Business

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! We will now debate expenditure area 24 Business. This will be one of the Riksdag's last debates this calendar year.

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

The Sweden Democrats are, as is well known, a business-friendly party that believes in and safeguards a market economy, healthy competition, and open and free international trade. I am therefore pleased to be part of a government base that safeguards the business sector's conditions and takes political measures to facilitate the same. Such a measure is often for the political side to take a step back and let the market do its thing.

Instead of burdening the business sector with regulatory burdens and administration, the Tidö parties therefore focus on the opposite. That is why the Tidö Agreement stipulates, among other things, the following ambitions: There shall be lower administrative costs for companies. This is a task that has been initiated, among other things, with this budget and the simplification council that is now to be established, but also the implementation council that will be put in place to ensure that Sweden does not over-implement the EU legislation that falls on us to implement and thereby causes an unnecessary burden for the Swedish business sector.

It is also stated in the Tidö Agreement that corporate taxes and capital taxes shall be competitive and promote more new companies that contribute to jobs, growth, and prosperity. Furthermore, it is noted that companies should have good incentives to invest in research and be given better opportunities to attract and retain key expertise, for example through changed conditions for employee options. This is work that has been influenced through an appointed investigation, but which will also be addressed by the research and innovation bill that will be presented during the next year.

Furthermore, it states in the Tidö Agreement that the conditions for small and medium-sized enterprises to grow, hire, and attract capital shall be improved, for example through changes in the 3:12 regulations where additional directives to the existing investigation have already been announced.

The last thing from the Tidö Agreement that I intended to highlight, Madam Speaker, is the observation that it needs to become more profitable to move from benefits to work, to educate oneself, and to take on increased responsibility at work. This is something that has been manifested, among other things, through the job tax credit but also the upcoming but already announced benefit ceiling.

All that is to happen in connection with these and other reforms for entrepreneurship and productivity is not handled in this report and will not be handled by the Committee on Enterprise.

A part that is indeed handled in the Committee on Industry but not in this report, but which is extremely important for the business sector's conditions, is energy policy. There, the government, as is known, together with the Sweden Democrats has shifted the energy policy that has existed and which prompted the decommissioning of half of Sweden's nuclear reactors and contributed to a less robust electricity system with volatile prices and volatile supply. Extensive work is being carried out there which, in the long run, will strengthen the business sector's conditions for not least the transition that is currently underway.

Another part that is neither handled in this report nor in the Committee on Industry but which is nevertheless extremely important for the business sector's conditions is the crime policy. There, we see today estimates that for the business sector, it involves a cost of 100 billion kronor to invest in crime prevention measures but also to bear the cost that is shifted onto the companies as a consequence of the crime that has taken hold in Sweden under Social Democratic governments.

Madam Speaker! Let me, with this said, highlight some parts of this report by listing some of the Tidö parties' initiatives in the area of expenditures for the business sector.

We are allocating 10 million to Tillväxtverket for the simplification council that I have already mentioned.

When it comes to business development, targeted funds of 7 million are provided for, among other things, simplification assignments to authorities, 5 million for improved authority contacts with companies, 15 million for a systematic review of business-promoting measures, and 20 million to attract and retain international top competence.

We also allocate 6 million to the Agency for growth policy evaluations and analyses to expand the agency's impact evaluations. It is an extremely important task to ensure that the funds moving from the public sector to the private sector achieve the effect that the policy demands and that it does not distort competition or the like.

It is also the case that the most mining-positive government and government base in living memory also shows this in the government's budget by allocating 27 million to the Geological Survey of Sweden for a supplementary marine geological mapping and by allocating an additional 70 million for a systematic mapping of ore-potential areas as well as other efforts linked to the promotion of mineral extraction in Sweden.

We are allocating 14.5 million to increased support for Verksamt.se at Bolagsverket and 30 million to Konkurrensverket to strengthen an effective and reliable competition supervision, which is particularly important when seeing risks that the public sector is increasingly competing out private entities.

We are also directing 100 million in additional funding to Business Sweden for their work in strengthening export promotion.

Madam Speaker! These are some examples of what is contained in the committee report and in the budget for expenditure area 24 which we are debating here today.

The last thing I highlighted concerns trade policy, which, as is known, is part of the business sector expenditure area. And I intended to dwell a little bit on that.

It is not least against the background of the upcoming election to the European Parliament that I think it is important, but also against the background of how we see the free trade line in retreat all around the world. I see a tendency that fewer and fewer people comply with and demand free trade and a market economy.

Classical economic liberalism is becoming increasingly alien in a time when war, increased tensions between great powers, and growing state subsidies constitute the new reality. Ideologically targeted industries attract state subsidies in the billions of kronor/dollars in everything from Sweden to the USA, and various trade barriers are becoming increasingly common.

The idea that economic integration and free trade, even between dissenting states, would spread liberal democracy across the world and contribute to a positive development even in authoritarian countries is likely to be a mere memory today.

Instead, the Western world has found itself in a predicament with a low degree of self-sufficiency regarding some of the most important materials, components, processes, and skills for the industry of the future. This, combined with a near-nonexistent growth in Europe, should make all friends of the West worried about our place on the economic world map moving forward.

Caught between the USA and China and potentially without our traditional competitive advantage of low electricity prices, and in a time when state subsidies determine where investments are placed instead of how competitive the market is, both are bad for Sweden. It is therefore good that the government has now presented a strategy for Sweden's foreign trade, investments and global competitiveness with clearer objectives in the area than before.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion, I just want to emphasize the importance of this government basis continuing the work of creating better conditions for the Swedish business sector by strengthening the authorities' presence in the area, reducing red tape, promoting trade and exchange with others – and at the same time just taking a step back and letting the market and the business sector stand in focus.

(Applause)

In this speech, Josef Fransson (SD) agreed.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for your speech, Tobias Andersson!

When I read the section on expenditure area 24 in the government's budget bill, I noticed a passage about women's entrepreneurship. It is an issue that I consider important and that I think it is good that the government is investing in. It is, in fact, a rather serious situation that women operate businesses to a lesser extent than men - but what I believe is more alarming is that women do not get the same conditions to create companies and see their ideas realized.

The Sweden Democrats have previously criticized that resources should be allocated to increase women's entrepreneurship in industries where they are underrepresented. I believe we had a similar debate about this this spring, or if it was last year. Tobias Andersson himself has been critical of support aimed at reducing the gender gap within Swedish entrepreneurship, but now we see that the government explicitly writes – this is a quote from the budget bill – that "improved conditions for women's entrepreneurship is a priority issue for the government."

Since the Sweden Democrats have a budget cooperation with the government, I would like to take the opportunity to ask Tobias Andersson if the Sweden Democrats have changed their opinion regarding women's entrepreneurship and the support that the government and politics can provide to ensure that more women get to see their ideas realized in Sweden.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question. It is true that the assignment given to Tillväxtverket to analyze the reason why women choose to start and run their own companies to a lesser extent than men was not something that was coordinated with the Sverigedemokraterna.

It has, therefore, not formally been the case that the Sweden Democrats have had a dissenting opinion, but on the other hand, after we were informed about the assignment, we may have been critical of the approach. We believe, namely, that what the policy should focus on is to ensure good conditions for everyone who chooses to – or everyone who wishes to – start and run their own company. They shall be given the opportunities that it can entail, completely regardless of what gender or what background they have.

We perhaps believe more in general measures from the political side than in the political side stating that women run their own companies to a lesser extent than men and then choosing to problematize it. It could be as simple as that, Madam Speaker, as that men and women have some different degree of risk aversion. It is something we see around the world - that men are prone to take higher risks in different decisions, when it comes to both career choices and the choice to start one's own company as well as completely other issues - and it does not necessarily have to be a concern.

This has, then, been the general starting point from the Sweden Democrats' side, but that being said, we look forward to the report that will come from Tillväxtverket. We can then see if there are any structural obstacles for women choosing to run businesses in Sweden. That, of course, should not be the case; I want to be clear about that towards Member Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro. But we perhaps do not think that politics should problematize the choices individual individuals make - regardless of their gender.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! I would then like to get some concretization regarding which general initiatives the Sweden Democrats see as needing to be made so that women's entrepreneurship will increase in Sweden. I also believe that Tobias Andersson needs to reflect on what happens to an industry where half of the population is not participating and contributing.

I still hear criticism of the type that it would be a form of identity politics to ensure that the situation is changed for women who run businesses in Sweden and to ensure that more of them get to see their ideas realized. Member of Parliament Tobias Andersson also does not seem to care that women to a lesser extent get to share in venture capital in our country and that women's entrepreneurship accounts for barely 30 percent of the total entrepreneurship in Sweden. It also does not seem to be a problem that women's ideas are not realized or that the proportion of women who get to enjoy the freedom of being an entrepreneur is low.

Madam Speaker! It almost sounds as if one should not invest in half the population. It sounds as if the men should get everything and that everything concerning investing in women's entrepreneurship - or in people with foreign backgrounds - is identity politics and that one should not invest in it. That is not how you conduct politics, Madam Speaker, but in the Sweden Democrats' industrial policy, certain people are to be left out.

This problem is, however, real, and it affects the women who actually want their ideas to be realized to the same extent as the men's. Therefore, I am glad that the government sees this as a priority issue. But my question to Tobias Andersson and Sverigedemokraterna, Madam Speaker, is whether Tobias Andersson will counteract the work of prioritizing women's entrepreneurship that is being carried out within the government cooperation?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am somewhat unable to understand what kind of straw man the member chooses to debate against. It is because it is neither me nor the Sweden Democrats' policy that the member chooses to attack.

What I tried to make clear in my first speech is the fact that the Sweden Democrats primarily want to focus on creating good conditions for everyone who wishes to run a business to realize their dreams and try being entrepreneurs. They shall be given the conditions that are required, not least by us facilitating.

It is about something as simple as the Simplification Council, which the Social Democrats oppose in their budget motion. They are cutting the appropriation to Tillväxtverket, which we choose to focus on. They do not, therefore, want to work actively with regulatory simplification work – something that is important regardless of the gender of the person who runs the company that suffers under the regulatory burden that has been established during the time of Social Democratic governments in power.

It is undeniably the case that the form of discrimination through quotas that the Social Democrats believe in is not something that the Sweden Democrats believe in. We do not believe in quotas for corporate boards, and we do not believe in quotas for venture capital. We believe, on the other hand, in the free market, and we believe that both men and women are free to choose whether they want to be employed or whether they want to employ others through their company.

Perhaps that is where the problem lies: From the Social Democrats' side, one always wants politics to step in and poke into the business sector - to manage and dictate the terms. It is clear that from the member's and the Social Democrats' side, it is then considered problematic that men choose to run companies. Yet, there are industries where a majority of those who run companies are women, not least within the cleaning industry and in other types of service occupations.

For my part and for the Sweden Democrats, there is nothing wrong or strange about there being more men running companies within the plumbing industry and more women running companies within, for example, the cleaning industry. It does not have to be a problem.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden finds itself in an extremely exceptional situation. We have high inflation which has led to high food prices and volatile electricity prices that create uncertainty for Swedish households. Ten years of real wage increases are blown away, and we see rising unemployment.

At the same time, we see that the number of billionaires is increasing in Sweden and that the banks are making incredible profits. Many speak of a Svantesson effect, and it is beginning to become clear what the Svantesson effect means: that ordinary people are becoming poorer and that the banks are becoming richer. It is an unfair Sweden that is emerging.

What our committee handles in the state budget is that which is directly or indirectly job-creating. During the two past parliamentary terms, we have seen an expansive green industry emerge in Sweden since the state and the business sector decided that Sweden should become a winner in the climate transition.

Together we started cooperation programs, invested in incubators that supported highly innovative companies, ensured that Swedish projects were considered to be of common European interest, expanded electricity production and were leaders in climate negotiations in the EU and in the development of the Paris Agreement. We also ensured that thousands of jobs were created in several parts of our country and that towns that had previously been neglected are now, to the highest degree, vibrant.

If there is anything that instills hope in me, but also in society, it is precisely the green transition and the increased prosperity that we know can come as an effect of it. When we, as a small nation, decide on something and do it together, we can achieve great feats.

There are several good examples of Sweden's ability to gear up through cooperation and create prosperity for the Swedish population. One such example we see in Dalarna, where the incubator program at Dalarna Science Park has ensured that the companies that have participated in their incubator now turn over over 1 billion kronor. We can also look at the national incubator program - those who have participated in excellence incubators today employ over 20,000 people in Sweden and turn over around 30 billion kronor. In northern Sweden, we see how battery factories and fossil-free steel create an incredible faith in the future by competing with high-quality Swedish products and ensuring that Sweden's competitiveness is strengthened.

It is obvious that Sweden has been at the forefront and needs to continue to develop in a green direction. But, Madam Speaker, Sweden must not go in the green direction that has been pointed out at the expense of those who work in the factories. Two people have died at a battery factory in Västerbotten. Two workers went to work and never came home again. When industrialization took off in Sweden over a hundred years ago, workplace accidents leading to deaths were common. That must not happen in the green industrial revolution.

What has happened is appalling. The green transition cannot only focus on economic growth for companies but must also focus on security for ordinary people and for those who work in the green industries. Workers must be safe at their workplaces. No one should have to wave goodbye to their family in the morning and never come home again because they went to work. It has become apparent that the unions will play a decisive role in the climate transition. It has also become apparent that the role of safety representatives needs to be strengthened.

Madam Speaker! Now we have a government that is not investing in the green transition at all, but rather is leaving the industry and the highly innovative companies behind. Collaboration programs have been abolished. Strategies have been removed. Agencies have been given fewer assignments to work on these issues. These are cuts that directly affect, above all, the highly innovative companies and companies within the green transition.

I believe that the government basis's commitment to these issues is most clearly exemplified in the cuts we are now seeing at the Agency for Innovation Systems, Vinnova. This is an agency that has, to the highest degree, played and continues to play a decisive role for Sweden to manage the climate transition.

Here, the Social Democrats have higher ambitions. The climate transition is important. It is through it that we can see Sweden's competitiveness strengthened. We are an export-dependent country - trade with the rest of the world is crucial if we are to succeed in increasing our prosperity.

Initiatives from the state to promote exports were needed not only to increase exports but also to strengthen the image of Sweden. Exports must be free, sustainable and fair. This creates not only a competitive Sweden but also a better world that takes into account the environment and climate, workers' rights and democratic values.

It is precisely this that is the image of Sweden. It is this that makes us competitive. We are known for high-quality goods that are sustainable and for the fact that forced labor or child labor does not occur in one of the world's strongest democracies.

It is in the wake of such a view of Sweden that we have continued to invest in innovation and research and wanted to strengthen the role of the ombudsmen and constantly develop democracy.

Madam Speaker! I believe that Sweden is a land of opportunity. Everywhere I see opportunities. I see opportunities in the north with green steel and large-scale electricity production. I see opportunities in the west with new battery factories. I see opportunities in southern Sweden with small and medium-sized enterprises that contribute to the climate transition. I see opportunities in Stockholm with numerous highly innovative companies that will ensure that we accelerate the green transition.

I see jobs emerging, and it all ultimately comes down to the jobs. We have a fantastic country that is worth investing in, living in, and visiting. We need to strengthen the image of Sweden, Madam Speaker, and invest our way out of the many crises we face. We need to invest in innovation and ensure that Sweden is a country that many want to visit and invest in.

It is the goal, Madam Speaker. We shall not only manage to get through the crisis, but we shall emerge from it strengthened. But then we must invest in Sweden, and I can only state that this government is not doing so. It is deeply regrettable and will harm Sweden in the long term.

We know that Sweden can do better. Therefore, we need a Social Democratic government again. For that reason, Madam Speaker, I move for the approval of the Social Democrats' reservations 1 and 2.

(Applause)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro for the speech.

I thought of something that is under point 3 in the special statement from the Social Democrats. There, it is written that they want to emphasize the importance of Sweden having a robust electricity supply system that creates competitive advantages for companies.

It was precisely the robust power supply system that I chose to focus on, Madam Speaker. I find it somewhat difficult when I look back and reflect on what the Social Democrats have done in recent years to strengthen the robustness of our power system. In the Swedish National Audit Office's review report on previous energy policy, it is quite clear that the governments have not understood what political decisions they have made or what consequences these would have. They have also not carried out proper impact assessments. Not least, they point out the electricity tax that ensured that four of the nuclear reactors we had were decommissioned. They also highlight the punitive taxes that have existed on combined heat and power and district heating, the waste incineration tax, and so on.

These are factors that have contributed to us having less robustness in our electricity system, so what does the Social Democrats mean by what they have done in this area? Or have you, in your specific statement, introduced a new ambition, Madam Speaker, that you would like to see a more robust electricity system in the future – despite the decisions the Social Democrats have made previously? What measures do you then want to take?

From the Sverigedemokraterna's side, we see it as obvious that base power from nuclear power will be what generates robustness to the electricity system, but gas turbines and other things could also contribute.

What has the Social Democrats done for the robustness of the electricity system, and what does one want to do moving forward if given the chance again?

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Tobias Andersson for the question.

I do not perceive that the member, with his question, is seeking answers as to what the Social Democrats think regarding electricity production or the electricity system. I perceive that there is a suspicion regarding what the Social Democrats actually think about nuclear power. If this is unclear, I must ask the member to go back to the Social Democrats' reservation, which I assume Tobias Andersson was in the chamber and voted on, and read what the Social Democrats think about nuclear power.

We have no problem with planning for new reactors or that they are later constructed in places where there is nuclear power today. We are therefore in favor of removing the provision regarding ten reactors that exists in the Environmental Code, and Tobias Andersson knows that.

Sweden is today a net exporter of electricity. I do not believe we would have been that if we had not increased our electricity production during the past eight years.

We agree that Sweden needs a more robust electricity system. That is why the Social Democrats want an energy agreement, primarily with the government parties. If we are to have a robust electricity system and increase electricity production in our country, we need to have long-term rules of the game so that the investments end up in Sweden.

The absolute most important thing for the electricity system, Tobias Andersson, is however cheap electricity. The most important thing is that we can ensure that we continue to be competitive with low electricity prices through a good energy mix that delivers cheap electricity when it is needed and where it is needed. That is how we attract investments to Sweden.

I cannot quite understand why a certain type of electricity production would be better than another. What I care about - and what the Social Democrats care about - is cheap electricity. We need a robust electricity system that is capable of delivering the power that is needed.

What is the Sweden Democrats' answer to Swedish households and investors who want to see cheap electricity here and now? Is it that they should wait 15 years for new nuclear power? What is the Sweden Democrats' plan for 2030?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is actually not as simple as that cheap electricity is the only thing that matters, or that all electricity production is equally important for the electricity system, or, as the member said, that cheap electricity is the most important for the electricity system. That is not necessarily the case. Purely hypothetically - in some scenarios - that which is more expensive can actually be what guarantees that the system holds together.

The electricity system we have today, which the Social Democrats in particular have created, is a system where one rewards those types of power that drain our electricity system. These types of power also do not take the cost they generate for others. Hydroelectric power constantly needs to regulate the weather-dependent types of power that the Social Democrats have subsidized into our energy mix but receives no compensation for it. At the same time as wind power has been given priority on the grid, reduced property tax, electricity certificates and so on, the Social Democrats have chosen to penalize those types of power—that electricity production—which actually guarantee that the system functions.

Madam Speaker! That is why I believe that one should turn away from the thesis that all cheap electricity is good. It is only good when it can be delivered, and it can only be delivered when it can be regulated and when there is a base load that enables the connection of the same. That is where the Sweden Democrats want to go. We want to move away from the idea that the only thing that matters is the exact öre per kilowatt, if it is designed as it is currently. We have, in fact, a rigged system. The Social Democrats have chosen to treat different types of power in completely different ways and with different conditions without taking the electricity system into account.

Madam Speaker! It was against that background that I fixated on the fact that the Social Democrats write that they believe in a robust electricity supply system. At the same time, while in government, they have taken measure after measure to destroy the electricity system that was once robust and which this government intends to make robust again.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! If I understand correctly, Tobias Andersson is therefore upset that the Social Democrats want to see a robust electricity system. I think we have a fairly reasonable position for a political party that claims to have the power to govern Sweden.

I still believe, however, that we need to conduct a dialogue across party lines if we are to build a robust electricity system. Time and again, we have told the government parties that we stand here with open arms and that we seek dialogue because we want to create the long-term perspective that is needed in Sweden.

But now there is no dialogue. And it seems that the government's only solution to electricity crises is new nuclear power.

I received no answer, and I know that one should not ask questions when the member does not have the opportunity to answer. I can only state that the Sweden Democrats and the government have no answer as to what they want to do for Swedish electricity production and the Swedish electricity system by 2030.

It turns out that new nuclear power will probably become very expensive and take an incredibly long time to establish. We can produce other types of electricity until investments for new nuclear power are secured. There are other types of energy that can be invested in and for which conditions can be created for investment. I believe the one-sided focus on one type of energy is harmful for Sweden.

If the energy agreement from 2016 had remained in place, I believe we would have been well on our way toward new reactors in Sweden today. But instead of producing electricity, the current government chose to politicize and polarize electricity. It is a strange strategy if one wants to ensure an increase in electricity production in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! I can state that the government base has no plan for 2030, and there is no plan from the Sweden Democrats or Tobias Andersson regarding a proper and robust electricity system.

(Applause)

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! In an article in Expressen this week, some of Sweden's most successful entrepreneurs were described as lucky. It is a description that makes me think of Ingemar Stenmark's quote: The more I train, the luckier I get.

It is clear that luck and misfortune are a parameter in everyday life for all of us. But it is hard-working entrepreneurs, not lucky lottery winners, who carry forward Sweden's prosperity. Sweden is an entrepreneurial country. Innovation, perseverance, and entrepreneurs' courage when it comes to taking risks and daring to invest in an idea, in a dream, has driven the development that has benefited us all.

Strengthening Swedish growth and competitiveness is about strengthening entrepreneurship. It is a task that the Moderaterna are passionate about. It needs to become easier, safer, and more profitable to be an entrepreneur in our country. That is what we work for.

In these times, that work has been a particularly broad brushstroke. Swedish entrepreneurship is challenged by a number of factors that are currently creating a tough situation. It is the inflation, the lack of secure and reasonably priced electricity, a criminality that haunts both the small entrepreneur and the large corporations, and on top of that, an unreasonably heavy bureaucratic burden. A troublesome large part of the entrepreneurs' challenges is, in other words, created by political failures and misjudgments and therefore needs to be addressed with wiser political solutions.

Madam Speaker! There we stand now, with our sleeves rolled up, working to extinguish the inflation fire as quickly as possible and stabilize the economy, stifle the crime that has been allowed to run rampant under eight years of Social Democratic passivity, rebuild our fossil-free, secure energy system, and ensure that we distribute and consume the power we already have in the best possible way.

I add that a number of reforms are taking place, for example to reduce dependency on subsidies and get more people into jobs, strengthen the countryside by reforming the shore protection and introducing farm sales, abolish meaningless rules such as permit requirements and so on. These are measures that make Sweden both better and freer and actually a bit more fun.

In addition to the work being done to return Sweden to the normal state we once had, we look forward. Then, the honors for the government's and the Tidö parties' cooperation are: stronger and simpler. Sweden shall become stronger by us now taking measures to strengthen Swedish growth and competitiveness. And it shall become simpler by an important part of the work being to make it easier to be an entrepreneur in our country.

Companies' costs have increased over time. Tillväxtverket estimated companies' total regulatory costs during 2021 at nearly 380 billion kronor. It is a problematic development, to put it mildly. To speak plainly, it is somewhat of a stumbling block for Swedish competitiveness.

To break the trend and reduce costs, the government is driving an offensive simplification agenda. It is a broad effort which means that the country's authorities receive a clearer mandate to reduce regulatory burden and unnecessary bureaucracy. The government and the coalition partners appoint two councils: the Simplification Council and the Implementation Council. The Simplification Council shall work with simplifications in already existing legislation, and the Implementation Council shall ensure that Sweden does not over-implement EU directives. They shall instead be introduced in a way that, to the greatest extent possible, promotes our Swedish business sector.

The permit processes that often act as a bottleneck for both business operations and the green transition are being reviewed with the explicit goal that they should be simplified and shortened so that the assessment shall be more flexible, efficient, and predictable. These are, therefore, broad measures to simplify things for the entrepreneurs.

Apart from that, a similarly broad scope shall be taken to also strengthen our business sector. The Government is developing a number of strategies to achieve greater efficiency in the business-promoting work. Three strategies concern Swedish industry, and one strategy concerns foreign trade and competitiveness.

The industrial strategies aim to strengthen Sweden's position as a world leader when it comes to innovative and sustainable production. Particular focus is placed on the new industrialization in the north and the societal transformation occurring in connection with it, but also on securing domestic metal production and strengthening the Swedish mining industry and preserving our country's natural resources in a wise and sustainable way.

Madam Speaker! As a resident of Södermanland, I know the importance of an industry that stands strong. We have many good examples of this in my home county. There, both the manufacturing and steel industries, as well as food production and forestry, do not only create jobs that finance our welfare; they also contribute to development and innovation. The same applies, of course, to all our small business owners who also contribute to building Södermanland and Sweden strong.

That is why I am particularly pleased with the strategy for foreign trade, investments, and competitiveness that has been developed under the leadership of Minister for Foreign Trade Johan Forssell. For a trading nation like Sweden, the interaction with the rest of the world is just as important as our national work. Our government is taking a completely new approach here to the opportunities to strengthen our companies also in the international context. The previous export strategy has been developed to also handle imports and investments with the clear goal of strengthening Swedish growth and competitiveness. For the first time, small and medium-sized enterprises are also brought into the context, and that is very important and welcome.

An important part of the international work is also to synchronize aid and trade. Controls and requirements are tightened for aid. But we also strengthen Swedish companies' opportunities to be involved in humanitarian efforts and reconstruction in crisis- and war-stricken countries such as, for example, Ukraine.

Madam Speaker! Let me state the following in that context. Entrepreneurship is boundless. Entrepreneurship is something that one understands, knows the value of, and can unite around in all countries. Therefore, entrepreneurship is about so much more than just doing business.

It is also about connecting people and countries and creating societies that hang together. It is the companies' innovation that makes our everyday lives better and solves the challenges of the future.

Entrepreneurship is hope. With a blue policy for free entrepreneurship, growth, and strengthened competitiveness, the future is bright. I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

In this speech, Ann-Charlotte Hammar Johnsson (M) agreed.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Anna af Sillén, for the speech!

Sweden has historically had a fairly strong competitiveness. This has enabled us to increase our prosperity by having innovative products and being a highly innovative country that contributes to the solutions and products of the future.

I heard Anna af Sillén say in her speech that Sweden is returning to a normal state. We are talking about innovative sustainable production. One becomes a bit thoughtful when reading the government's budget and seeing the cuts that are proposed for Vinnova.

I wonder if the member has read Vinnova's impact assessment of what it will mean for precisely the high-innovation companies when cuts amounting to around half a billion kronor are made by 2026.

Has the member taken into account the business community's criticism regarding precisely these cuts and what they will mean for the regional presence and the development of high-innovation companies? They shall, to quote Anna af Sillén, ensure that we have innovative sustainable production in Sweden.

It is important questions that I would like to have answers to, Madam Speaker.

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro, for the question!

The Social Democrats' focus on innovation pleases me. I have taken part of the analyses of the government's proposals regarding Vinnova. But above all, I have taken part of the government's proposals on research and innovation in their entirety. It is not something that is driven by Vinnova alone. What we can state is that in the government's budget there are increased appropriations to the Swedish Research Council, increased investments in Industriklivet and of course continued appropriations to Vinnova.

Innovation is driven by companies. Research and innovation come from free labor. Therefore, the government's work to make it easier to run companies and tear down barriers to growth is also an incredibly important part when it comes to promoting innovation in Sweden.

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

Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)

Madam Speaker! I can only state that what the authority establishes is something that the government base doesn't really care much about. That the business community is quite clearly alarming about the situation for precisely those highly innovative companies is also not something that the government base believes in.

The government base knows better than the business community and the Agency for Innovation Systems. It seems quite convinced that one will continue to be able to invest in innovation in Sweden. In that case, I can take the opportunity to ask: Will there be an innovation strategy?

Will we get a plan and a direction for what the Swedish government wants with that which makes us so competitive, strengthens our prosperity and makes us a highly innovative country?

Madam Speaker! I and many of my colleagues have asked State Secretary Ebba Busch about this. But I may perhaps get a clearer answer from Anna af Sillén, who nevertheless seems to be very convinced that the government's investments in innovation are sufficient, even though no one else is.

Madam Speaker! I am a little worried about what this does to the image of Sweden. It is not the case that the image of Sweden is as it was about a year and a half ago. Now people speak of a Sweden that withdraws from the work we need to do to curb the climate crisis and a Sweden that increases emissions. At the same time, we are making things more difficult for the companies that are crucial for us to achieve the green transition.

It is through innovations that we will ensure we remain at the forefront, strengthen Sweden's image, and be part of the solution to the climate crisis we find ourselves in. It is a matter of ensuring that Sweden does not just get through all the crises we see without us emerging stronger from them and seeing more jobs created.

Madam Speaker! My questions are: Is the government base of a different opinion than almost the entire business community? Does the government have a plan, and will an innovation strategy be presented?

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! To take stock of the Social Democrats' business policy over the last nine years is a bit like sitting at the kitchen table and watching your youngest child handle the ketchup bottle. First, nothing comes out, then nothing comes out, and then everything comes out. In this case, it is about someone else delivering everything.

The Social Democrats have had eight years to strengthen Swedish innovation, strengthen Swedish entrepreneurship, and strengthen Swedish growth and competitiveness, Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro. During those eight years, we have sailed down to the bottom of the European league when it comes to growth. Naturally, that also affects our capacity for innovation.

I can of course answer everything here. But the feeling is a bit that the member himself has decided what he wants to hear. Let me still help Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro a little bit.

Something that the business community has shouted themselves blue over in recent years is more reasonable conditions for running their business. It should be easier to be an entrepreneur in Sweden. It is about an unreasonable bureaucratic burden being reduced and that permit processes should be reasonable and anchored in a legally secure and efficient process.

What we see now from the Social Democratic side is zero and nothing when it comes to that work. We are presenting a proposal for a simplification council and an implementation council. The Government, together with the coalition partner Sverigedemokraterna, has high ambitions and a consensus on making it easier to be an entrepreneur in Sweden. In that dialogue, the Social Democrats remain silent and are the ones who owe an answer, and it is a pity.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Anna af Sillén mentions that we must remove obstacles to growth. When Miljöpartiet sat together with Socialdemokraterna in the government, we saw a strong economic development in Sweden, while at the same time we managed the corona pandemic, among other things.

What the business community is now demanding so that we can continue to have a strong development and strengthen Swedish competitiveness is competence supply, electricity in the near term, and faster permit processes.

When we were in government, we commissioned inquiries specifically to speed up the permit processes. There are completed inquiries on the government's table that the Moderate-led government has chosen not to proceed with.

Instead, a new investigation has been appointed. The process is being delayed instead of quickly starting to work on delivering measures that enable the companies' investments and significant development potential.

When it comes to the supply of skills, we have a labor shortage in parts of the country today. Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner show in a report that welfare alone needs 50 percent of the incoming labor force, and the business sector needs 70 percent. Already there, we are over 100 percent.

But instead, the government chooses to significantly complicate recruitment from third countries, and at the same time, they are reducing support for housing construction. A central part of ensuring that people move to where the jobs are is that there are also houses available. This is being hindered by the current government.

Instead of investing in electricity in the near term, in enabling grid connections for offshore wind power, and in creating incentives for municipalities to build electricity production, one is making it more difficult for the electricity production that could be delivered in the near term.

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Elin Söderberg, for the questions and for allowing us to hear your reasoning, which I, not entirely surprisingly, do not share!

Miljöpartiet has in the highest degree been at the helm of the social democratic ketchup strategy that has put Sweden in the situation we now find ourselves in and which requires extensive measures to be steered back up.

It is interesting to hear the Green Party's reasoning regarding the drivers for work. In the Green Party's budget, the tax on work is raised while you simultaneously increase the benefits. The Government Offices estimate that the Green Party's budget would lead to a decrease in employment by a corresponding 100,000 full-time jobs.

For a Sweden that works, for a Swedish business sector that can get help to address the competence supply which is a major problem today, it is therefore not Miljöpartiet that is the political answer.

On the contrary, this government's policy was needed for a clear work line, where a cap is placed on benefits and people are helped and guided toward a working life and in that way create greater revenues for the welfare that we, quite frankly, all are very dependent on.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! We find ourselves in a difficult economic situation right now, not least as a result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. We have inflation and high food prices.

For us in Miljöpartiet, it is obvious that the whole country should live and that everyone should have an economic basic security. One should also feel secure throughout the entire green transition that we want to drive. We see that those who have the absolute smallest economic margins should also be protected through this tough economic situation for households.

The Moderates stand here and say that it is bad that the Green Party wants to protect households with the smallest economic margins. At the same time, one uses the same argument, namely to protect households, when one lowers the petrol tax, phases in more fossil fuels in the fuels, and in other ways makes the Swedish population more dependent on oil nations and more exposed to volatile oil prices. It does not add up.

What we are talking about now is the development of the business sector. Anna af Sillén mentions in her speech an unreasonable bureaucratic burden and obstacles to growth. But the areas that the business sector most clearly points out as obstacles to growth today are skills supply, electricity in the short term, and permit processes. In those areas, the Moderate-led government is not delivering, and I think that is highly noteworthy.

Sweden now has a fantastic potential for strengthened competitiveness and strong social development throughout the country through the green transition and through the powerful momentum that exists in the Swedish business sector. It is a potential that I think it should be obvious for the Moderates to take advantage of. But the Moderates are not taking advantage of this opportunity. Instead, they are throwing grit into the machinery and making things difficult for the Swedish business sector.

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! If there is a phrase that sends a bit of a chill down the spines of entrepreneurs, it is when Miljöpartiet says that the whole country shall live. For the mental gymnastics that Elin Söderberg demonstrates here tonight, I am not quite following, if I am to be completely honest.

One thing we agree on, Elin Söderberg, and that is your conclusion: It does not add up. That is the problem with the Green Party's policy. I always tend to think that we all stand in this chamber and have this mandate of trust because we all want what is best for Sweden. But the Green Party's policy has proven to be directly harmful.

We have a fantastic entrepreneurship and a fantastic industry that is the engine of the green transition, and it is so despite the policy that Miljöpartiet and Socialdemokraterna have pursued over the last eight years.

Now there will be a difference. Now this government and these coalition partners will clearly point out a direction where we strengthen Swedish growth, where we simplify for companies, and where we recreate the energy system that Miljöpartiet has systematically worked to dismantle. In that way, by creating clarity, good conditions, and security for Swedish business, we strengthen Swedish competitiveness and growth.

Then we will also be able to increase the pace when it comes to the work for the green transition and when it comes to working against climate change and reaching the goals we have set for this.

(Applause)

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! There are many things that do not hold together in the budget we are debating today.

One thing I reacted to was when the member mentioned trade and aid. I know that the government has presented proposals where it argues that one can use trade as part of the aid and so on. But I cannot say that I have seen the government working for the perfect balance, and somewhere one must have much clearer rules within trade policy in order to be able to achieve the part of the aid that is being talked about.

Sweden has now voted for the UN resolution on a ceasefire in Palestine. I wonder which trade tools the government intends to use to achieve a ceasefire.

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! I would then like to begin with a reading tip, namely the government's recently published strategy for export, import, and competitiveness, which I also mentioned in my speech.

The starting point for Moderate aid policy is the belief in human ability and the will to build one's own future and one's own life, to be able to take care of one's family and so on. Therefore, it is completely self-evident for us to link trade with aid.

I believe it is also a genuinely long-awaited move among Swedish companies, which will gain expanded business opportunities abroad. In that way, we strengthen our growth even when we work on aid issues. It is, therefore, a win-win situation.

When it comes to trade issues and the use of trade measures for various political purposes linked to conflicts, it is naturally something that requires preparation in a special manner, and I refer these issues with a warm hand to my colleagues in the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! I can state that the Moderaterna do not know if there is even a discussion at all about which trade tools should be used to achieve what was actually voted for in the UN resolution - a ceasefire in Palestine.

I can give some tips. We have an association agreement with Israel that can be terminated. One can also terminate collaborations with Israel. We have, for example, Vinnova, which was discussed just now, which has research collaborations with Israel. We have proposed that these research collaborations should be suspended until Palestine has been freed from the occupying power.

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

Anna af Sillén (M)

Madam Speaker! I was strictly disciplined in the Nyköping municipal council by a chairman who was particularly careful that one stuck to the subject of the issue that was actually to be debated. I have understood that it is not as strict in the Riksdag. I can think that is very positive. I do, however, draw the line here at discussing current conflicts abroad in a debate on our business policy. I am sure that Madam Speaker has an understanding of that.

Let me use my remaining speaking time to emphasize some parts that I think are important to understand, since I have the privilege of having an exchange with Vänsterpartiet and Lorena Delgado Varas. We can observe that Vänsterpartiet presents a budget with an extreme focus on subsidies and increased taxes. In addition to bank tax and property tax, you also want to reintroduce wealth tax and abolish the rut and rot deductions.

This is a budget that would be devastating for Swedish growth and Swedish competitiveness. It is with pleasure that I observe, when I place the two current government alternatives in Sweden side by side, that there is a reassuring consensus within the Tidö cooperation regarding strengthening Swedish competitiveness, making it easier for companies, and in the long term and sustainably strengthening Swedish growth. It is a cooperation that will benefit Sweden Inc.

It remains for the left side to work on the unity that until now has completely been marked by its absence.

(Applause)

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! We are debating business today, a rather broad issue. It is also not an area that is free and independent, but an area that is one of many threads that shape the fabric that constitutes our society.

Unfortunately, a budget is presented that will not be able to bind our fabric together. There are large gaps, and these will of course affect the whole. The business community is dependent on us having a functioning society - that people have access to care, that those who are ill can stay home and not risk others becoming ill, that we can address overcrowding so that one can go to work or start the day in the small business without worry, that the basics are available, that we can support each other in all of this and that we can reprioritize, that is, meet unemployment with solid investments to meet the climate crisis.

The cuts we are now seeing in municipalities and regions will affect entrepreneurs in a thousand different ways. It is actually us, all of us, who make it possible for companies to exist, either as workers or as entrepreneurs. For example, there are many young people who do not reach upper secondary school eligibility. These young people must be given the opportunity to find a way forward. We as a society and the companies are dependent on their future competence.

Economic security reduces crime, something that affects our societal development. It also makes entrepreneurs feel willing and secure in investing. The companies that are going to apply for permits will probably meet authorities that will be fully occupied with keeping themselves afloat and perhaps not have the staffing required to meet and facilitate administration.

Since then, we have a series of investments that must be made, public investments that stimulate the economy and create jobs. Investments in power grids, rail connections, and housing construction must be made. These will also benefit companies and are essential for them to be able to develop and innovate, not least in the work of the climate transition.

We from Vänsterpartiet have a budget that invests in reducing the enormous gaps that exist in Sweden today. Our budget also aims to strengthen the welfare and transition society to a greener society.

We have in our budget two important general parts that I particularly want to highlight.

One is our climate and environmental policy, which is based on the premise that society needs to transition in a comprehensive, urgent, and structured manner to achieve the climate goals. Therefore, we have proposed a comprehensive investment package for the climate. Through investments of 700 billion kronor, we want to ensure that the climate transition is accelerated over the next ten years. This is needed to accelerate the necessary transition and to create more jobs.

The second part I choose to highlight is that we want to introduce a tax reform that will create a fair tax system that can contribute to a long-term and stable financing of the welfare system. The most prioritized area to address is the eroded capital taxation and the extremely uneven distribution of wealth in Sweden.

Housing shortages, poorly maintained power grids that do not meet the demand, a lack of expansion of rail traffic, insufficient accessibility to public transport, the depletion of rural areas and suburbs, a people who cannot afford to live a dignified life, and a segregating school system do not contribute to providing a good foundation for cultivating innovative sustainable companies. Our policy provides solutions to this.

We must rethink the question of how companies should be run, what the production should look like, and how we should actually support our small businesses. It is not reasonable that large companies make such enormous profits by exploiting smaller companies or that basic companies, such as those in the food sector, earn astronomical figures on food prices without reason and force families with children to opt out of food while enormous dividends are being paid out.

Nor neither should our business community rest on workers risking their lives, something we have unfortunately seen evidence of, not least in recent weeks. It is a figure that increases year after year.

We must reduce transport and create more sustainable production chains. We can do this by giving companies the opportunity to take more steps in their processing towards the final product. This would provide great development opportunities, especially for the small and medium-sized industries which today are those that generate the most jobs. They would have a reason to further train or hire new employees to expand their production chain. It would also provide climate gains if some of the transports that occur between companies and processes could be eliminated. The processing steps could also become greener.

All these climate investments require coordination, a focus. Therefore, we from Vänsterpartiet propose that a climate investment authority be established. The authority would need to begin its work immediately to effectively fulfill the purpose of planning for a full-scale climate investment plan. To anchor the authority politically, we propose a transition minister – a government minister who is responsible for the political steering of the climate investments, quite simply.

An area that I am deeply concerned about is our innovation strength. A series of deteriorations are occurring in several areas, which will have very negative consequences for innovation. This includes, among other things, cuts within higher education. There, we have already seen what we have warned about previously.

Now, for example, KTH is closing down in both Kista and Södertälje. However, one lab in Kista is being retained. This means that more students must share the spaces that remain. One loses an important anchoring in the IT sector, while at the same time KTH Kista's important Electrum laboratory becomes isolated and loses the pedagogical proximity – not to mention what it means for Järva and Södertälje to lose the proximity to higher education.

But it is not enough that there are cuts within higher education or that there are no proper investment plans for the future, one is also cutting back on the agencies that work closely with the companies that drive innovation. For the innovation agency Vinnova, the budget is being cut while other countries choose to invest in innovation.

Vinnova finances, for example, the national incubator program. It attracts capital. The number of employees and the turnover in the companies that are in incubation have increased compared to the market. The program has had the same budget since 2016, but now they face a reduction in addition to the general savings they must make. This is not investing in Swedish innovation. In the Left Party's budget, we choose to reject the reduction and instead include a higher budget, because we believe that Vinnova needs to work more with sustainable building materials to meet the future.

In the report Innovation-critical metals and minerals - a research overview, it is noted that there is insufficient bedrock geological and ore genetic research in Sweden regarding innovation-critical metals and minerals, which is something we really need. A knowledge base needs to be built in this, and therefore Vänsterpartiet has increased the budget so that SGU can, among other things, be able to map the occurrence of innovation-critical metals.

Another important part of the point Business is trade policy - something another member meant was not the case, but I want to speak about it here. Difficult times remind us of how vulnerable we are in the global world. A large part of our raw materials and products are imported from other continents. In that respect, we also need to look beyond our borders and realize what impact we have on other countries' development. We can contribute to improving development both here and there.

Trade policy is intended to be a tool that builds bridges and opens up countries - so nicely it is often described by many political parties. But the truth is that we have conducted trade for decades with certain dictatorships without any changes having occurred. Furthermore, there are transnational companies that do not take responsibility and who contribute to the persecution of and murder of local environmental and indigenous activists.

We need to redo our trade agreements and really demand change when we open up for trade with dictatorships and pseudodemocracies. We must also take more responsibility for production along the entire chain for the products we so gladly want to consume here in Sweden.

The climate crisis and also other global crises will not be solved by us remaining stagnant here. We must see the whole picture. This should be brought up more often, but most often there is no will to present the concrete proposals. When they are presented, they are unfortunately watered down.

The power of large corporations, we see for example in the exploitation of children in Madagascar's mines that supply the electric cars we need for the transition. These companies can even influence how much critical journalism is exposed in social media, and what is worse, we actually use the minerals that have been extracted through the exploitation of children's bodies. More countries can be mentioned: Congo-Kinshasa is one example. To maintain the system, we have considered it more important to secure the supply than to secure the children. This must change.

The government has also reduced international aid and intended for it to be more linked to our trade policy. But for it to become a reality, one should set higher requirements on, for example, the trade agreements and how we introduce sanctions when needed.

During the war in Ukraine, we have consistently used the tool of sanctions within trade, for example with gas and oil, in order not to contribute to the Russian state treasury. The hope has been to minimize civilian suffering and that the war should come to an end. Unfortunately, we as a country have not been consistent in how we have used the trade tools.

The State of Israel has murdered over 18,000 Palestinians, and probably over 10,000 of them are children. Before any of the Members of Parliament who have not said anything about the suffering of the Palestinian people jump in and ask about Hamas, I can say: Yes, Hamas committed a terrorist act on October 7, and of course, we must also highlight the suffering among the civilians who were murdered and kidnapped then.

Sweden recently voted on the UN resolution on a ceasefire, and now Sweden must act. It simply means using the tools that exist to get the Israeli state to stop the genocide. I am thinking of some of the pressures that the Vänsterpartiet has repeatedly highlighted following Israel's occupation of Palestine. It is about breaking the association agreement with Israel, introducing sanctions, and stopping collaborations of the type I mentioned earlier, for example, the one Vinnova has with the state of Israel.

In the first instance, we must achieve a ceasefire to save lives. We must support the International Criminal Court's investigation and provide more aid to Palestine. After that, we must demand that the occupation ends and that the settlers are disarmed and leave the illegal settlements. Only then can we achieve peace.

I move for approval of reservation 3, where Vänsterpartiet highlights that we want people, social justice, animals, the environment and climate to take precedence over the profits that large corporations can make.

(ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN: I would like to inform the member that the speaking time was exceeded by nearly 100 percent.)

I also want to remind that what we are debating today is expenditure area 24 Business.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thought that when everything other than what we are to debate is still being debated, perhaps one should still enter the debate for the sake of the debate - not least because Lorena Delgado Varas complained that I and other members from the committee who have participated in the debate so far have not, during any part of our speaking time, chosen to highlight that the Israeli state murders thousands of Palestinians, as Lorena Delgado Varas said. If one is expected to highlight all conflicts occurring around the world in every speech, perhaps it will become unsustainable to debate in this chamber.

Lorena Delgado Varas focused a lot on innovations, the importance of Swedish innovative power and so on. Is there any country in the world that is good at innovations, other than Sweden, I mean, it is Israel. We have much to learn from Israel in terms of innovation. We have many Swedish high-tech companies operating in the Israeli market and Israeli companies operating in the Swedish market. We see a great potential for deepened cooperation, partly between the Swedish state and the Israeli state, and partly between Swedish companies and Israeli companies, not least regarding technology exchange in view of the great challenges that lie ahead for us.

I think it is important to emphasize what conditions exist for Sweden to strengthen our innovative power by joining our clever brains with like-minded people around the world, for example Israel, which is also very skilled in this area. I would like to hear if Lorena Delgado Varas also thinks it is important with Swedish innovative power and how we can cooperate with Israel in that area.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! As long as Israel conducts an occupation, I mean that we cannot have such a cooperation, which I know, however, that Member Tobias Andersson appreciates very much. The innovation that Israel conducts occurs with the help of a trade agreement that is very generous towards Israel and a support from, among others, the USA which is also very generous. Agriculture is conducted in illegal settlements, and they have an apartheid system.

Then my question to the member is: How far is the member willing to go to cooperate with a government that repeatedly violates human rights and is now even committing genocide? Last time we spoke about Israel was during the covid times, and then the member thought, among other things, that it was completely okay that Israel denied the Palestinian population medicine.

(ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN: I want to remind again that it is expenditure area 24 Business that we are debating.)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I think it is important that this is emphasized, because what I am trying to highlight are the conditions that exist within, not least, Swedish trade policy to strengthen relations with the Israeli state and market. To the question of what I believe Sweden should do in this area, I answer that I think Sweden can do more to deepen its relations with Israel. From a Sverigedemokratiskt standpoint, we have, not least, wanted to see a relocation of the Swedish embassy to emphasize where in the Middle East we believe it should be located.

But if it is the case that Lorena Delgado Varas on one hand thinks that innovation is important but on the other hand does not think that one should cooperate with Israel in terms of innovation, I would like to see Lorena Delgado Varas highlight other successful countries in the region where Israel is located that are good at innovation. Can we get some good examples of states in the region that rank high in terms of innovation power? Can we get some examples of successful patents or other things from other parts of the region? Can Lorena Delgado Varas list a couple of good companies that are active in the region and that also have an impact on the Swedish market?

For my part, Madam Speaker, there is a knowledge gap regarding which innovations, patents, and successful companies with an impact on the Swedish market exist elsewhere in the region concerned than in Israel specifically.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! I find it interesting that the member, in this specific question, chooses to look only at one region, but when it comes to market issues, looks at the whole world. If a value chain ceases to function in one part of the world, one does not insist on finding another value chain in that direction, but instead seeks somewhere else. There are very many countries in the world that could have an excellent cooperation with Sweden on innovation issues, which are democracies, which do not conduct occupation of another state, which do not conduct genocide, and which do not have an apartheid system that makes a distinction between the inhabitants in that country.

I think it is deplorable that one continues to insist on supporting such a state. One must actually signal to the state of Israel that this is not sustainable. These are issues that we have agreed upon internationally: we shall respect human rights, we shall not commit genocide, and we shall not introduce apartheid systems. It is that simple.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! On behalf of the Christian Democrats, I move for the approval of the proposal in the report Expenditure Area 24 Business.

The Christian Democrats' economic policy rests on the insight that work and welfare for all can only be achieved by individuals, families, companies, and civil society taking responsibility for our common society together. The Christian Democrats stand guard over a vibrant business sector that can create more jobs and increased growth. We know that a majority of the new jobs emerge in small and growing companies.

In addition to employing a number of administrators in the political superstructure, the policy does not create a single job opportunity. It is the business sector that creates opportunities for people to get work. On the other hand, it is one of politics' most important tasks, Madam Speaker, to create conditions for economic growth and thus tax revenues that can be used for the common welfare. Therefore, I am happy and proud as I see how the government handles the challenges that the Swedish companies have and gives them the best possible conditions to grow nationally and compete internationally, not least to seize the business potential that exists, among other things, in the green and digital transition.

Madam Speaker! There has long been a need to reduce a major burden on the vitality and competitiveness of companies by implementing regulatory simplifications, cutting administrative burdens, and enabling entrepreneurs to choose optimal ways of working as well as opt out of what does not create added value. Time efficiency and predictability in permit processes are of great importance for all industries covered by permit requirements. The Government is working purposefully to strengthen the business community's opportunities to be at the forefront of the climate transition. An important part of this is the ongoing work to streamline the permit processes, while Sweden shall continue to have high environmental requirements.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, I am proud that the government has taken a major step to simplify for companies to focus on core activities instead of hindering development in the permit processes and unnecessary outdated regulations. In the budget, the government has now allocated funds to establish two new councils, the Simplification Council and the Implementation Council. We heard the previous member from the Moderaterna tell us what the Simplification Council and the Implementation Council stand for, and I want to clarify that again. The Simplification Council shall simplify in existing legislation. The Implementation Council shall, during the implementation of EU directives, counteract unjustified regulatory burdens.

Madam Speaker! I want to emphasize the industry's central role for Sweden's economy. Creating good conditions and prerequisites to meet the ongoing green and digital structural transformation is important to strengthen Sweden's competitiveness and contribute to more investments. I look forward to the government's upcoming industrial strategy, which will set the framework for how Sweden can continue to be a world leader in innovative and sustainable industrial production of goods and services.

Sweden has the advantage of having a growth of larger international companies that also demand a favorable regulatory framework in order to be able to continue growing and remain in our country. That the small companies get the opportunity to grow and that the larger companies get to continue developing is a prerequisite for our country to also be able to assert itself in the international competition with competence, products, and services in the future.

Madam Speaker! The Government is now taking a new and unified holistic approach to develop Sweden's foreign trade and promote investments. We Christian Democrats are warm supporters of free trade. Trade binds countries and markets together all over the world. The opportunity to export goods and services benefits both companies and consumers as well as the economy of society as a whole.

The strategy for Sweden's foreign trade, exports, and investments has now been developed to strengthen the position of Swedish business, which is of great importance for the economy and society as a whole, especially in light of the global developments of recent years. The strategy is broadened with measures to maintain Sweden's position as a leading innovation country with a competitive investment climate and with continued strong attractiveness.

Madam Speaker! I will also focus on the impact for Sweden's competitiveness. Sweden needs to make large investments in ports, attract competent labor immigration, and have a GDP that delivers. This requires goals and result monitoring. I would like to say that the government has [this], and that is where I feel at home.

I thank you for the floor and move once again for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! Lili André mentioned in her speech that the government is strengthening the business sector's conditions to be at the forefront of the climate transition. I would like to know how. In the Christian Democrats' speech, there were many fine words and fluff, and it sounded as if everyone in the chamber is in agreement. But when it comes to actual action from the government parties, I lack delivery and concrete proposals to specifically strengthen the business sector's conditions to be at the forefront of the climate transition.

The committee member mentions that, at the current stage, fast-track permit processes are needed. But the government has chosen not to proceed with already prepared proposals for faster permit processes. Nor have they provided the authorities working with permit processes the resources the authorities have requested.

Competence supply is also needed. Lili André mentioned in her speech that we should attract labor immigration. But the government has presented proposals that significantly complicate labor immigration and which also make it harder for people who are already here and work in several different industries within several different sectors with several different work tasks to be able to continue working in Sweden and contribute to the development of the business sector.

Since taking office, the government has hindered the supply of skills, worsened housing construction, and hindered labor immigration. They have also hindered new production of electricity in the near term, which the business sector demands, launched an investigation into energy efficiencies when only months remained, and clipped the wings of the incentive investigation regarding the municipalities. What we need to see is that they actually invest in the business sector's conditions to be at the forefront of the climate transition.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Elin Söderberg for her contribution and comments.

The government has a goal for the climate transition, and it is the same goal as Europe, the Paris Agreement, to achieve climate neutrality by 2045. This can be achieved in many different ways. We invest heavily in research and development, and we prioritize the same areas as Europe does to go hand in hand with the important research and development for green transition. It is important to, together with the rest of Europe, invest in the right things to strengthen our position in the world.

Madam Speaker! Elin Söderberg raises the permit processes. Here, the government has put in an enormous amount of work. It is about simplifying and shortening the permit review according to the Environmental Code by making it more flexible, efficient, and predictable. The government is now doing what the previous government should have done so that Sweden can go even further in reaching the climate goals we strive to achieve.

Madam Speaker! So, regarding the supply of skills. Sweden has a great need for high skills. We need to attract researchers, professors, and engineers to our country. Here, the government has not held back.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! I am becoming concerned. The Christian Democrats say that Sweden has a climate goal and that it is the Paris Agreement's and Europe's. But they are not the same.

The Paris Agreement states that global warming should be limited to a maximum of two degrees compared to pre-industrial times, but with the aim of limiting it to 1.5 degrees compared to pre-industrial times. It also clearly states that this should be done in a globally just way because different countries have different conditions. Sweden has some of the best conditions in the world to transition to fossil-free and limit greenhouse gas emissions, and the EU is one of the absolute best regions in the world for this.

The EU's climate goals are different from the international ones in the Paris Agreement. The EU has a long-term vision until 2050, not 2045, and Fit for 55 until 2030, not 2045. In the EU, new climate goals for 2040 will also be negotiated during the upcoming mandate period.

The climate policy we have affects the business sector's development and innovative power, and the government is not pursuing the same climate policy as the EU. The government has, on a number of occasions, opposed the EU's climate work and countered the major reforms to curb climate change and strengthen business development, the pace of innovation, and entrepreneurship in the EU and Sweden. This applies, for example, to the emissions trading and not least the forest. Here, Miljöpartiet sees that we can get new business opportunities in Swedish forestry thanks to the EU's climate policy for the forest, but the government has opposed it.

Just saying a lot of words without delivering content is not enough.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I do not agree with Member Söderberg when she claims that the government does not have goals for climate neutrality. The government is taking strategic actions to also provide Swedish companies with the best possible conditions to take large steps in the green transition.

The government has been in power for a year and has several strategies that will contribute to achieving the climate goals. It is primarily about innovation and research but also about Industriklivet and the new industrialization, which are at the forefront. Together with the business sector, this will contribute to a societal transformation. Especially in Norrbotten and Västerbotten, the business sector, industry, and the green transition are now being strengthened.

Madam Speaker! I see that the government has a strategy forward, and we will decide on various measures.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Madam Speaker! It is concerning that growth in Sweden has been weak since 2007. In the so-called prosperity league, Sweden is now in twelfth place. It is the lowest position ever. Not even during the 90s crisis were we down at such low levels. This year, the EU Commission forecasts that Sweden will have the lowest growth in the EU.

The design of economic policy is of great importance here. How favorable the climate for innovation, investment, and business is is closely linked to how well-functioning our tax system, our labor market, and the public sector are. With the right reforms, we can increase both our productivity and our prosperity.

Today I am focusing on what could make our business climate as favorable as possible and note that Centerpartiet has a specific statement on this expenditure area.

Madam Speaker! The land of entrepreneurs, the industrial nation and the unicorn factory Sweden stands at a crossroads. The high interest rates are hitting all companies.

The high interest rates affect the fast-growing growth companies that cannot find any risk-tolerant capital today – not because their ideas are so much worse now than they were 18 months ago, but because there are not so many investors or business angels who want or can take risks.

The high interest rates also affect the small companies all over Sweden in cities and in the countryside that want to expand because they might be in a niche where it is actually going well right now. They face stone-hard requirements and high interest rates from the banks.

The high interest rates also affect the large companies that have been able to turn to liquid markets around the world for capital at a low cost. They must now rely on their own balance sheet.

It is not only in Sweden that one faces challenges with high inflation and high interest rates. In the rest of the world, as has also been mentioned earlier this evening, the response has been to launch enormous programs to invest in the climate transition. In many cases, these are pure subsidies for already functioning technology, and sometimes they are investments in new technology. In the USA, 22,000 billion kronor over ten years are on the table, ready to be distributed. It is obvious now, as I speak with companies in both Sweden and the USA, that this is having an effect. They are placing the operations where the demand is, and the companies and the jobs that they bring with them.

Madam Speaker! The way Sweden can meet this can only be by having a business policy that is as attractive as possible. Therefore, it is incomprehensible to me why the government chooses to raise taxes and only talk about reduced red tape.

Centerpartiet still wants to lower the employer contributions. As a first step, we want to halve them for everyone who has a salary of up to 22,000 kronor. The seasonally adjusted youth unemployment is currently at 22 percent - every fifth young person is currently unemployed. For companies that have a declining demand, it matters whether it is a 30 percent or 15 percent surcharge on the labor cost. Lowering the employer contributions does not either drive up inflation.

Madam Speaker! Lower employer contributions are like a Christmas gift with three presents in one. It provides more jobs for young people, it increases tax revenues in pressured municipalities, and it reduces inflation.

Centerpartiet also wants that labor that is not from Europe should be able to work in Sweden in a legal way. To totally choke off the labor immigration for people with incomes that are lower than 27,360 kronor per month will put companies in very difficult situations. We have not yet seen the effect of this for many companies, but I hear their problems when I visit them around Sweden.

Centerpartiet also wants to continue with a policy that does not increase the costs for small businesses. The government has proposed that companies should receive an expanded sick pay responsibility. Previous conservative governments understood that when a restaurant's chef breaks their hand on a ski slope, it has nothing to do with the company's preventive health work. Under the government's policy, the company will have to pay both sick pay for the person with the wrist injury and for a substitute so that the business can function. It is a policy that is very expensive for the companies.

What has happened then regarding regulatory hurdles for large and small companies? The Regulatory Council, which is our best brake to ensure that new legislation does not pass completely thoughtlessly, has received neither an expanded mandate nor more money. If that does not happen, we, or perhaps other politicians in a few years, will stand there and say: Why did no one think that this would be the effect for the companies?

Regulatory simplification is about applying laws and regulations in a way that reduces waiting times, seeing opportunities instead of problems in every case and, where possible, handling different parts of an application in parallel between authorities. This applies both to industrial investments and to seasonal permits. The Regulatory Council must enter the legislative process earlier and be given an expanded mandate to follow up on the fees that companies are charged for different types of permits and the processing times at authorities.

When it comes to faster permit processes for carbon-free energy and critical minerals, it is also going far too slowly. Sweden has good deposits of technology- and innovation-critical metals and good conditions to conduct a sustainable extraction of these, which also creates excellent export opportunities. But for extraction to be possible, increased acceptance from, and revenue to, landowners and the local population is needed. It is unreasonable that companies today must sit in a waiting position to invest hundreds of millions of kronor.

To break the negative trend of skyrocketing processing times, measures are required both here and now to clarify and streamline relevant processes, and a more long-term review of potential measures to shorten processing times. It is a matter of having a processing guarantee, but it also requires that we have "a way in," where both national as well as regional and municipal permits are handled.

The tourism industry, which turns over hundreds of billions of kronor and creates growth and jobs both in rural areas and in cities, consists of a diverse range of companies that are also constantly affected by more regulatory complications.

One example is the small food producers, who are also actually a part of the tourism industry in the countryside. They are affected by more regulations and higher costs. Instead of expanding their operations because the demand for the products is high, they choose to stand still. The compliance costs are simply too large for them to be able to grow. An updated national strategy for the tourism industry is required.

Madam Speaker! It is not enough to lower costs for companies and ensure more efficient application of rules and controls. Some new thinking is also required.

Centerpartiet wants it to be both prestigious, career-enhancing, and profitable for researchers to be able to conduct research, both at universities and in various industries. Sweden needs to become more attractive for investments in research and innovation. We need to create research and innovation environments and better conditions for companies to conduct research in Sweden.

After that, we are back to the good conditions for the business sector, which I spoke about earlier, which are the basis for innovations to become global companies.

Madam Speaker! With lower costs for hiring and employing staff, with a focus on innovation, with a policy that ensures new legislation does not make it more complicated for companies, and with authorities that coordinate and help companies through the permit and inspection processes, we can begin to climb the prosperity ladder again.

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

Elin Söderberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! We are debating expenditure area 24 and business policy. Regarding the goals for foreign trade and export and investment promotion, I move for the approval of reservation 4.

For us in Miljöpartiet, it is important that trade policy contributes to strengthening the environment, climate, human rights, and the global sustainability goals in Agenda 2030. Both business policy and trade policy are part of the societal development that we create together, and for me, it is obvious that we shall together build a sustainable society.

Another area I want to highlight is the cultural and creative industries. In Sweden, we are incredibly strong when it comes to the music industry, film production, and not least the video game industry. For far too long, the video game industry has grown strongly but without receiving the same attention from politics as other cultural and creative industries. Therefore, we in Miljöpartiet have, in our budget motion, included development funds for the video game industry in the amount of 30 million kronor.

What I note, Madam Speaker, is that we are today in a situation where strengthened competitiveness is the same as green transition. Multinational companies all over the world are now investing enormous resources to ensure their green transition in order to maintain and strengthen their competitiveness on the global market. This also applies to the Swedish business community.

Unfortunately, we see that the government is reducing the support to Vinnova in this expenditure area, which, among other things, has supported this development. We in Miljöpartiet therefore want to add these 200 million kronor to Vinnova for more innovation.

To ensure the green transition and strengthen the competitiveness of the Swedish business sector, much more needs to be done. Electricity is needed in the near term, and we can deliver that with improved power allocation, expansion of smart grids, increased flexibility, and by creating good conditions for new production of renewable electricity that can be established in the near term.

There is also a need for an improved supply of skills with better conditions to recruit the skills that are de facto needed from all over the world. When we are in great need of personnel, it is a hard blow that the government instead chooses to complicate and worsen labor immigration. When the business sector, companies, and several industries cry out for more personnel, the government turns off the tap. It is serious.

To secure the supply of skills, housing construction also needs to be improved. Not least, it is important to strengthen housing construction in this economic dip to retain the skills in the construction industry, because when the economic dip is over, we might otherwise be left without the construction workers we need so much. Therefore, Miljöpartiet has also included support for housing construction in our budget motion. It is also an important part of the industrial policy.

The third is permit processes, which we have returned to several times in the chamber today. When Miljöpartiet was in government, we commissioned both the Climate Justice Inquiry and the Environmental Assessment Inquiry, precisely to speed up the permit processes. Several agencies have also produced reports themselves on how they can expedite the permit processes. But unfortunately, the government has chosen not to proceed with already prepared proposals. Instead, a new inquiry has been commissioned.

The new investigation has as its first point to lower Sweden's environmental requirements to the EU's minimum level. This is also a hard blow to Swedish competitiveness. Swedish companies compete today on the basis that they have the best environmental and climate performance and that we have good working conditions in Sweden. That is what strengthens Swedish competitiveness. Lowering the environmental requirements can, of course, partly lead to serious environmental risks and worsened conditions for the local population, and partly lower the credibility, competitiveness, and competitive advantage that Swedish companies have today. I take that seriously. There are many ways to speed up the permit processes, and we should move forward quickly with those ways.

Finally, I would like to mention a few words about the supply of minerals and metals and agriculture and forestry.

From the Green Party's side, we see today that four focus areas are needed to strengthen a sustainable mineral and metal supply to ensure the green transition.

The first thing is about investing in a more circular and resource-efficient economy. We have a large demand for minerals and metals today, but there is much we can do to use the resources more efficiently.

The second thing is to invest in alternative materials. We see today that we can manufacture batteries without lithium, for example. That type of innovation we should invest in.

The third is that the Swedish mining industry shall, of course, be the best when it comes to the environment, climate, and social rights. That is also how we strengthen the conditions for the entire industry.

The fourth is to push on the global value chains. In the EU, we must ensure that requirements are set regarding sustainability for human rights, environment, and climate in the global value chains. In this way, we can ensure that the consumption we are dependent on here does not lead to child labor or serious environmental risks in other countries.

Sweden's agriculture and forestry are also a central part of a sustainable business development and a green transition. We see fantastic business opportunities in both agriculture and forestry when we strengthen biodiversity, increase carbon sequestration, and see more of a diversified farming in our agriculture and forestry. In this way, we can increase domestic food production, strengthen crisis preparedness, and get more value out of the forest that we harvest.

With that, I would like to thank you for a pleasant debate and wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 20 December.)

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