If we start with the smaller, modular plants, I do not have the names of the factories that manufacture them; there are several. But who builds them is a technical question and also a procurement question. The government should give the assignment to Vattenfall, for example, to get started. One can actually get these up in three or four years, the manufacturers themselves have stated. I know colleagues who have been at ABB in Västerås, where they are also standing ready to build smaller, modular nuclear power plants.

I believe, therefore, that the technology exists and that the interest in doing it is very great. But it also requires that someone orders it. I believe that the government must write regulatory letters on this, because I do not believe that the interest is so great in the boards. Vattenfall is making TV commercials about building offshore wind power. It is pure obstruction against the government, I believe.

The next question concerned corporate support for electricity. It is a question that is now being investigated by the Ministry of Enterprise. It is a troublesome issue, because when one provides electricity support, it is also a matter of being competition-neutral. That question is difficult for me to account for here in the chamber because the ministry is not finished with it. But intensive work is ongoing, and it is urgent – you are completely right about that.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Kjell Jansson, for the answer to the questions! I will start with the question about the electricity price cap. There is a real urgency, as some of these companies must prepare a balance sheet for control because they have no revenue. Then a number of companies will go bankrupt or end up in very great distress now during Christmas and New Year, even though they would not have to do so. I understand that the matter is being prepared, but it would be good to know if there is any so-called emergency solution for these companies so that they can survive and do not need to be shut down unnecessarily.

Regarding the second question, the government often refers to the small, modular nuclear power plants. If I have understood correctly, there are not that many of them that can be built immediately, even though the modularity implies that they are produced in a factory with large-scale production and the idea is therefore to bring down the cost. This is actually not something that we are to decide at all, but it is the market that solves the issue. But those that exist in the USA and Canada are still in a demonstration phase. They will not be in a scalable phase and provide something that anyone wants to invest in until 2030-2035.

Until then, it is possible to build offshore wind power equivalent to approximately 70 terawatts, almost three Forsmark. It is on the government's desk; it is only a matter of handling it. Why does the government not do it now, in the short term, to solve the issue?

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker and Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist! If we start with the offshore wind power, it is all clear to build. But one has to pay for the grid themselves. Originally, we were to subsidize the grid to build up these monsters out in the sea. This would be placed on the households in the form of grid fees, which would mean at least 5,000 per villa household in increased grid fees. I would strongly advise against this.

Furthermore, it is questionable to build these from a defense perspective. We know what is happening on the other side of the Baltic Sea; we have a war there. Even the defense has views on this. There are also other aspects. I even saw that the Swedish Maritime Administration were strong opponents to this.

Let them build the lines themselves, then we will see if there is profitability in this. I find it hard to believe. Even here, there are long permit processes, just like for things on land.

When it comes to the modular nuclear power plants, we have received the answer that it is possible to get them up in three to four years. It is naturally a technical question; that we agree on. I cannot give any more answers than that right now.

When it comes to the electricity price support, the Government Offices and the Ministry of Enterprise are looking into this. Personally, I have a solution, but I cannot talk about it here in the chamber. This must, in fact, be prepared by the government.

This is not so difficult. If companies are having a hard time, they can contact Skatteverket and request a deferral, for example, with paying taxes. I believe they can get that without the government getting involved. That is what I would suggest if someone calls me and asks, and someone actually does. Then I give them that tip.

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

Birger Lahti (V)

Mr. Speaker! I must admit that I have a great desire to begin my speech with anything other than what I have written down, with everything that our expenditure area seems to encompass. But, Mr. Speaker, I shall try to stick to my points. It concerns the Committee on Enterprise's report 1, Expenditure area 24 Business. In the report, there are two decision points: goals for foreign trade, export, and investment promotion, as well as the budget frameworks for the expenditure area.

I want to begin by clarifying that 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 refrain from taking a position regarding the allocation of appropriations within this expenditure area. The Left Party's budget alternative should be seen as a coherent package where no part or parts can be broken out and treated in isolation. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I set out our view on the expenditure area in a separate statement.

The common society rests on as many as possible wanting, being able to, and being allowed to participate in the labor market. To achieve a higher employment rate, good conditions for investments and entrepreneurship throughout the country are required, together with an active labor market and education policy that contributes to the workforce being educated so that the demand for competence can be met. Vänsterpartiet wants Sweden to develop as a knowledge-driven nation. Small and medium-sized enterprises, cooperation between the state and the business sector, exports, research, climate, and environmental considerations are important components in the design of this.

Jobs are created when innovations and new thinking are translated into new products and services, not by competing with lower wages and worse conditions. Small companies are an important engine for Sweden's business sector, not only because these companies can grow and become large but also because, at best, they can drive new ideas and innovations forward. Sweden has good conditions to develop entrepreneurship within sustainability and energy efficiency, which in turn can drive this transition. I want to see a policy for small and medium-sized enterprises that aims to create long-term perspective and good conditions for growth but also security for the individual entrepreneur and for the employees in the company.

There is no intrinsic value in as many as possible being entrepreneurs. On the other hand, there is a value in full employment, new innovations, and not least that people get the opportunity to realize their ideas and perhaps become entrepreneurs. The task of politics shall be to create good conditions so that it becomes possible.

I want to further emphasize the importance of the industries. Much of what the industries produce is of a socially important and crucial character, such as materials for welfare, construction, or the transition. Industry also accounts for many jobs. In some places, the majority of the working-age population is employed, for example in my home region.

I believe that Sweden should be at the forefront when it comes to industrial development. That the industry has the opportunity to transition is crucial for all of Sweden. Investments in a strengthened transport infrastructure with a focus on railway expansion, climate renovations, a robust power grid, and renewable electricity production would significantly impact the industry.

The fear that I and the Left Party see now is that failures with the electricity market and pricing risk scaring away the large investments that the industry wants to make in the course of the transition. Sweden should realize that we are not the EU's battery or its conscience for a failed energy system. The only real way to not risk these investments is to introduce what is actually called the Becken model. We have renamed it to Swedish prices for Swedish consumers. This is something that is outrageous.

Trade with the rest of the world is, however, crucial for Sweden's prosperity and development when it comes to other things, which do not constitute socially important functions. I want to see a fair trade policy that puts people, social justice, animals, climate, and the environment first and that focuses on societal gains for everyone and not just profits for the large corporations. When trade works best, it allows for the exchange of products and creativity that enriches life for all parties. Unfortunately, a fair world order does not exist. During the last decades, increasingly complex multilateral trade and investment agreements have become the way for the world's rich countries to exploit the poor countries.

Mr. Speaker! It is appropriate here for me to highlight the reservation that we have together with the Social Democrats and the Green Party regarding the point of decision on foreign trade, which the Social Democrats moved for approval of. We naturally stand behind the reservation and also move for its approval.

Back to the expenditure area! I will speak about the Left Party's budget alternative regarding expenditure area 24. I do not know if I need to cover everything.

Motion 1:3 The institutes' strategic competence funds should have been increased by 30 million kronor compared to the government's proposal. It would have enabled investments via Rise in innovative small enterprises so that they could apply their research in the state labs.

Appropriation 1:5 Business Development should have been increased by a total of 122 million kronor in comparison with the government's proposal. The increase includes several initiatives. Just over half of this appropriation increase should have gone to targeted support for women's entrepreneurship, which would consist of two parts. One part would aim to facilitate professional networking between women and the other to support women's innovation. The rest would go to cooperative business activities which are important for the development of the business sector.

I would also have liked to see an increase in the appropriation 1:8 Sveriges geologiska undersökning by 76 million kronor in comparison with the government's proposal. In the report Innovation-critical metals and minerals - a research overview, which was prepared on the assignment of our committee, it is stated that there is an "insufficient bedrock geological and mineralogical research infrastructure in Sweden regarding innovation-critical metals and minerals" and that knowledge building is required. But no money has been received. Sveriges geologiska undersökning has been tasked with mapping the occurrence of innovation-critical metals, but I believe that the agency needs more resources for this.

In the budget proposal, there is appropriation 1:24 Elstöd with an amount of 2.4 billion. I believe that the Riksdag should reject this amount in favor of the Left Party's proposal on Sweden prices, which I have just mentioned. The entire appropriation would then not be needed.

Finally, I mean that a new appropriation should have been introduced within the expenditure area for a three-year program for green transition in the pulp and paper industry. We want to allocate 150 million kronor to the program for 2023. Through the program, the pulp and paper industry could receive support for investments involving energy efficiency and increased production of renewable fuels, where there are great opportunities for the aforementioned industry to contribute further. This could, of course, in the long run contribute to a greater inclusion of biofuels and thus an increase of the reduction obligation with domestic biofuel.

Regarding the announcements that the government reports as completed, I have a different opinion than the government regarding that which concerns Serverat. The government considers this announcement to be completed and states, for example, that a new e-service has been introduced and that an e-service and a guide have been updated. Furthermore, the government states that the connection requirements for municipalities have been changed, which enables more municipalities to join the program. But it also appears that the number of municipalities that have joined during the period May 2021 to March 2022 is only seven. I do not think that is sufficient for it to be considered completed.

Mr. Speaker! I would like to wish the Speaker, the committee secretariat's staff - Christina Ribbhagen is sitting in the corner of the chamber - and of course my colleagues a very Merry Christmas and a wonderful holiday season.

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! On behalf of the Christian Democrats, I move for the approval of the proposal in Report 1 and the rejection of the motions.

Sweden needs a business climate that lays the foundation for more jobs. New jobs cannot be commanded into existence by politicians. They are created when people find it worth the effort to start and develop a company, realize their ideas, and risk their savings.

It is important that laws, taxes, and regulations are designed in a way that makes it easy to start and run businesses. Small and medium-sized enterprises, which are often family businesses, should be at the center of the design of the business policy.

Sweden needs structural transformation in economic crises. I want to dwell a little bit on family businesses. New research that has been presented says that family businesses as a group retain more jobs than other companies, especially during crises. Therefore, family businesses are important for mitigating the negative effects of crises.

Family businesses are more resilient, long-term, and stable owners, and they are important for the whole country. These companies see their ownership not just in reports for Q1 or Q2 but for the first decade and the second decade.

Since family businesses are based on the next generation taking over, stable rules over time are needed. These companies do not only create valuable contributions to our GDP, but they also create a culture where they see the local community and civil society as a resource, which is significant for our common good and stabilizes society.

During the financial crisis, employment decreased significantly less in family businesses than in non-family businesses, which meant that they had a counter-cyclical effect on Swedish employment and thus contributed to the resilience in the Swedish business sector.

Mr. Speaker! A diversity of actors within the welfare sector is a prerequisite for voluntarily driven and idea-based care and nursing to be able to emerge and be operated. We want to do more to give such organizations the opportunity to conduct activities in the welfare area.

Closing the possibility for privately run welfare activities in corporate form will not improve the opportunities for non-profit care and nursing to be started and operated - on the contrary. When choice systems such as LOV are abolished, it also affects non-profit activities.

Those who build elderly care homes, hospitals and health centers work in private companies, which are most often founded by men. Those who, on the other hand, work with care and nursing in these buildings have for a long time been referred to a public employer and have mostly been women. When the choice reforms within the welfare sector were introduced, it meant a major change for the employees in this female-dominated sector.

Then new opportunities for creativity and entrepreneurship were created for people. New career paths were opened. This had positive effects on women's wage development, not least as the number of employers increased. The reforms have had positive effects for female entrepreneurship. Freedom of choice in welfare creates conditions for an equal Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! In order to enable continued strong foreign trade, with positive effects on the economy as a whole, the government works for open international trade and promotes the use and development of international standards that support the implementation of the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030.

The goal for foreign trade and export and investment promotion is a well-functioning internal market, growing exports and international investments. There, it must be about promoting free, sustainable and rules-based international trade. Increased trade exchange with the rest of the world is valuable for Sweden's entire economy. Foreign direct investments in Sweden contribute to increased employment and sustainable growth throughout the country.

Mr. Speaker! I cannot leave this rostrum without speaking about strengthened transition capacity, strategic research, and innovation. These are important areas that many in our country perhaps do not go and think about every day. But I do. We Christian Democrats are well aware that powerful changes and innovation are required for, among other things, the climate transition. We see the benefits of research and innovation to achieve climate neutrality.

The driving force for demand is the development of new technology needed to achieve climate neutrality and to reach the UN's global goals in Agenda 2030.

An emission area that has a major impact on the climate is the transport sector. To achieve a fossil-free and sustainable transport sector, far-reaching change is required. The automotive industry, together with academia and the public sector, has a central role for Sweden to manage this transition.

During the year, the global demand for many metals and minerals has continued to increase and is expected to increase further over several decades ahead. This applies to both base metals as well as critical metals and minerals, which are used, among other things, in rechargeable vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels.

As a Christian Democrat, I am pleased that the Riksdag has announced to the government that it should as soon as possible take necessary measures to simplify and shorten the permit processes for, among other things, the mining and minerals industry.

To achieve the goal for industrial policy, both new companies and growth in existing companies are needed. Fast-growing companies are important for the creation of new jobs.

The Swedish business community's capacity for innovation and renewal is judged to be continued good. We need to continue to strengthen the conditions for innovation and renewal, and for the countryside, this is obviously particularly important.

The Swedish business community is a greenhouse for prosperity and innovation but now also an important environmental movement - world-leading in sustainability and green transition. The Government will be an offensive partner in that work, as will the Christian Democrats. All the enterprising people who create jobs, prosperity, and dynamism deserve our respect. Free economy and free enterprise are the foundation for our prosperity.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! The starting point for Swedish entrepreneurship and Swedish companies is bleak, but it can become quite good.

We have an economic situation that is extremely gloomy, which several before me have pointed out here. We can expect an inflation of over 11 percent during the first quarter. The margins for the companies are thus decreasing. We can also see that we might have interest rates of up to 3 percent in a year. This means that the companies cannot invest. With low margins, we get low profits and no opportunities to invest. This means that companies will need to lay off many people.

The cost of housing means that people will have much less left to spend on consumption, which means that many service companies will have an incredibly tough time ahead, now that they have just emerged from the covid crisis.

Of those who are unemployed today, 75 percent have difficulty entering the labor market, either because they have been away from the labor market for a long time or because they are young and have difficulty getting their first job. To then do as the government and remove the halved employer contribution for young people is a catastrophic proposal, say many of the companies that have employed young people in recent years.

Centerpartiet wants to keep the reduction, but we want to go further and halve the employer contribution for wages up to 22,000. It doesn't matter what type of low-wage job it is - since the employer contribution up to one-third is still pure tax on labor, we think it is completely correct and reasonable that it disappears. These would have been important measures in the economic situation we are in. For me and Centerpartiet, the measure that is chosen to be taken right now appears incomprehensible.

Mr. Speaker! Another important issue for the companies is the simplification of regulations, which many have touched upon. It is partly the rules that we must ensure never become so complicated for the companies and which we decide on in the chamber, and partly the rules that we want to simplify where we have made mistakes at one time or another and where authorities may have added some extra layers of regulations. These we shall work to remove.

I do not think anyone has been as eager to improve for the companies in the specific area of regulation as Minister Maud Olofsson was when she was Minister for Enterprise. At that time, she was a guarantor that this had the highest priority for every department and agency. It was then that the Regulatory Council was created as it looks today, and it was a rather innovative construction. We looked at what existed in Holland, Great Britain, and some other places and took the best of what was there and created the Regulatory Council. Today, Mr. Speaker, the Regulatory Council is important but has substandard conditions to do a good job.

Until last autumn, I myself was chairman of the Council on Legislation. Despite the fact that we submitted proposals to the government, I could see that they did not even bother to carry out a comparison to see how we stood and measured ourselves against other OECD countries. From the Council on Legislation's side, we pointed out that the Council on Legislation enters the legislative process too late. This has been a problem since day one, but it has also been something that one wanted to improve during a process.

The Rule Council is too weak, and it is hidden within Tillväxtverket. Therefore, it is important to create a separate agency for the Rule Council. This has also been financed by the Center Party in this budget. Furthermore, it is important to ensure that the Rule Council enters the legislative process earlier so that one can ensure that the rules do not become as complicated as they do. Above all, this needs to be done because the authorities then interpret the rules based on what they like; a bit like a bad Sibyllakorv that you want extra everything on.

Furthermore, the Council on Legislation should be included in the measurement of processing times. For it is something that today is a much greater problem than it ever was when the Council on Legislation was created, which is the processing times. And one must give the Council on Legislation the opportunity to push back. It is not so complicated to do, but the government has now chosen to include this in an investigation that has a rather uncertain timetable.

A third question, Mr. Speaker, which is very important for the companies, is that the Swedish companies, the world-leading Swedish companies, have taken the climate threat seriously. They, like many others, believe that the climate issue is our time's defining issue, and they know that customers go to companies that work sustainably and smartly. And shareholders know that one prefers to invest in companies that will be sustainable in ten years.

Centerpartiet has a goal of net-zero emissions by 2040 - that is in 18 years. It is possible through digitalization, electrification, and automation. We are one of the few countries that actually have everything in the entire value chain - from the mine to the high-tech. We also have the contractors who can do it. But it is still the case that the problems with the permit processes have rather accelerated than been solved. And it is too poorly funded. It sends completely wrong signals when we scale down our goals within the climate area, when the USA does nothing but pour on.

We must set goals that are clear for the climate transition so that companies know that we in Sweden still think this is very important and that Sweden can be a pioneer market in so many areas. And we must invite the world - the world's innovation, researchers and companies - to continue to invest in this. And it is not just batteries or green steel it is about. It is also materials, software and many products that exist in the entire value chain that have to do with ensuring that we have a leading technology for climate transition.

For we can then not only solve our own climate challenges but also be part of solving challenges that exist in other parts of the world. There are good solutions for how more capital can come to the green transition.

And it is not actually as I hear from some parts of the Tidö parties, that we choose technology. We do not choose technology. We have chosen the challenge. We have chosen the climate challenge. Which technology is to solve it is completely open, and we shall not interfere in that.

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

Louise Eklund (L)

Mr. Speaker! A free and strong business sector is a prerequisite for a free and strong society.

Politics must create the conditions for this. Sweden needs more liberal reforms that strengthen our competitiveness and create conditions for Sweden's companies.

We see today how much of Swedish industry and production faces great challenges, partly as a consequence of the aftermath of the pandemic, partly as a result of world events such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Increased energy prices and high inflation constitute significant challenges for parts of the business sector. It is of great importance that policy focuses on what is required to support Sweden's companies and business sector: 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.

All of this is good. Furthermore, we also need to ensure that Sweden does not fall behind in the infrastructure investments that are now being made elsewhere in Europe. They can be of great importance even for Swedish exports, not least those that we are planning for in the north. And if we look at the Fehmarn Belt link that is now being built between Denmark and Germany, it will further shorten travel times between Sweden and the continent. Bottlenecks on the Swedish side, such as over the Öresund, need to be addressed and built away. For a small, export-dependent country like Sweden, it is absolutely necessary that we do not fall behind when other countries build their markets closer to each other.

Mr. Speaker! It is also not possible to have a debate about the Swedish business community without talking about the very concerning energy situation. We have an acute situation in the southern parts of the country where we quickly need to establish more local energy production. The companies are on their knees, and it is very uncertain whether everyone will manage to get through the crisis we find ourselves in.

There is much we need to do. The electricity subsidy is an absolutely necessary factor. It is also a first step where we will continue to monitor the issue very closely moving forward. Equally important is that today we take the steps needed so that we never again end up in this situation. We need to establish a much more stable energy system.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker! Free markets, free companies and free individuals are values that the Liberals have fought for since we began organizing as a party. They are also the prerequisites for an open and democratic society. And that is what this government is focusing on.

I hereby move for approval of the committee's proposal within expenditure area 24 Business.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Miljöpartiet has for many years in government actively worked for a strong green business development and the green industrial revolution. Through results-oriented politics and a strong and engaged business sector, Sweden can become a world exhibition for new technology, innovations, a sustainable society, and strengthened competitiveness.

If Sweden is to continue to attract investments in the billions, the climate work must continue. Here in Miljöpartiet, we see three challenges that are central for the green industrial revolution to move forward and deliver societal development, increased welfare, and climate benefits.

I want to start by mentioning the supply of skills. In many places, we have very low unemployment today and recruitment needs that far exceed the labor reserve. In northern Sweden, where I come from, this is particularly clear. It is about tens of thousands of people who are welcomed to move in and build their home and future in northern Sweden so that the staffing needs can be met.

Already today we see how businesses that are dependent on each other compete for the same staff. In order to secure the supply of competence for the green industrial revolution, the supply of personnel for the entire society needs to be ensured. When societies grow, more teachers, more hairdressers, more cooks and more nurses are needed. All people have a valuable role in our shared societal development.

Mr. Speaker, the government and the Sweden Democrats are pursuing a policy that aims to actively make it more difficult for people to take jobs, move to, and build a future in our country. It is a policy that will hinder the supply of skills, worsen business development, and hamper Swedish competitiveness. The government's and the Sweden Democrats' policy thus hinders business development.

The second thing I want to mention is permit processes. In order to achieve a rapid transition, efficient and predictable permit processes are important.

Companies and authorities highlight the importance of cooperation and dialogue for fast permit processes. It is therefore important that the authorities work in an advisory and regulatory capacity simultaneously so that the companies can get clarity on which underlying documents are needed for a fast review.

Resources are needed for the authorities so that there are enough case officers to handle all cases. It is central that measures are made where they de facto have an effect on the permit processes. It is against that background that it is worrying that the Moderaterna repeatedly mention changes to the Environmental Code when permit processes are discussed. Deteriorations in the Environmental Code would risk people's local environment and also the companies' environmental profiles without achieving an actual acceleration of the permit processes.

In the budget, the government and the Sweden Democrats also provide the authorities with far too few resources for them to be able to build up and maintain efficient permit processes. The government's and the Sweden Democrats' policy thus hampers business development even in this area.

The third thing I want to mention is electricity and power in the near term. In order to move from plans to investments, the companies need to know that they will be allocated the power and the electricity they need for their operations. Expansion of electricity production now, in the near term, is therefore central to being able to meet the needs within the industry.

We in Miljöpartiet want to fund the land connections for offshore wind power. The land connections are part of the main grid, and thus part of the basic social infrastructure. We also want to implement the proposals in the Incentive Study to increase the incentives for municipalities to plan for renewable electricity production. We also want to introduce an electricity bonus so that we get resources for those municipalities that have electricity production and that are planning to build electricity production.

But, Mr. Speaker, the government and the Sweden Democrats choose instead to pull the rug out from under offshore wind power and complicate the expansion of electricity in the near term. The government and the Sweden Democrats are putting all their eggs in the nuclear power basket - whatever the cost may be! This creates great uncertainty for Swedish business.

The lack of clarity and inconsistency that has arisen as the government and the Sweden Democrats now push through their energy policy is very unfortunate. One day they want to make the entire of Sweden an electricity zone. The next day they say: No, that is probably not what should be done.

The business community is attentive to politics. The business community requests long-term rules of the game. We in Miljöpartiet would like to see a process where we continue to work on strengthening green business development and the green industrial revolution.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Elin Söderberg mentions that the Moderates and the Sweden Democrats want to simplify the Environmental Code. And it is clear that we do. What a mess it is!

Cementa is an example. Every construction project is at stake if Cementa does not receive a long-term permit – even wind power foundations, which Elin Söderberg wants. We must understand how a society functions and not go around dreaming about things.

I can once again take an example I raised in the previous debate. Out on Yxlan in the archipelago, there was a fantastic shipyard during the war with 130 employees. It was one of the largest companies during the war. For various reasons, the generational transition has not worked. The previous generation did nothing for the shipyard, and it sat derelict. Now, the next generation wanted to start up the shipyard, move out into the archipelago, and hire people. They submitted the application in good order, and the municipality approved it. Then a leisure resident appealed the establishment, and the County Administrative Board, which Miljöpartiet wants to strengthen, stepped in and said no. They are not allowed to start up the shipyard.

Is it to ensure that companies grow? Is it to ensure that the archipelago grows? Is it to ensure that the countryside grows? No, it is to turn the archipelago into a Skansen. That is what Miljöpartiet does with its policy.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! To make Skansen - Miljöpartiet does not want to make Skansen of the archipelago. We see a fantastic opportunity for community development in the whole country.

When it comes to Cementa, we need raw materials and materials for the whole society. But we also need to review the conditions for what kind of society we want in the long term. Shall we ensure that we have clean drinking water and groundwater? It is these questions that are weighed against each other.

We are in a situation where we see that we have, on one hand, a climate change that will complicate water conditions, and on the other, local consequences that risk leading to a population that stands without reliable water supplies, which is the fundamental basis for our lives and our quality of life. In that case, we also need to ensure that we protect them.

There, we in Miljöpartiet have worked systematically with several different measures to ensure that we can achieve broader resource use, more efficient resource management and material use, and more circular systems. We shall ensure that we find raw materials and goods from several different sources so that we are not dependent on a single actor for a supply as fundamental to society as cement production is.

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

Kjell Jansson (M)

Mr. Speaker and Elin Söderberg! One can close Cementa - absolutely. Then we can transport cement here from China. That is also possible - if it is indeed more environmentally friendly to transport with ships running on oil and coal from China. That can be done if one believes that it is a long-term environmental initiative. If it is to be sustainable, one must have it here in the local area now that we have it.

Water shortage, which Elin Söderberg speaks about, we are not even close to in Sweden. We have plenty of water and a fantastic water quality.

I also want to ask Elin Söderberg regarding the Environmental Code and the shore protection, whether she believes it benefits the countryside and the archipelago to have such rigid shore protection and such a rigid Environmental Code that one is not allowed to build anywhere. If you own something, you get rich on the turn in the archipelago, because almost no one else is allowed to build. And if the local building committee, which I sit on at home in Norrtälje, were to grant permission and someone else then appeals to the County Administrative Board, you can bet your cat that they will tear it up and say no.

This is being done, with murky arguments, with reference to the Environmental Code and coastal protection, and that is not what I want. I want to reduce the County Administrative Board's power, not increase it. How does Elin Söderberg want to do it? Does she believe that having a strong County Administrative Board is good for growth and business?

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I believe it is important for a sustainable societal development where we have quality of life for all inhabitants in our country that we have authorities with high competence and resources to uphold the laws that we jointly enact here in the Riksdag. And that is what our authorities do and shall do. If one wants to change these laws, one can propose something else and debate it here today.

Kjell Jansson mentions the import of cement from China. I wonder if that is what Kjell Jansson wants or suggests. In any case, it is nothing that Miljöpartiet is promoting, so otherwise, it is nothing we need to discuss here.

I was clear that Miljöpartiet wants to ensure a sustainable supply of socially important raw materials and that we will work for a circular society and a circular economy. We want to work on utilizing the resources in society effectively. Natural resources are limited, and a harsh and exploitation-driven utilization of them also deteriorates our quality of life and our conditions for a sustainable societal development as well as our conditions for an active business development.

We do not have a water shortage in Sweden, but on Gotland we have specific conditions. We also see that as a result of climate change we are getting worsened situations regarding groundwater in several regions in Sweden. For me and Miljöpartiet it is central that we have good and secure access to water in our entire country, for all our inhabitants, wherever they live.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden faces a tough time with high inflation, recession, and high electricity prices. Households and companies are under severe pressure. This applies in particular to small and medium-sized enterprises.

What has built Sweden strong is a world-class welfare combined with a trade policy that is fair, sustainable, and provides strong protection for workers' conditions. Countries all over the world marvel at Sweden's ability to be a world-leading innovation country with a multitude of companies competing on a global market. How could a country with 10 million people in the northernmost part of the globe become so well-known and competitive?

Reforms such as universal healthcare and universal schooling, tuition-free higher education and child allowance, as well as several other welfare reforms, have created a country where everyone is given the opportunity to - fail. In Sweden, university students can test their knowledge and test their ideas without an overwhelming student loan that limits the possibility of taking risks.

The secure welfare policy also makes us an attractive country to work in. The Swedish model provides long-term rules of the game in the market, and that gives both employees and employers security in an otherwise restless world.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is not only a country that is safe to work in, but also a very beautiful country. With our high mountains, deep lakes, historical towns, world-unique archipelagos, and beautiful beaches, we are an attractive destination for many. The Swedish tourism industry has enormous potential to contribute with new jobs, innovation, and development of destinations in a way that makes places more attractive even for those who live and work there on a daily basis.

The tourism industry paid a high price when the corona pandemic broke out, and many were saved by the support packages that were distributed. Many, however, are no longer there today. The tourism industry still suffers from the aftereffects of the corona pandemic, and with an impending economic crisis, the outlook does not look bright.

We Social Democrats know that the state needs to play an active role in industrial policy. To succeed with the adopted tourism strategy, it is required that the state and the business community work together to make Sweden a quality destination. Therefore, we Social Democrats add increased resources to tourism promotion initiatives. It is both about strengthening Visit Sweden's ability to market Sweden and about business owners' opportunities to create more jobs through high-quality activities.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats know that an active industrial policy yields results. This is most clearly manifested in the green industrial revolution in the north, and it is shown in the previous government's life science strategy where good cooperation between the state and the business sector creates conditions for future prosperity in accordance with Agenda 2030. There is much to be proud of and many companies to be happy about.

I am, however, concerned about the current government's attitude towards our jointly set climate goals. We know that many of the good innovations coming to market today are developed so that we can transition, and that we have good conditions to be world leaders in the global transition that needs to be made. But lowered ambitions from the government and Sverigedemokraterna mean that our companies can no longer rely on the state's interest in being part of the green transition and may find themselves overtaken by other countries.

Sweden must have high climate goals because we have to. Our generation is the last that can do something about the climate changes caused by human emissions. We need to make transitions to avoid floods, forest fires, and melting ice that leads to higher water levels. To use the words that the UN Secretary-General uttered at COP 27 in Egypt: We are on a highway, straight toward climate ruin, with our foot on the gas pedal.

There are many in this chamber who refuse to see reality and realize that the climate transition is not a choice but a necessity. The transition needs to be made; that is how it is. But we have an opportunity to invest our way out of this crisis and make Sweden a world leader in green industry, sustainable food production, improved health, and sustainable tourism. The climate crisis is our greatest threat, but the climate transition is perhaps our greatest opportunity.

We Social Democrats are ready to pull Sweden out of the crisis and ensure that on the other side we are a world-leading country that has secured jobs and innovations and created a society where people live in increased equality and with a higher quality of life as a result. That is what we Social Democrats want Sweden to be, and all industries are important for this to happen.

Even more important, however, is that the government recognizes the opportunities of the transition and safeguards the image of Sweden as something synonymous with quality and sustainability. Right now, the image of Sweden is not such. The world views Sweden's lowered climate ambitions with concern, and it affects the reputation of Swedish companies as innovative, climate-responsible companies whose products compete with the best in the world.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats will do everything to involve the whole of society in the green transition - and to ensure that the state, the business sector, the trade union movement, civil society, and academia do it together.

(Applause)

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

Aida Birinxhiku (S)

Mr. Speaker! Much wisdom has already been spoken in this debate, but I would like to say something specific about trade policy.

Trade policy is about how we build our welfare society. Sweden's prosperity has been built through a general welfare policy and an economic policy for full employment based on our trade exchange with the rest of the world. For a small, export-dependent country like Sweden, trade is absolutely crucial for our opportunity to create welfare, growth, and jobs in the country. It is one of the pillars of our economy.

Our exports account for almost half of Sweden's GDP and mean that approximately 1.5 million Swedes have a job to go to. Increased trade and exports therefore mean more employees in healthcare, more teachers in schools, and more police in society. That is why we want to increase the appropriation for export-promoting activities by 15 million kronor compared to the government's proposal.

Mr. Speaker! Trade policy is also one of our most important tools in the work of contributing to a more equal and just world. Trade creates jobs with decent working conditions and bridges between city and country, and it enables us to increase the pace of the global climate transition.

When we design our trade policy, we must however keep in mind that economic globalization has proceeded very quickly, but that policy in several respects has fallen behind. Therefore, it is crucial that Sweden stands up for fair trade, that is, a trade policy that can distribute the gains of globalization more fairly. This is something that is clearly evident from the current goal for the trade policy.

I note, however, that the government no longer wants to talk about fair trade but is changing the goal formulation, which is remarkable. A fair trade is, in fact, a prerequisite for rule-based trade. It is through a fair trade policy that the legitimacy of global trade can be strengthened and anchored. It is also a prerequisite for sustainable trade, not least when it comes to the social aspects.

We need a trade policy that safeguards, among other things, the environment and climate, health, animal welfare and workers' rights. At least as important is also that this policy contributes to achieving the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030, as well as that it serves men and women equally well.

Mr. Speaker! World trade is currently facing extensive challenges in the form of increased protectionism, ongoing trade conflicts, and a war in our near region. In times like these, it is more important than ever that we stand up for fair trade. In that work, the World Trade Organization, WTO, has a fundamental role. The WTO must be reformed and modernized in order to continue to be able to create predictable and fair rules of the game in the multilateral trading system.

Sweden must also be a clear voice within the EU, especially during the presidency. The EU's internal market constitutes the largest market for Swedish goods and services; more than 70 percent of Swedish exports go to countries in the internal market, which creates almost 800,000 jobs in Sweden. Therefore, we must continue the work of removing remaining trade barriers and also adapt the market to new conditions. This is crucial both for free movement and for the green, digital transition.

Furthermore, more free trade agreements were needed within the WTO and the EU. Here, Sweden must continue to drive the work for trade agreements that actually take into account all aspects of sustainability. These agreements shall also safeguard workers' rights, not only in Sweden and the EU but also in the rest of the world.

Finally, I want to say a few words about the global partnership Global Deal. It is a central tool for trade that promotes social dialogue, improves labor market relations, and increases the pace of the global climate transition. Today, Global Deal consists of over 130 actors, of which 25 are states. There is great potential to expand and deepen the cooperation.

This was a clear prioritization by the former Social Democratic Minister for Trade. But after having asked a question about Global Deal to the new Minister for Trade, I suspect however that the current government's ambitions are not as high. My latest exchange of remarks here with Member Kjell Jansson confirms this.

Even though the OECD has taken over the chairmanship, it is crucial that Sweden continues to take a leading role so that Global Deal can be expanded and developed. In this way, we can create more inclusive, long-term and sustainable trade.

Mr. Speaker! The protectionist winds are blowing ever stronger and world trade is under great pressure. Therefore, it is more important than ever to stand up for a trade policy that creates more jobs, better welfare, and a more just and greener world.

In conclusion, I would like to move for approval of the Social Democrats' reservation.

(Applause)

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Mr. Speaker! Adjustable wrench, ball bearing, zipper, dynamite and respirator. Tetra Pak, Spotify and Skype. The list can be long of the inventions that Swedish entrepreneurial spirit has developed through the years. Sweden may purely geographically be the small country in the north, but in terms of entrepreneurship, we are a great nation.

If we also add the natural resources our country has in forest and land, which have been refined by generations of entrepreneurs into major export industries and high-quality food production, it is easy to state that Sweden is a country with fantastic conditions.

Still, it is not among the top rankings that we find Sweden when it comes to growth in Europe - on the contrary, we are now found among the countries that have poorer growth, and at the same time Swedish competitiveness has weakened. How could it become so?

The reasons are, of course, several, but it is clear that the growth rate has hardly slowed down when it comes to bureaucracy and administration. The regulatory burden has, on the contrary, increased. A recent report from Svenskt Näringsliv shows that as many as every second entrepreneur experiences the rules as being more complicated and harder to predict than before. When about ten hours a week are spent handling administration, it is easy to understand that Swedish entrepreneurship hardly has any fast track in the competition with other countries.

Time is money, as always. 200 billion is the estimated total cost of the regulatory burden for companies - for companies, that is, Mr. Speaker! To that comes the cost carousel that over-bureaucratization also causes Swedish taxpayers.

In other words, hindering bureaucracy and burdensome administration hamper the competitiveness and profitability of Swedish companies and thus the country's growth. Small businesses, which create the most jobs, are hit hardest when entrepreneurs have to spend more time on red tape than on the work itself. At the same time, the industry stands idling waiting for endless permit processes from authorities that lost their understanding of the business community's conditions a long time ago.

Unnecessary bureaucracy, Mr. Speaker, often goes hand in hand with political clumsiness. Too many entrepreneurs, not least in the countryside, experience that the state overrides them in matters where ownership rights should have been respected and the business protected. A shift in culture and mindset is required on many levels, not least the political ones, to reverse the development.

Sweden needs a major wave of deregulation. A debureaucratization that would benefit our entrepreneurs would, of course, also contribute to streamlining the state, a benefit in itself. The Moderates went to the election with the goal of reducing the regulatory burden for companies by 30 percent.

Business

In the government statement, Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson particularly highlighted the importance of a free and strong Swedish enterprise. In this first budget, it is also established that the government shall initiate work to improve the business sector's conditions in the long term. Tax reliefs and simplifications with a clear impact on entrepreneurship, small business ownership, research, and investments will be particularly important to create a more favorable business climate.

Extra important is the reinforcement of the Regulatory Council and the implementation council that is now to be introduced and which shall specifically aim to reduce the regulatory burden. These councils should take a broad approach to the question of how one can simplify for business - not just conduct a review of the consequences of new regulations. Even the over-implementation of EU rules must be stopped; there must be a thorough clearing of the existing regulatory flora, and the justification for regulations' existence must be based on having asked the question of which problem they solve.

The exercise of public authority should also be scrutinized, and regulatory letters should indicate a clear line of action for the officials across the country who handle business issues.

Mr. Speaker! It is entrepreneurship that is the key to Sweden's prosperity, and it is free enterprise that is the key to development. With a good business climate, the conditions are strengthened for more Swedish business ideas and inventions that not only create the jobs that finance our common welfare but also ensure that we meet the future better equipped with new solutions for the challenges and transitions we face.

The message that the Moderates, together with the coalition partners, are now moving from campaign promises to workshop when it comes to the work against red tape is important and welcome. It creates conditions for entrepreneurship – and entrepreneurship, Mr. Speaker, is hope.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision.

Business

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 21 December.)

Subsidiarity test of EU proposals

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