Public procurement

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by expressing my support for the committee's proposal.

Sweden faces great challenges. We need to strengthen our economy, improve welfare, meet climate requirements, and at the same time safeguard every tax krona. In this work, public procurement is one of our most important tools. Every year, the public sector procures goods and services for nearly 900 billion kronor. Therefore, the procurement processes must be characterized by competition, efficiency, and transparency.

But all too often we see something else. We see how public procurement is used as a tool to drive political agendas that lack any connection to the actual purpose of procurement: to ensure the best possible quality at the best possible price.

We Moderates oppose this politicization. We say no to procurement policy where political symbols and ideological demands carry more weight than common sense. This is a line that the Social Democrats and their supporting parties stand for, and it is a line that makes public operations more expensive and shuts out companies.

Of course, positive social effects should be promoted, but requirements must be reasonable, relevant, and possible to follow up, as well as be in proportion to the purpose of the procurement. There must be a balance. When requirements are driven by ideology rather than results, both companies, employees, and not least the taxpayers lose out on it.

Four out of five jobs in Sweden are created in small and medium-sized enterprises. It is they that create growth across the entire country, drive innovation, take risks, and to a large extent also participate in public procurement. These companies deserve not only a hearty pat on the back but also concrete support in simplifications and improvements.

What is so sad is that the Social Democrats, with the left at their back, never miss an opportunity to speak ill of and pull the rug out from under all of Sweden's entrepreneurs. In this context, the undertone is almost always that entrepreneurs are greedy and potentially criminal. Collective agreements must be forced even for small businesses that follow the law, and they do not hesitate to limit the number of subcontractors even though it is obvious that this will wipe out many small businesses. Furthermore, it contravenes EU law.

Miljöpartiet, on the other hand, wants to set far-reaching environmental and climate requirements without taking responsibility for either the costs or the possibility of follow-up. And what will the result be? Well, it will be fewer tenders, higher costs and worse competition. This is not only irresponsible. It is also a betrayal of the companies that create the jobs and keep our economy alive and a betrayal of the taxpayers.

At the same time, the Moderate-led government has taken action against crime in the labor market and the unserious actors who exploit the systems. The government has strengthened cooperation between agencies such as Skatteverket, Polismyndigheten, and Arbetsmiljöverket, introduced more control possibilities in vulnerable industries, and tightened the requirements for personnel lists.

A concrete example is increased efforts against fraud and exploitation within the construction and cleaning industries. There, controls have led to unscrupulous actors being excluded and that legally secure conditions have been able to be established.

The government will also proceed with the Supplier Control Investigation's proposals regarding register control of suppliers, and the Competition Authority's procurement supervision will be strengthened. The National Audit Office has also been tasked with proposing measures to improve municipalities' and regions' follow-up and control of private contractors in procurements.

We Moderates believe in entrepreneurship. We believe in competition, quality, and innovation. We know that every tax krona must be used with the greatest responsibility. Therefore, the Moderate-led government has, during its first two years, taken several important steps to improve the business climate and to facilitate for companies to participate in procurements. The turnover limit for VAT has been raised, which means that several small companies reduce their administration and can focus on their core mission. The business portal verksamt.se has also been improved with procurement support. This makes it easier to find relevant procurements, understand the rules, and participate.

The government has decided on changes in how procurements are advertised. This will make it clearer what requirements are set and easier to find the right assignment.

The procurement statistics are being improved so that contracting authorities shall indicate all companies that have participated, not just the winning party. This creates a better picture of the competitive situation, especially for small businesses to take part in.

The National Agency for Public Procurement also has a mandate to identify measures that can facilitate for companies and idea-driven actors to participate in public procurement.

Public procurement can also be a powerful tool to promote innovation and sustainability. This, however, presupposes that the procurement processes are flexible enough to meet the challenges of the future. Among other things, work is underway to establish an innovation procurement arena.

Procurement should be about quality, price, and transparency – not about ideological steering. Sustainability and fair conditions – yes. Inefficiency, symbolic politics, and political demands that are not followed up or do not work – no. We shall open up, make it simpler, reduce the thresholds, and let more companies participate – not fewer.

We do not want a procurement that micro-manages with political finger-pointing, but we want a procurement that builds a stronger Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Gunilla Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the speech.

The member initially pointed out that it is important to safeguard every tax krona. There should be no political agendas that govern public procurement. Should we then interpret this as that the Moderates' ideological requirements and direction is that we should let workers be exploited at workplaces? Should criminal actors win procurements, instead of the serious actors that the member highlights? Today we find ourselves in a situation where many serious actors choose not to even enter a procurement because they know that they will not be able to compete with the low prices. Many actors are serious and do a good job – not to mention anything else – but some changes need to be made.

Now the member of the board is speaking about proceeding with the Supplier Control Investigation's proposal, which was submitted to Minister Slottner in 2023. It is proposed there that Bolagsverket shall be responsible for a register of unreliable actors. Procuring authorities and entities can, during procurements, access the register and check whether a supplier has actually paid all taxes and meets the requirements.

In the investigation, it was said that it was desired that the register should be in place by 2025. Now the Minister says it should be in place by 2028. Can the member tell me why it should take so many years before a register can be in place?

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

I have listed a number of measures that the government is actively working on to counter crime and unserious actors. We have also tightened the legislation in several other areas where a number of other parties have resisted. That this government is taking action against crime is clear on several levels in many areas, of which this is one.

Just as the member states, taxpayers suffer when unserious actors can operate in the market, and serious companies that try to do a good job are knocked out. They are forced to compete on completely unequal terms under conditions that in many cases are almost impossible to follow up on. The situation becomes acute, and this government has acted forcefully – just as I have enumerated. There are several parts to this. The supplier control investigation is one part of many proposals that the government has put forward.

In many areas, the parties want to move towards the same goal, but we have different paths to get there. When I look at how the Social Democrats are driving their policy forward, I am not so sure that is the case. I last received information yesterday that they want to abolish the right of free establishment.

My question back to the member is the following. Do the Social Democrats even want private actors on the market? What do the Social Democrats think about the choices when it comes to school, health care, and elderly care for the citizens' sake?

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

Gunilla Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I note that I received no answer from the member regarding the proposal from the Supplier Control Inquiry. Why should it have to be delayed until 2028 before a register can be in place? This inquiry was commissioned by the Social Democratic government. I am pleased that the Minister and the government are moving forward, but I think it is deplorable that we should have to wait until 2028. It is a tool that would make it possible for all the procuring authorities and entities that want to do right to access information about all actors who do not do right and who do not safeguard every tax krona, which the member so clearly says is so important.

Then it was the question of the right of free establishment. I do not think it is more than right that the municipality can influence when a new actor chooses to establish itself in a municipality. I think it is good that we Social Democrats put forward that proposal.

Another problem we have in the Swedish labor market is that many are being exploited. Those who are serious find it increasingly difficult to get in, and we highlight long subcontracting chains. Here, the member in the rostrum refers to the fact that it is not possible to make a change because EU law says no to it. But we have the opportunity to influence what the new EU directive should look like. It is not all about not making changes, but politics is about making changes for the better.

How are the Moderaterna and the government parties working to influence the new EU directive and reduce the number of subcontracting chains, specifically to address a significant amount of the crime and insecurity for many workers in the Swedish labor market?

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

The limitation of the number of subcontractor levels has been investigated in the Supplier Control Investigation. In addition to the fact that limitations are not compatible with EU law regarding the free movement of services, they also have a major negative impact on competition. I stated in my report that it is obvious that they will result in a number of small companies being eliminated. It is such a large intervention that it would mean structural changes for an entire industry. The member surely knows that many public procurements concern larger industries and companies, and a number of smaller actors cannot offer a complete solution. The solutions instead rely on subcontractor levels.

The answer to the question of whether we would be prepared to proceed with limiting the number of subcontractor seats is not no only with regard to EU law, but it is above all no with regard to the competition situation and the small companies' opportunities to continue to exist and operate in these markets.

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

Gunilla Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! As we have heard earlier, public procurement in Sweden accounts for approximately 900 billion kronor every year. It concerns a significant part of the society's total economy and our common tax funds, which are to be used in a responsible and wise manner.

I want to start by highlighting the possibility for non-profit actors to provide welfare services in Sweden today. Compared to most other countries in the Nordic region and Europe, the share of non-profit actors in the welfare sector is small in Sweden. In an attempt to increase the share of non-profit actors, a new law entered into force in January 2023, after the Social Democratic government had commissioned an investigation and submitted a legislative proposal.

Today, idea-driven organizations that carry out welfare activities can register in a special register, and procuring authorities can reserve the right to these organizations. Despite this change, we see that the idea-driven welfare actors only account for 3 percent.

According to a survey that the organization Famna had conducted, politicians believe it stands at 9 percent, and they would like to increase the share to 17 percent. In other words, there is a large gap between reality and what the politicians believe and would like to see. We Social Democrats believe that the government should do more to give the idea-driven sector greater opportunities to offer welfare services.

Madam Speaker! When we debated public procurement here in the chamber last year, I raised in my speech how criminal actors are ravaging the Swedish labor market. Unfortunately, the situation does not look better this year. Unserious actors earn large sums of money through creative arrangements. No tax is paid. VAT fraud occurs and parallel criminal activity takes place. And foreign labor is exploited.

Within the welfare sector, we have been able to see that criminals are operating HVB facilities or health centers. A few weeks ago, it was reported that the police and the Economic Crime Authority carried out raids against health centers in the Västra Götaland region. In these companies, money has been laundered and our common tax money has been used to purchase luxury items such as expensive cars and watches. Millions of kronor, instead of going to healthcare, have been used for luxury consumption and to finance criminal activity.

The governing parties just continue to throw our common resources at these market failures. Yesterday, the Sverigedemokraterna in Västra Götaland, together with the bourgeois parties, took another step when they decided to introduce vårdval bup within child and adolescent psychiatry. Is it really about safeguarding the taxpayers' money? Instead of offering care, one must now devote large resources to controlling these private actors, so that the money does not end up in the criminals' pockets. It must surely be a wrong prioritization.

We Social Democrats believe that the government should proceed with the Supplier Control Investigation's proposal that the provisions on the grounds for exclusion in LOV should be changed to become more similar to the provisions in the Public Procurement Act. For example, crimes that can be grounds for exclusion in the Public Procurement Act should also be so in the Act on Choice Systems, if we are even to have such a system.

Madam Speaker! Serious companies experience that procurements sometimes have an all too strong focus on low prices, that the relevant quality requirements are too few, and that there is a lack of contract follow-up. The combination of low prices and lack of contract follow-up risks giving unserious companies a competitive advantage in relation to those companies that follow regulations and contracts. Today I meet serious companies that no longer choose to submit tenders. They know, in fact, that they will not get them. They also do not want to compete with such low prices and poor conditions.

Through procurement legislation, we have the opportunity to counter corruption, arbitrariness, and waste of taxpayers' money. Unfortunately, we see a worrying development of corruption even in Sweden. Corruption in Sweden is increasing. We have fallen and are at the lowest level since Transparency International began making these reports. It is truly alarming.

We have a responsibility to demand that the money goes to companies that offer good working conditions, that workers' rights are met, and that procurement is done with climate and environmental considerations. It is important to hire companies that want to do the right thing. Public funds should never contribute to unhealthy competition and to dumping conditions on the Swedish labor market.

Setting requirements regarding the work environment already at the procurement stage naturally prevents both workplace accidents and occupational diseases. It is also an effective way to prevent unscrupulous companies from gaining competitive advantages by violating the Work Environment Act in order to win tenders.

The number of subcontractors also has an impact. Above all, it affects how the work is planned and carried out and how accountability can be demanded if something happens. Today, subcontractors are used on top of subcontractors, in several tiers. There is a great risk that the main contractor ultimately has no control when it comes to their own subcontractors.

We Social Democrats therefore consider that a limitation should be introduced on the number of subcontracting seats to a maximum of two in public procurement. In this report, it is referred to that this is not compatible with the EU procurement directives. But just as I said in the exchange of remarks earlier, a review of the procurement directive is currently being carried out at the EU level.

Our Social Democratic MEPs, with Johan Danielsson at the forefront, are pushing for a change. The bourgeois parties could also do this both at the national level and at the EU level, if one truly wants to see a change in the Swedish labor market and if one is prepared to work to secure the working environment for very many employees.

Madam Speaker! I have full respect for the fact that it is not always easy to work with procurement. One has very different circumstances, ranging from large procurement organizations to a single individual. I know that the National Agency for Public Procurement does a good job with helping and informing. And in most cases, the procurements actually work well. But we also see that a good deal of improvements are needed.

Madam Speaker! In August 2023, the Supplier Control Inquiry submitted its report to Minister Slottner. In the report, it was proposed, among other things, that Bolagsverket should be responsible for providing a system for coordinated register control. Such a system could mean that procuring authorities and entities can gain better control over the companies that submit tenders.

Now – finally – Bolagsverket has been tasked in the regulatory letter for 2025 to develop such a system. It sounds great, but as mentioned, it is not to be ready until 2028. I wonder how it can need to take four years to establish such a register, Madam Speaker. It is a tool that could mean that procuring entities can step in and check that those who submit tenders in a procurement are not unserious or criminal.

It is remarkable that the government does not act faster in such an important issue. If we are to get the Swedish labor market in order and use our resources in the best way, the government must start acting. It cannot just sit in the stands and twiddle its thumbs.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion, I would like to move for approval of reservation 8, but I naturally stand behind all the Social Democratic reservations.

(Applause)

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! I have a question. I also believe there is reason to add some information.

The Social Democrats say in the press release regarding the abolition of the right of free establishment: The right of free establishment means nothing other than that it is the private actor's, the market's, and the risk capitalist's interests that rule.

I believe some additional information is needed here. The Social Democrats need to be enlightened about a small detail. The fact is that what governs where companies establish themselves and operate is the customers' demand, the students' choice of school, and the patients' need for care. That part seems to be completely ignored by the Social Democrats.

It is very much possible to see what a governance by the Social Democrats could look like in all of Sweden if one only looks at Sweden's shop window, Stockholm. Here, they are raising both taxes and the price of SL cards, and bus lines are being cut. They are also scaling back the choice of care for ideological reasons, not least when it concerns women's healthcare, gynecological activities, and eating disorder care. This is also a hard blow to female entrepreneurship in the only industry where women are in the majority among entrepreneurs. This is the picture we see now.

The Social Democrats want to abolish free establishment and limit the number of subcontractor seats. The freedom of choice system was questioned right here by the member as well. Furthermore, they want to limit profits. What freedom of choice and opportunity for care and school do the Social Democrats want Sweden's students, residents, and patients to be offered?

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

Gunilla Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Just as I said earlier, the right of free establishment means that a municipality cannot itself influence whether an actor chooses to locate its operations in that municipality. We see examples of operations being shut down because new operations are established in their place. When one then is no longer able to conduct the operation or no longer wants to do so, the municipality shall take responsibility for the students who no longer have a school to attend.

In my own region, there were three health centers operated by an actor who turned out to be conducting criminal activity. It was money laundering. Our common tax funds were used to buy luxury cars and watches. How can anyone even think that it is okay? For me, it becomes upsetting when at one end people talk about protecting the taxpayers' money and at the other end they just send out resources to these actors. How can the member even think that it feels good? It is completely incredible.

When it comes to the subcontractor chain: We see how it looks on the labor market, and it has not always looked this way. Previously, for example, there have been actors within the construction industry that had construction workers, electricians, plumbers and so on – a lot of different skills within the companies. The work tasks are not disappearing. On the other hand, one needs to have better control over all those subcontractors who today in many cases work under very tough conditions. And as I said in my main speech: If an accident happens, you hardly know who the subcontractor is in these long chains.

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! Since the speaking time is limited, I choose not to recount all the measures that the government is now implementing to counter crime and ensure that serious actors can operate in the market. I have already accounted for this in my main speech.

Municipalities should be able to influence, says the member. I read: "Society should always have a veto when establishing a tax-funded welfare activity, says Hallengren." Now it is the case that we have had to learn that statements from the Social Democrats can, at the very least, be one or the other depending on who is speaking. When it comes to limiting working hours, one Social Democrat says that we should reduce working hours while the other says that the opposite is true. You perhaps do not quite have a grip on your own policy. With humility before the fact that it is difficult to get a statement from the Social Democrats, I nevertheless want to ask a question again that I did not feel I received an answer to.

One is abolishing the right of free establishment. One wants to limit the number of subcontractor seats, which will exclude very many small businesses from being able to operate. Should we even have a choice system? That was the question the member was at. One also wants to limit profits. What choice and possibility for care and school do the Social Democrats imagine that one should be able to offer Sweden's citizens, students, and healthcare recipients?

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

Gunilla Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I do not think it is so strange that a municipality should be able to have a veto when another actor chooses to establish themselves in the municipality, if the municipality is already conducting operations. The new actor might only want to take over a certain part of the operations, while the municipality remains responsible for the other part. Should this actor choose to no longer remain in the municipality, the responsibility would be shifted to the municipality, which would be left with school premises or whatever it may be for operations. I do not think it is more than right that the municipalities have that possibility to influence it.

Regarding freedom of choice, I believe that very many in Sweden today want their children to attend a good school and that their parents should have good elderly care or home care. I believe that we all in this chamber want to know that the health center is there for us if we become ill – or the hospital, if we should need it. I think that is the most important thing of all, together with that we use our common tax money to develop healthcare and do not put it into the pockets of those who can extract large profits. I do not mean that everyone is criminal – absolutely not. But large profit withdrawals are made in certain companies that operate, among other things, school activities. We also see how criminals run HVB homes and use them for recruitment into criminal activity. Does the member think that this is the right way to move Sweden forward? As a Social Democrat, I do not think so.

(Applause)

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

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! Every year, approximately 17,000 procurements are carried out with a value of approximately 900 billion kronor. This corresponds to approximately 18 percent of GDP. It is thus anything but an insignificant topic that we are discussing here today. Rather, it is the case that public procurement should be given a significantly larger place in our conversations.

It is important that we design the rules in a correct way, so that the procurements are carried out in the manner intended. They have a great impact on the private business sector, given that a large part of the companies' revenues come precisely from business with municipalities, regions, and the state. If this is done correctly, we simultaneously ensure that we get as much as possible for the tax money that is used. On the other hand, given the large amount of approximately 900 billion kronor, it is no surprise that this also attracts unserious actors.

Madam Speaker! There is a common – and also clear, I would like to say – perception in this chamber that unserious actors should not receive a single krona of the taxpayers' money. It is therefore important to find a solution that ensures that unserious actors do not get the opportunity to participate in public procurements. By conducting proper checks of suppliers who participate in public procurements, unserious actors can be identified but also excluded at an early stage.

Madam Speaker! There is today relevant information and data regarding suppliers at a number of different agencies, but there is no good system for the collection of the data. The Government has therefore announced that it is now proceeding with the Supplier Control Investigation's proposal that Bolagsverket shall be responsible for providing an IT system so that a coordinated register check of suppliers in public procurements can be carried out. This will contribute to a significantly more efficient and structured control. The Government also allocates funds so that that work can now begin.

Madam Speaker! LOV, the Act on Choice Systems, is also being reviewed in order to target unserious companies. LOV is a procedural legislation describing how municipalities and regions should proceed when they choose an actor to perform services for them. This is fundamentally something very positive for the citizens. But it simultaneously requires a well-thought-out process, from the planning and design of request documents to a thorough follow-up by municipalities and regions.

The Government wants, also based on the Supplier Control Inquiry's proposal, to change the grounds for exclusion in the Act on Choice Systems, LOV, and establish a legal basis for processing sensitive personal data in connection with the follow-up of contracts according to the procurement laws. The Inquiry's proposal implies, among other things, that an applicant can be excluded on grounds that the municipality or the region in the case at hand has written into the underlying material.

The government has also clarified that the Competition Authority's procurement supervision shall be strengthened and that the authority is tasked, among other things, to investigate the possibility of facilitating for contracting authorities and entities to reject so-called abnormally low tenders.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion: In order to increase idea-driven participation in welfare, the previous Social Democratic-led government took the initiative for an inquiry that submitted a proposal which entered into force on 1 January 2023. It was good.

Compared to in other countries in Europe, the share of non-profit actors in the welfare sector is low here in Sweden. Even though the share of welfare services performed by external actors has increased, it is the commercial actors that have increased and not the non-profit ones.

The government is therefore continuing to work to increase the proportion of purpose-driven organizations. Minister for Social Affairs Jakob Forssmed and Minister for Civil Affairs Erik Slottner, both Kristdemokrater, have therefore held round-table discussions with representatives from civil society and the purpose-driven sector.

As a Christian Democrat, I think it is important. If not otherwise, the pandemic showed us all with persistence the need for an active civil society. There is a power, a warmth and an added value in the idea-driven organizations that Sweden has every reason to take advantage of in a better way.

With that, I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

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

David Perez (SD)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin by, on behalf of the Sweden Democrats, move for the approval of reservation 17 in the report.

Public procurement contributes, as we have heard here today, to a better functioning public sector. It also counters corruption in the public sector.

It is one of the reasons why Sweden ranks relatively well on Transparency International's corruption index. As we have heard here today, we have moved back a few positions. By European standards, we are still very far ahead of other European countries.

The Government's work to increase the proportion of small companies and smaller actors participating in procurements is commendable and is something that should continue to be developed.

We have said it before, and I say it again: Denmark is a role model in many areas, not least within public procurement. There, one sees that more small businesses participate in procurements. That is because there are slightly fewer requirements on their procurements.

It does not necessarily have to be bad, but it can, as in this case, increase the proportion of small businesses in public procurement. They are currently scared away by overly extensive requirements. These are requirements that are then not followed up. They may sound good, but they have no real significance if they are not followed up.

Some time ago, I met with Skattebetalarna, who raised a number of improvement measures and pointed out the weaknesses that exist today. The example that was raised in this case by the Waste Ombudsman when it comes to efficiency was: Why should all of Sweden's 290 municipalities procure their respective websites individually? It is a question one can ask. Is it reasonable that we have 290 public actors who are simultaneously going to procure their respective websites? Is it efficient from the perspective of public administration?

Or why not take as an example the recurring problems when municipalities and regions procure new IT and medical record systems that are subsequently rejected or do not even function as intended?

What can the public sector then do to counteract these errors? One can work preventatively and have a clear follow-up of the requirements that have been set.

This is being done in, among others, the City of Gothenburg, which procures for nearly 30 billion kronor annually. There, about thirty cases have been discovered that have been linked to white-collar crime or breach of contract and which have led to fines. The municipality has also employed specific individuals who work preventatively before contracts are entered into and after contracts have been entered into. In this way, fraud is countered.

It is also partially countered with the help of the National Agency for Public Procurement's and the Swedish Companies Registration Office's work in the area, which we have heard here today from the rostrum. The work to remove unserious actors is extremely important. The Sweden Democrats do not think least in this matter.

There are also exciting tools that we can use in this area, not least with the help of artificial intelligence. It was a big news last year, not least after Jens Nylander's review of the public sector and incorrect invoices that were sent all over Sweden. The public must understand and utilize this more. The tools exist – let us utilize them!

It can be important to have clear requirements in procurements, and sometimes tough ones. We maintain that. But it is also important that they are followed up and have a concrete purpose. A company that lacks a specific certification should not be eliminated on a technicality if the product or service meets the other requirements. Collective agreements are a requirement that causes companies to sometimes be weeded out, even though what they offer meets everything else in the substantive issue.

Madam Speaker! Regarding the report, the Sweden Democrats have a number of motions which, for example, highlight the importance of being able to pivot in the event of a crisis. The purpose is primarily to help domestic producers in the event of supply shocks. This is something that is significant in the long run for the country's civil preparedness. We have also wanted to see national guidelines in the area that ensure that public procurement can be redirected towards more Swedish-produced goods.

In another motion, we present a question that we have championed for a long time, namely to increase the proportion of locally produced food that is purchased, and preferably organic ones where that is possible. In some cases, they are not produced in a sufficiently large extent. This means that the public sector can import food instead of buying the locally produced food that is available, simply because it happens not to be organic. It can still be produced under very good conditions.

Sweden has clear requirements for both animal husbandry and animal welfare. The use of, for example, antibiotics is relatively low in our country from a European perspective. Stunning before slaughter is, in our opinion, a must, but it is not so abroad.

The meat that is sometimes imported and served often comes from countries that lack equally strict laws and regulations in the area. Therefore, we believe that all food products procured publicly should be produced in accordance with Swedish environmental and animal welfare legislation when possible.

There should be no doubt that the food served in our schools, in our hospitals, or in our elderly care homes meets the same tough requirements as that which we produce within Sweden. Today, it is up to each municipality to set this type of requirement, but we believe that it should be guiding.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, the public sector shall contribute to a good life in the local municipality and region. This is done by us supporting small businesses, as we have heard from the rostrum here today. If we can get more entrepreneurs to enter into procurements and submit bids, the competition will lead to a more cost-effective product – that is certain. It leads to more jobs and opportunities for entrepreneurship, and hopefully less waste when it is done correctly.

(Applause)

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! Within the construction and civil engineering industry, we see how long and complicated chains of subcontractors create major problems. Deficiencies in the working environment, dumping of wages, and insecure working conditions are common, especially further down the chains. It is not worthy of a country that claims to stand up for fair conditions and safety in working life.

To remedy this, a main contractor responsibility was introduced in the Byggnads collective agreement 2014. From January 1, 2015, the main contractor is responsible for ensuring that rules and agreements are followed, including by subcontractors. The Act on Contractor Responsibility for Wage Claims entered into force in 2019. This means that employees who do not receive their wages can turn to other actors in the contracting chain to get paid.

A government investigation has now evaluated the law. It states that the law is an effective tool but still does not suggest that it should be extended to other industries. Vänsterpartiet does not share that conclusion. We stand behind LO's view: The contractor's responsibility should apply to the entire labor market. In all industries with long chains of subcontractors, space is created for cheating and exploitation. The industries that do not have these problems are not affected, but for all others, this would mean an enormous difference.

Madam Speaker! We see how the current legislation hinders the union's opportunities to exercise control. Today, local union representatives cannot request lists of which subcontractors are active at a workplace. This hinders the union work precisely where it is most urgent.

It is time to review both the trust representative act and the act on contractor liability for wage claims so that the local union representatives are given the tools they need.

Madam Speaker! Every year, public goods and services are procured to a value of over 800 billion kronor. It is still often the lowest price that prevails, with dumped wages and working conditions as a result. This is a breeding ground for and has led to criminal gangs and other networks being able to win contracts within our welfare.

It is of course completely unacceptable. Tax money should not go to companies that cheat. Workers within publicly funded operations shall have the right to terms in accordance with collective agreements, and criminal actors shall, of course, be kept out.

Vänsterpartiet therefore wants to see that the Public Procurement Act is amended so that requirements for reasonable working conditions can be set in all procurements, regardless of the amount. Requirements can also be set on pensions, insurance, and other rights.

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet also proposes that in public procurement, as a general rule, a maximum of two levels of subcontractors should be allowed – this is to facilitate control and counter fraud. We also want to introduce requirements that bidders report both staffing levels and wage levels.

Trade unions are usually those who have the absolute best grasp of the industry. Therefore, procuring authorities should have a dialogue with relevant unions before a procurement is carried out. It is a simple and effective way to filter out unserious actors.

Madam Speaker! A national coordination is needed – a system where all contracting authorities participate and where unserious companies can be listed so that they cannot, as they do now, go from municipality to municipality and continue their operations.

The procurement shall also be used to create confidence in the future. Vänsterpartiet supports Byggnads' proposal to introduce apprenticeship clauses in procurements. There is a shortage of apprenticeship places, and it is in our jointly funded projects that we can set requirements that young people shall be given a chance to enter the profession.

Madam Speaker! Sweden has begun important reforms for order and clarity in the labor market, but much remains. We must also push for changes at the EU level. As we have heard earlier here in the debate, the EU's procurement directives currently prevent Sweden from setting certain requirements. This must change.

Vänsterpartiet wants to see a working life where no one is exploited, where our tax resources go to the serious companies and where workers have security, fair conditions and a sense of hope for the future.

I vote in favor of reservation 13.

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! There is a lot of focus here today on crime and unserious actors. There is no dividing line here, and even though there is a debate here today, I do not perceive overall that the government is being questioned for not taking a crackdown against crime. The government has, on the contrary, proceeded at least firmly.

I want to say clearly that we agree on the objective; there is no one in here who wants to see crime continue. It must simply be removed.

However, we have very different views of entrepreneurship and Sweden's entrepreneurs. I would therefore like to take the opportunity to include another view of reality. When we talk about small businesses, there is a human being behind them. It is a person who has invested time, effort, and money – often the family's money – to achieve something good. It is not common that companies are started due to profit interest, but rather it is about a passionate soul who sees that something can be done better and that something can be accomplished.

I meet many entrepreneurs who think it is incredibly tough to be met with the image that is being trumpeted by the opposition parties. I would therefore like to invite the member to a company day, where we meet some of all those companies that are struggling and trying to contribute something good. My question is whether the member can imagine joining something such as that.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Merit Frost Lindberg, for the invitation! Of course, I will join you on a company visit. I actually do such visits quite often in my home constituency.

It is exactly as Merit Frost Lindberg says: Most entrepreneurs are decent and good people who start a company because they have an idea and so on. I think the member is trying to read into things both regarding me and the Social Democrats, suggesting that we would portray all companies as villains and unserious. No one has ever done that.

However, we argue that there must be order and clarity, and that this order and clarity must also prevail in the labor market. We want to get rid of the unserious actors.

Something that the Moderaterna are very careful about is that there must be clear regulations and also consequences when the rules are broken. It is because it is incredibly important how we use our common tax money. They cannot go to unserious companies that dump wages on the labor market.

I heard Merit Frost Lindberg say earlier that the Left is making a lot of political and ideological inputs in this. Then the question comes back: Isn't that exactly what the Moderates also do? The Moderates are also driven by an ideology where one should portray the Left in a certain way and always want to remove as many regulations and laws as possible for all companies, completely regardless of whether they are serious or not?

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! I must state here that the member seems to have misunderstood the Moderates' policy. We do not necessarily want to remove as much as possible. We only want to remove what is unnecessary and what impairs the opportunities for companies to operate – and by that, I mean, of course, serious companies.

We are debating procurement today. The purpose of the procurement legislation is that it should be efficient and legally secure, but also take advantage of competition in the market. If it is to do that, there must also be some companies left that can compete.

The Moderates' policy encourages both large and small actors. We want a wide range of companies, not just large corporations. Many of the measures that have been raised here today, both by the Social Democrats and by the Left Party but also by the Green Party, will hit small businesses. They will make it impossible for many companies to operate in the market.

Again: What the Moderaterna want – it is a self-evident line we are pursuing – is that unserious actors, cheating, and crime must be removed. I also believe that we have been more than clear when it comes to this. However, we do not want to knock out all small businesses in the process. Then there will be no competition left. It will also not be possible for those who are to receive these services to choose anything. It will also become more difficult to receive the services.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! The logic is incredibly flawed. On one hand, one must ensure that there are not too many laws and regulations so that small companies are not knocked out. On the other hand, one must break some eggs and allow unserious actors. I cannot make sense of it at all.

Serious entrepreneurs who do things right are harmed by unhealthy competition when we allow other companies to procure in a completely different way without checking which subcontractors exist. The reasonable thing would be for the Moderaterna, who safeguard competition and businesses, to ensure that the same rules applied to everyone so that it actually becomes healthy competition.

When Merit Frost Lindberg and I then go around on our company visits, we will be asked: Why should I do the right thing? Why should I do these things when someone else in another link does not need to do them but can submit bids to win procurements and hire people, who then also suffer, in their operations?

The logic is quite flawed, then, among the Moderates. I find that remarkable considering it is they who claim to protect the companies. I mean that it is the Left Party that protects entrepreneurship and wants to ensure that decent conditions and healthy competition prevail. No one should be able to cheat. Everyone should be able to do the right thing. That is when we get a good climate. That is also when we build a strong Sweden with secure workers.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! As several previous speakers have said, this is one of the absolutely largest economic issues we have to debate in the Committee on Finance. Procurement involves at least 800 billion kronor in Sweden today.

What I will primarily focus on is small businesses, recycling, preparedness, and the criminal networks that have unfortunately infiltrated quite a few procurements in Sweden.

I thought I would start with the small businesses. It is interesting to listen to the debate, where the Tidö government argues that they are protecting small businesses with this. I want to point out that it is this government that has increased the costs for companies by over 15 billion kronor, quite a lot through the increased cost of employing young people in the companies they procure from. The government's tax increases on employing young people have contributed to increasing the costs of procurements in Sweden by billions.

Nevertheless, perhaps the biggest problem for small companies is that when procuring from municipalities, regions, and the state, it is almost pointless to bother because there are so many criteria. It is not about the controls that we have discussed today and which must be tightened – I will come to that later – but about the fact that there are so many criteria that only large-scale suppliers can participate. That is why many small companies often become subcontractors. They simply cannot handle the bureaucracy we set up.

If we are to be able to achieve effective procurement with competition also regarding the aspect of locally grown, which has been mentioned in the debate – for example, being able to get locally grown food and locally produced game meat in the school canteen – we cannot design the procurements in such a way that small businesses cannot participate at all.

When we tighten the controls and are careful that unserious actors do not get in, we must also open the door for the small companies. It is they who often drive improvements and opportunities to get more out of every tax krona. Furthermore, they contribute to local and regional development.

Quite a few of the small businesses that participate in procurements are also focused on the green aspects of procurement, not only to improve the economic side but also to contribute to lower climate emissions and environmental impact as well as to recycling. Unfortunately, the knowledge in Sweden today is extremely low regarding which green values can be promoted through procurement, as a nation that at least until a few years ago strove for reduced environmental impact and reduced climate emissions. It is literally the case that textiles, furniture, and building materials worth many hundreds of millions of kronor go to waste during renovations at the same time as we know that this can be recycled or reused. In that case, we save both money, environmental space, and climate impact.

We want to ensure that this knowledge is spread among the procurers. Often, that is exactly the problem when you are a public procurer: You have a rather tough situation and far too many criteria to take into account, and you do not always have the information required to make exactly the right specification so that the small company that wants to work with recycling – I have met several of them across the country – can win a public procurement while you get as much as possible for the money.

Then we have the absolute largest procurement that we are to undertake in the coming years, that is to say the upgrading of the Swedish defense – not just the military but the total defense. There we have the problem that the effort with the total defense in Sweden clashes with the fact that we have under-invested in the countryside, especially when it comes to healthcare and elderly care around the country.

We have a starting point where there are already today large gaps between different parts of the country regarding the care that the public sector delivers and can deliver. That system has been debated previously today. The problem when we are now to get a total defense is that it also requires that parts of this include preparedness to provide care in war and conflict, but the law on procurement in the defense and security area, which otherwise is usually applied to matters concerning defense, does not apply to healthcare.

We in the Center Party consider this to be a huge national effort where the total defense must be at the center. Therefore, in our reservation number 21 under point 15, we propose that the law on procurement in the defense and security area be reviewed so that it includes total defense aspects when it comes to healthcare.

Finally, regarding the threat directed at Sweden, it is not enough just to have registers and keep track of subcontractors to tackle the organized, society-threatening crime that now also occurs in procurements. Large public contracts concerning infrastructure have, in fact, been shown to be held by criminal gangs linked to Russian oligarchs, even though it was naturally not the intention. We simply need to have much deeper knowledge about these types of networks and connections to tackle organized crime.

We have spoken earlier today about how fraud in the financial sector is a larger source of income for criminals than drugs. To enter and manipulate, participate in, and in various ways undermine public procurements is also a very large source of income for them. Therefore, we in Centerpartiet – though not under this specific matter – have proposed that a new agency, Ekokrim, should be established, which can scrutinize the structures and collect and disseminate knowledge so that, among other things, procurements can be kept free from these networks.

By emphasizing small business ownership – and thereby favoring efficiency but also local and regional development – and favoring the green in efficient ways, one can save both money and environmental space. By taking into account these new aspects in our procurements within defense and when it comes to keeping gang crime away from procurements, we can improve the procurements and the conditions for both municipalities and regions and the public at large throughout the country.

I move for approval of reservation 21 under point 15.

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! We can at least be honest in the debate when it comes to tax cuts and tax increases, because this is not a government that is raising taxes. On the contrary, we have lowered taxes, not least through the job tax credit, in two rounds.

We have also made many other initiatives for companies during the short time we have been in government. Some of them I highlighted when I spoke about procurement. I perhaps do not need to list everything. But regarding small businesses, we have raised the turnover limit for VAT to reduce administration. We are also investing in investments in electricity supply and energy production. The rules on interest deductions remain unchanged, and we have not proceeded with the harmful tax proposals that were discussed by the previous government.

The government has also introduced a simplification council and a regulatory council. A number of measures have thus been taken to facilitate things for all of Sweden's entrepreneurs – and then I am not counting up everything I highlighted in my speech regarding just procurement. This government has really had a focus on small businesses.

But I have a question. The Centre [party] likes to talk about companies – specifically small businesses today. That is pleasing. But isn't it a bit difficult for the Centre to put the plans for company policy into practice together with the Social Democrats or the Left? Is there any other plan that we can be given a share of?

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! This is a very important issue now that Sweden will be hit by the terrible tariff chaos that Trump and his nationalists have created in world trade and when we need to arm Sweden strongly and lower the companies' costs – not raise them – in order to protect them and the Swedish jobs.

When we – regarding the last question – collaborated with the Social Democrats in the January agreement, we lowered the tax for jobs and companies by 20 billion kronor. We are always careful that it stands at the center of all the collaborations we participate in.

What concerns us is that the Tidö Government, during the two and a half years it has been in power, has increased the tax on hiring young people, that is, the employer contributions, by 12 billion kronor. It has removed the high-cost protection in the sick pay responsibility, which particularly affects small companies – just like the employer contributions for the young – without replacing it with any other tax cut. This costs billions in procurement, but above all, it costs tens of thousands of jobs across Sweden.

We have a situation with weak growth and very high unemployment. One could even call it mass unemployment now that it is over 9 percent. New business creation is decreasing and the number of bankruptcies is increasing. It is an extremely poor result for those who call themselves business-friendly.

I know that many small things have been done, but they only constitute some percentage of tax reduction in relation to the tax and cost increases totaling 15 billion that the government has implemented. Here we definitely have something to debate moving forward.

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

Merit Frost Lindberg (M)

Madam Speaker! The government faced a major challenge when it took office. Unemployment was almost the highest in the EU and inflation was extremely high. The most important thing the government has done for both households and companies is to have fought inflation. In addition, we have, as mentioned, implemented a number of measures to facilitate things for the companies.

Regarding tax cuts, the previous government prioritized above all the well-off. As a Moderate, I think all tax cuts are positive, as long as they are effective. But this government has prioritized tax cuts for all income groups – above all ordinary people with ordinary jobs. Just the other day, we declared that we will increase the subsidy rate for ROT, which is also positive for the companies, when we now talk about taxes.

I actually did not receive an answer to my question. I am asking it again: How is the Center Party's corporate policy to be planned together with the Social Democrats or the Left? What plan exists?

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! First of all, I just want to point out that unemployment was lower when we were involved in negotiating the government policy during the pandemic than it was during the recovery until Trump's tariffs now, which will make it even higher.

During your period in power, unemployment has fallen in the rest of Europe while they have fought inflation there. But it has risen very sharply in Sweden. You must respond to that now. You cannot ignore it any longer. The same problem applies to growth and entrepreneurship.

It is not wrong to work with ROT. But faced with the deep economic crisis we have now, it is not the crisis management we need. We really need to safeguard the Swedish jobs and companies and reduce their costs so that they can get through the crisis.

The first thing you can do is to take back the tax increases you have directed at small businesses. I have not heard any self-reflection during the debate when it comes to them. Take back that burden of 12 billion plus the sick pay responsibility – 15 billion in total – that you have placed on Swedish companies. This has caused us to lose our recovery and our fight against unemployment and for entrepreneurship. Start there!

We succeeded in our agreement – that was the question – to really lower taxes for both companies and ordinary people, I want to emphasize, by a total of 20 billion kronor. That meant a lot for us to be able to get through the pandemic.

Now it is your turn to manage this crisis. Do not raise the costs, but lower them so that all of Sweden can grow, so that the small companies can grow, so that we can protect the jobs and so that people can feel secure that the government is capable of handling the customs crisis. But you must do much more for growth and the companies than this.

Public procurement

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Madam Speaker! Swedish public procurement accounts for more than 800 billion kronor and more than 23.5 million tons of carbon dioxide every year. This is our collective money. It is the money we as a society invest in our future, in our children's well-being, in our health, and so that our elderly can have a good life in their autumn years.

The Public Procurement Act is a crucial tool for us to be able to control how the money is used, if we use the tool correctly. It is also a tool to stimulate innovation and development. There is undoubtedly much to be done to simplify the administration for the companies that participate in public procurements. There is also undoubtedly very much to be done with the control and follow-up of the requirements that are set in public procurement. But by setting clear requirements in public procurement – also on sustainability – we can strengthen the competitiveness for the companies that lead the green transition even in these uncertain times. I move for approval of reservation 7.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 12.)

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