Party debate

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! In 95 days, there is an election in our country, and it is a crossroads. Either we hold the course, continue to get Sweden in order and build a country where effort always pays off and where crime always results in punishment. That is a country that is fairer in the deepest sense. Or we change direction, as the red-green parties want, and increase the benefits, increase asylum migration, increase foreign aid and let hard-working families pay for everything with increased taxes. Two completely different paths is what the election is about.

Mr. Speaker! The Social Democrats are now going to the election as if the Swedish people had a poor memory and had forgotten their eight years in power. Let me therefore just remind you of how it was in 2022.

Sweden became poorer. We had skyrocketing inflation that ate up ten years of real wage increases. The Social Democrats raised or introduced 46 different taxes in eight years – 46! Many families opened the electricity bill with a lump in their stomachs and fueled the car with another lump in their stomachs.

Sweden also became more dangerous. At that time, it was serious crime and extremely deadly gang violence that made Sweden known abroad. Now it is successful companies again that do that, as it should be.

Sweden received 320,000 asylum seekers during these eight years without a single thought about integration problems. Just during Magdalena Andersson's own eleven months as Prime Minister, asylum immigration increased by almost 50 percent.

The Swedish people saw the results of an ill-considered policy and fired the government.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is literally built on hard work, and in Sweden, effort must always pay off. It is also my very foremost campaign promise: Effort must always pay off.

We want two normal incomes to be sufficient to be able to buy a small house for one's family, so that more Swedes get the chance to play football with the children in the backyard of that house and on that patch of grass. Therefore, we want a normal family to have an additional 5,000 kronor left in their wallet every month during the next parliamentary term.

Sweden shall become a country where one can feel faith in the future again, where one wants to start a family. Regardless of whether one is born in Sweden or abroad, one shall be able to realize small or large dreams through one's own efforts. That is where Sweden can reach if we hold the course.

For almost four years, we have worked impatiently but persistently to begin solving Sweden's truly big problems. We have lowered the tax on work, mostly for those with low and average wages. We have lowered the preschool and after-school fees. We have lowered the tax on fuels and on electricity. A typical family with children now keeps 5,000 kronor every month compared to 2022.

We have more than halved the deadly gang violence, but that means half still remains. So do not change direction! The government's fight against the criminal gangs must continue, even after the election. Then we can tackle everyday crime, cellar burglaries, shoplifting, fraud against the elderly and dangerous speeding outside the school.

With the same force as we fight the gangs, we fight the violence against women. Sweden shall be a country where young women dare to go out and run in the evening and where old women are never harassed or raped in elderly care.

Asylum migration is now at its lowest in 40 years. Those who come here and commit crimes will be deported from the country, while those teenagers who, on the contrary, have done everything right will get a chance to stay. Effort shall pay off, and crime shall be punished.

Sweden is on the right track, but we are not there yet. We are proud, but we are not satisfied.

Opposite my blue-yellow team in politics stands a red-green team that says they want to change direction. That direction is left-radical, led by S, V and MP. With a red-green government, it will mean higher taxes for those who work and higher benefits for those who do not work – and more benefits out from Sweden to other countries.

My questions to the Swedish people are therefore these: Can you really afford a red-green government? After three years of training as a nurse, can you afford a higher tax on your salary? If you already have expensive mortgages, can you afford a mortgage tax that increases your interest costs? If you have bought a house, can you afford a reintroduced property tax? If you do not live in a large city, can you afford a 10 kronor higher diesel price? Think before you vote!

Mr. Speaker! I am convinced that a majority of all Swedes will answer no to all these questions. If the red-greens become winners, hard-working Swedes will be losers. There is a lot at stake in the election on September 13.

(Applause)

In this speech, Fredrik Ahlstedt, Ludvig Ceimertz, John E Weinerhall, Ann-Charlotte Hammar Johnsson, Caroline Högström, David Josefsson, Mattias Karlsson i Luleå, Ulrik Nilsson, Stefan Olsson, Thomas Ragnarsson, Jesper Skalberg Karlsson, Maria Stockhaus, John Widegren, Viktor Wärnick and Boriana Åberg (all M) as well as Staffan Eklöf and Erik Hellsborn (both SD) agreed.

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! On September 13, 8 million eligible voters will decide which direction our country shall take: whether Sweden shall continue to drift apart and be weakened, or whether we shall come together and make our country strong again.

When I travel around our elongated country, I encounter a longing for something new. People want to move away from an economic policy that has led to almost 100,000 more unemployed and records in the number of bankruptcies. People want to move away from a reality where hard-working people who do everything right still find things getting tougher and tougher. People want to move away from skyrocketing budget deficits where we borrow 200,000 kronor every minute all year round. People want to move away from cheating and a culture of corruption. And people want to move away from overcrowded classrooms, long waiting times in healthcare, and an elderly care where minute-schedules rule.

Instead, one wants a new direction towards a strong country, a country that stands firm in an uncertain world.

The Social Democrats have changed to meet this new era and make everyday life better for those we exist for: ordinary people. If I am granted the trust of the Swedish people to become Sweden's Prime Minister, I will unite the Swedish people to accelerate the Swedish economy, turn around the crisis in schools and healthcare, and restore safety on streets and squares.

Mr. Speaker! Let me focus on two areas today: growth and welfare. We need to get the Swedish economy moving again, because it is when the economy grows that ordinary people with ordinary wages can have a better everyday life. It is when wages rise that one can afford not only the bills but also that little extra in life: to go on a holiday, take the children to Liseberg or Gröna Lund, or buy those new football boots.

Conversely, ordinary people are hit when the economy shrinks or prices soar in the way they have done in recent years. Therefore, it is absolutely central for the next government to put growth at the center.

Right now, major technological shifts are occurring in the world – AI, life science, green technology – and Sweden has all the prerequisites to be at the forefront. We can lead the technological development, and that would not only provide investments, jobs, and prosperity to our country. It is also the right policy to meet an uncertain situation in the world economy. The war in Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, on top of the ongoing war in Ukraine, show how expensive it is to be dependent on the dictatorships' fossil fuels. So invest in the new technology so that we can become independent of the dictatorships' oil, while at the same time the Swedish people get jobs and more money in their pockets!

This, however, presupposes a government that supports, that wants to, and that does not place obstacles and drive a culture war against precisely the new technology that Swedish companies have invested billions in, where jobs are now at risk. It could have major consequences for the Swedish economy and for jobs if the culture war against the new technology is allowed to continue for another four years.

I want us to say yes to new technology instead, so that we create jobs and prosperity in Sweden and can make the everyday lives of the Swedish people better – raise wages, increase child allowances, and implement reforms for cheaper medicines, better pensions, and abolished care deductions. It is an economic policy that stands on the side of ordinary people and that simultaneously takes Sweden into the future.

(Applause)

Mr. Speaker! It is not only when it comes to the economy that Sweden is underperforming. The welfare is not as good as the Swedish people have the right to expect. We have disorder in the classrooms and far too many who have had to wait illegally long to receive care. People who have built up our country, like Annelie in Hjo, have to eat frozen food seven days a week. This is the result when the Tidö parties have prioritized tax cuts for the richest instead of welfare for the Swedish people.

If the Tidö parties get four more years, how much more will be cut? Will it cost extra to go out for a walk in the sun with home care or to receive care in time? It is far from a welfare state where the thickness of the wallet should not decide.

But Sweden can choose another path. We can choose a Sweden where teachers have time for all the children who raise their hands – and for those who never do. We can choose a Sweden where all Swedes shall have a permanent doctor at their health center. We can choose a Sweden where all those who have built up this country, who with their toil have shaped Sweden, shall be spared minute-management, reduced Sunday roasts and frozen meals and instead receive better pensions, secure elderly care and a clear respect. For me, that is Sweden.

(Applause)

I am convinced that Sweden needs unity – that we cooperate for Sweden's best. Many of the societal problems we have today need long-term solutions and broad agreements that can last longer than a parliamentary term. Political trenches and conflict for conflict's sake make our country weaker; it harms Sweden.

But it is about something greater than cooperation across party lines. It is about the fact that our entire country needs to come together – that we must stand up against the forces that want to divide us and that use lies and hatred as tools and try to set human against human and group against group. I seek the Swedish people's mandate to become the Prime Minister of the whole of Sweden – a Prime Minister not just for those who vote for my party and who think like I do, but for all of Sweden.

In these days, thousands of young people are graduating from upper secondary schools and receiving their high school diploma. It is for them and their generation, who shall carry our country into the future, that we shall make Sweden strong again. I want us to do it together. It is time to take Sweden seriously.

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I will not appeal to the Swedish people's poor memory, as others do in this context.

I thought instead to focus on one thing that is very serious, strongly linked to the reporting in the media over the past few days. It is something that has exposed a particularly unpleasant truth for everyone who has eyes to see, namely that Vänsterpartiet is permeated by extremists.

We are talking about a long line of people on the ballot papers who praise Islamist terrorism, celebrate mass murder of civilians, spread gross antisemitism and deny the Holocaust. It is not about any isolated cases, but this is an obvious pattern. It naturally raises the question: How many more terror romantics and Islamist sympathizers are hiding in Vänsterpartiet?

Not least, Expressen's review has shown how between 20 and 30 of the Vänsterpartiet's municipal and regional candidates have praised Hamas and the brutal attack that Hamas, among others, was behind on October 7, 2023, when over 1,200 innocent civilians were murdered. Dancing youths were literally slaughtered, women were raped, men were beaten to death and kidnapped, and small children were shot at close range in the face with automatic weapons. All of this was also filmed by the perpetrators themselves, and they boasted about it.

The Left's candidates have celebrated that very act, spread antisemitic conspiracy theories, shared posts that deny the Holocaust, and praised the dictatorships in Iran and Russia. Over 20 people have been forced to leave their seats. Still, the party leader Nooshi Dadgostar downplays the problem and speaks of it being a handful of people.

Then the question must be asked: Is one blind or is one naive? And if one is naive, how naive is one allowed to be? This is a rot that sits deep in Vänsterpartiet.

In Helsingborg, candidates participated in pure celebrations of this massacre, including with the words: "How beautiful it is to wake up to news about the honorable Palestine and its brave resistance!" It is nothing other than active support for terrorism and for the heinous massacre that we saw a number of years ago.

This raises very many questions. Not least, it raises the question of what sensitive information representatives of this party can pass on to foreign powers, if they are given security or preparedness responsibilities in their municipality or their region or, if misfortune truly strikes, here in the Riksdag or in the state service.

This is a direct threat to Sweden's security. It also spills over onto the one who is to form a government together with Vänsterpartiet, namely Magdalena Andersson. Now she must truly take responsibility for her government base. It is not enough to duck this. It is not enough to shift the question to Vänsterpartiet.

The reasonable question, which I intend to repeat here today until I receive a proper answer to it, is: Will Magdalena Andersson let in left-wing extremists, Islamists, or antisemites into a government? Or can she guarantee that she would rather abstain from power than sell out Sweden to these dark forces?

(Applause)

In this speech, Clara Aranda, Chris Dahlqvist, Staffan Eklöf, Mikael Eskilandersson, Erik Hellsborn, Patrik Jönsson, Linda Lindberg, Daniel Persson, Patrick Reslow, Jimmy Ståhl, Victoria Tiblom, Timothy Tréville, Pia Trollehjelm and Martin Westmont (all SD) agreed.

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is a fantastic country. Sweden is a country built by generations who believed in something greater than themselves. It was workers who organized for better conditions, women who fought for the right to vote, and people who built schools, hospitals, housing, and a welfare state that ensured freedom was not only given to those who could afford it. That is why so many love Sweden – not because our country is perfect, but because we have time and again shown that when we stick together, we can build something better.

But today, many are wondering where Sweden is headed – the one who goes to work but still cannot make the money stretch, the one who seeks work but never gets the chance, the one who worries about the interest rate, the electricity bill or the dentist visit, or the one who has to wait far too long for healthcare.

Over half a million people are unemployed. That is 100,000 more than during the previous parliamentary term. At the same time, Sweden's teachers warn of the largest cuts in schools in 30 years. We have had the longest care queues ever. Elderly care is under pressure.

It costs over 10,000 more per month for a family with children to get by. It has never previously been so expensive to be Swedish.

But it is not everyone who has fared worse. The ministers and Jimmie Åkesson received a tax cut of at least 6,000 kronor a month as a gift to themselves. That is more than what a mail carrier receives in an entire year. Perhaps that is why Jimmie Åkesson looks so pressured in the speaker's chair?

It must become cheaper to live and to reside. It matters who is in power. This is not a force of nature. It is the result of political decisions. Politics is ultimately about priorities – about whose side one chooses.

They have decided that there is no money for a good home care service in the whole country, but that there is money for subsidized cleaning assistance for very wealthy people in municipalities such as Danderyd.

They have decided to let the banks raise interest rates at the same time as the banks are making record profits. They want to introduce market rents, i.e., shock-increased rents for Sweden's tenants. At the same time, the property owners have never been richer. Then one has chosen a side.

We see it when teenagers who have grown up in Sweden risk being deported. We see it when people are pitted against people while the real problems are left unsolved.

Mr. Speaker! The Left Party wants to give Sweden a new direction. We want those who work to also be able to live on their wages. 3,000 kronor more per month, the Left Party's budget would have given a family with children.

Politics must make a difference. If one breaks a tooth, the same conditions should apply as if one breaks an arm. A high-cost protection must be introduced in dental care.

A legislative change implemented by the government has resulted in three years of skyrocketing rents. Now we must change the frameworks for how rents are set. Until then, Vänsterpartiet proposes that rents should be frozen. People must be able to afford a good home.

Equality is retreating. The difference between men's and women's work incomes is now estimated to take a full extra 15 years to erase. That is what the Tidö Government has achieved during this mandate period. It is therefore not until in 37 years that we can get equal wages. That is far too long a time.

That is why we in the Left Party want to carry out one of the largest equality reforms in modern times. We propose a women's wage boost of 30 billion kronor for higher wages in female-dominated occupations in the public sector. Equality is not just about words but about practical action. In the next mandate period, we will raise women's wages.

(Applause)

I believe in Sweden. Sweden is a country with the world's best conditions to be at the forefront of technical development – a country with the engineering tradition, with the coast, the forest, and with the world's strongest steel.

I believe in the industrial worker who works the five-shift. I believe in the nursing assistant who gets up before dawn. I believe in the construction worker, the teacher and the retiree who have built this country.

When every person has a job to go to, Sweden becomes stronger. That is the direction Vänsterpartiet wants to take Sweden. Therefore, we stand on the side of the Swedish people.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to lift my gaze from the current affairs to the future, although it is a future that is already here.

Twenty years ago, few people could imagine how quickly technology would change our lives: that a small phone in the pocket would become our map, our office, our bank, and perhaps the way to find a life partner. What sounded like science fiction became everyday life.

Now we face the next major technological shift, artificial intelligence. Generative AI is not just about smarter apps or better search engines. AI is transforming entire societies and industries: how we run companies, how we detect diseases, how we defend democracy, how we educate our children, and how we organize the entire working life.

The question, therefore, is not whether AI will change Sweden. The question is whether Sweden shall be involved in shaping the development or stand by and watch.

AI implies enormous opportunities. In healthcare, AI can help doctors detect cancer earlier and find exactly the right treatment for the right person. In industry, AI can, with its computing power, identify entirely new manufacturing methods and strengthen Swedish competitiveness.

AI can improve and personalize teaching in schools, so that all children and young people receive exactly the support they need. And in a country like Sweden with large distances, AI can create new opportunities for entrepreneurship, service, and transport throughout the country.

If anyone thinks that development is moving slowly, it is enough to look at what happened this past week. An AI model from OpenAI recently managed to find a solution to an 80-year-old mathematics problem that researchers have worked on for generations. That says something important. AI is no longer developing step by step. It is accelerating.

What only a few years ago was considered uniquely human expertise is now beginning to be challenged faster than almost anyone thought was possible. Politics must also understand that this is happening now.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden actually has fantastic conditions. We are one of the world's most innovative countries and one of the countries that attracts the most private risk capital to AI initiatives in proportion to our size.

We have over 1,000 AI startups in Sweden. It is no coincidence. It is a result of people daring to build new things and think big. But it is no longer enough to be the best in Europe when the competition comes from outside. USA invested the equivalent of thousands of billions in AI just last year. At the same time, Sweden's national AI strategy has a budget of barely half a billion. It is not leadership in a historical technological shift but a symbolic gesture.

We see the results already today. Swedish companies are built on American infrastructure, financed by American capital, and all too often sold abroad. It is not a failure for Swedish entrepreneurs but a failure for Swedish politics.

Sweden's growth ranked 25th among the EU's 27 countries during the first quarter of 2026. We have a government that does not take AI development seriously or that demonstrates very poor political agency. Therefore, the Center Party has presented a new direction for Sweden in the AI era.

We want to build world-class AI research to make Sweden one of Europe's best countries for innovation and investments. We want to make it easier for researchers, entrepreneurs, and engineers to come here and stay here, instead of, as the government wants, deporting them or possibly threatening to deport their children. The companies of the future are built where the talents are.

We also see a need to realign job and education policy for the AI era. Education, transition support, and labor market policy must be adapted to how AI changes jobs, so that more people can take new jobs as the entire working life is being restructured. Therefore, we want to create a committee that performs a continuous analysis of AI's impact on the labor market and the education system so that we can continuously present new, relevant policy. We want to do this so that Sweden will stay one step ahead in the digital transition.

Centerpartiet also wants that young people from upper secondary school up to college and university should get access to relevant AI services. It is not controversial but completely necessary.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden can do more than this. The future is absolutely not waiting, but is being built right now by the countries that dare to invest in knowledge, technology, and people. I want Sweden to be such a country. It is only in this way that more jobs can be created and emissions can be reduced so that we have a welfare to distribute across the entire country.

(Applause)

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It has now been 105 years since Swedish women were first allowed to vote in a parliamentary election: Girls just want to have fundamental rights. This is now a self-evident fact, thank goodness. Through elections, we can both improve and worsen the conditions for Sweden's women and men.

Now Sweden faces yet another crossroads. Despite the fact that there are parties and politicians who proudly label themselves as feminists, it is not uncommon for proposals to come from the left that involve increased governance and a restriction of women's living conditions, as if they were not capable enough to decide their own best interests.

From the Left to now the Centre, there is the proposal to force through an even more precise division of parental leave. It is a quota-smock that hits hard against the mother with a median salary who is at home the first year. With the red-greens' proposal, she would receive 4,400 kronor less in parental benefit every month, in addition to a declaration of incompetence, by questioning whether she is capable of deciding about her own life.

We in the Christian Democrats, on the other hand, want a completely free parental leave. We believe it would be good for both nuclear, blended, and bonus families and everything else that exists in this country. We want there to be more double days and that earned pension shall be shared equally between the child's parents.

Mr. Speaker! It is a serious flaw when politicians in practice want to micro-manage when I as a woman should breastfeed and not, if I can and want to, but are incapable of even seeing the threat from political Islamism. In January, when we last met for debate here in the chamber, I spoke about the lack of freedom that affects women in our country. I call it burka-cracy in sharp contrast to democracy.

The burqa is a symbol of a system that controls the woman, restricts her movements, and defines what is permitted. If anyone wonders how burka-culture and related value patterns risk affecting Sweden and the Swedish social climate, I give you the Left Party. No one – no one – in the Left Party reacted to the terror-shouts from hundreds of members and representatives until the media wrote about the matter.

This is proof that extremism has already nested itself into Swedish democracy. They cleared out the terror-mongers only when the matter was revealed in the media. The Hamas terrorists were hailed, and their massacre of innocent Jewish youths was celebrated.

It is a life-threatening community of values when parents teach their children to chant that they want to be martyrs. As a mother, I cannot understand why some red-green politicians have such desperate difficulty condemning this Islamism. The burqa-bureaucracy is incompatible with Swedish democracy.

Take the fight, not against any individual person's religion, but against terror! Take the fight against oppression! Take the fight for democracy and for equality! These values must apply to everyone in our country. Ensure that the Swedish values, Swedish democracy, apply to all of Sweden's sons and daughters!

(Applause)

Another example concerns female entrepreneurship. It is no secret that the health and social care sector is dominated by women. Six out of ten care companies are run by women. Without these, Sweden would be at the bottom ranking within the EU when it comes to the proportion of women who are entrepreneurs. Yet, it is precisely against this form of enterprise that the left-wing forces are now attacking most fiercely. It is to deny women equal opportunities to realize their dreams. It is to prevent women from managing their own funds. It is not feminism, and it is not free entrepreneurship even for women, but it is prohibitionist policy.

Sweden's women deserve a Sweden that believes in them. Sweden's women deserve more in the coming years. This brings me to healthcare. No other government has done as much for women's health and care as we have managed to do. Still, I am not satisfied. We want more.

We fight for women's right to decide for themselves over their parental leave and to be able to start and run businesses and grow as entrepreneurs. We want it to not be the zip code that determines what care one receives when giving birth to the next generation of Swedes. Believe in Sweden more! Believe in Sweden more for Sweden's women!

(Applause)

In this speech, Camilla Brodin, Christian Carlsson, Torsten Elofsson, Cecilia Engström, Magnus Jacobsson and Camilla Rinaldo Miller (all KD) concurred.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! A feeling that I believe many in Sweden share is that this government has wasted four years. Emissions have increased, the transition has slowed down, and the expansion of renewable electricity has ground to a halt. At the same time, households are being pressured by high costs, welfare is on its knees, and the gaps in society are widening.

After a mandate period with the Tidö government, one thing is certain: Sweden needs a new direction. In three months there is an election, and Miljöpartiet is going to the election on three clear priorities:

The first is a just climate transition in the entire country. It is our great opportunity to build a stronger Sweden with cheaper and more stable electricity and with new jobs and investments that secure and strengthen the whole country.

The second is to defend nature and the environment. The water we drink, the forests we move in and the fields we share: biodiversity is a fundamental pillar for people's lives and for our opportunity to overcome the climate crisis.

The third is a more equal society that strengthens Sweden. Then we must invest in welfare across the entire country and put a stop to the profit-seeking in the market school, not deport teenagers and lock up middle school children in prison. A just transition requires a society that holds together so that more can live a good life.

Mr. Speaker! A decisive issue in the just climate transition is Sweden's path away from fossil dependency. It is not only about reducing emissions but also about household finances, industry, competitiveness, and Sweden's security.

War in Europe, the ongoing energy crisis, and the unrest in the Middle East have made one thing clear. A country that is dependent on fossil energy is vulnerable. Energy is used as a weapon in conflicts, and authoritarian states become stronger as others continue to be dependent on oil and gas.

We must transition and instead expand renewable energy through investments in solar, wind, and green baseload power. It strengthens our resilience, reduces emissions, and provides lower costs for both households and companies. It makes Sweden free from the dependence on Russia and other rogue states.

Mr. Speaker! This is also about people's everyday lives. Today, Swedish households live with uncertainties that they do not control themselves. When the oil price rises, people's finances are directly affected. We know that many Swedes need the car to drive to work, to drop off the children, and to make everyday life work. But let me be clear: it is not cheaper fossil fuels that are needed. It is new alternatives. Sweden deserves better than gasoline populism.

That is why we want to make the alternatives, such as electric cars and public transport, both cheaper and accessible to more people. With our Sverigekort, more people can travel cheaply regardless of where they live in the country. It is not like the Tidö parties' crisis measure for a shorter period, but it is a long-term investment. And we want to see trains that actually work and run on time from the large cities to the smaller towns.

Security is knowing that everyday life will function even next month. It is a freedom that oil dependency cannot give us.

It is about Sweden's competitiveness. A fair transition creates new jobs and strengthens local communities. New companies emerge. People move to where the jobs are. But with the Tidö parties' policy, Sweden falls behind. Swedish industry and Swedish companies want to transition. But if Sweden is to be a country that people want to invest in, long-term thinking and clear rules of the game are needed. Otherwise, the industry will not do this.

This is not done by wasting thousands of billions on nuclear power that will not be realized. It is done by accelerating the expansion of renewable electricity, investing in green base load power, and securing the electrification of industry.

The election this autumn is about what kind of country we want Sweden to be and what kind of country we want to leave behind. Do we want Sweden to be a country that clings to fossil dependency and pushes the problems ahead of itself, or do we want it to be a more equal country that creates security and faith in the future?

We choose the future. We do not wait for it. We build it. Sweden wins on green politics.

(Applause)

In this speech, Janine Alm Ericson, Camilla Hansén, Rebecka Le Moine, Amanda Lind, Jan Riise, Jacob Risberg and Ulrika Westerlund (all MP) agreed.

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! It is a new summer day in Stockholm. In the morning, Abbe woke up to get ready to bake pizzas in his food truck in Hornstull. In the suburb of Sätra, the children's book bus drives forward to invite everyone to a summer of reading. And when Friday is here, the girls' group stands in line at Trädgården, eager to dance and with glitter on their faces.

It is Sweden's capital. Almost half of Sweden's growth is created here – with some of the world's best universities and educational institutions. Stockholm is hard work and toil and culture and entertainment on a late summer day with family and friends. I am not from Stockholm, of course, but life has brought me here.

Mr. Speaker! Everything that is good about Stockholm is despite the current government in the city and the region. Point by point, Magdalena Andersson's party comrades have failed to deliver to the Stockholmers who today uphold Stockholm and those who in the future will uphold Stockholm.

The red-green experiment in Stockholm strikes hard against people's security and freedom. I therefore regret that the Center Party wants to export this to the national level.

I am thinking of the young girls who are struggling to recover from eating disorders but are met by the left-wing government's closed eating disorder clinics. In the Social Democrats' care apparatus, they are served food that I do not believe anyone here in this chamber would have wanted to serve to their children.

I am thinking about the long queues to BUP, which prevent children and young people from receiving help and care in time. I am thinking about all the bus lines that have been discontinued and about the SL card, which has become more expensive despite the Social Democrats promising the opposite. Is it like this because the Social Democrats have held onto the money tightly? No, on the contrary. In Stockholm, they have raised taxes in both the region and the city while simultaneously saddling Stockholmers with debt.

Those who want to know what awaits Sweden if the Social Democrats win power this autumn do best by looking at Stockholm. Under their rule, there will be yoga mats instead of real work experience, gender-segregated swimming lessons instead of feminism in the suburbs, worse healthcare, and fewer bus lines. Perhaps that is why Magdalena Andersson has chosen to live in a bourgeois-governed municipality, at a comfortable distance from the Social Democrats' plans to build away villa areas in Bromma with new rental apartments. That is what hides behind S's promise to build mixed in the fight against segregation.

Mr. Speaker! Point by point, the blue and yellow team has delivered where the Social Democrats have failed. We have not only made multi-billion investments to shorten the queues to healthcare. We have doubled the support for eating disorder care. We are doing what the Social Democrats fail to do here in Stockholm, and we are now halving the price of the bus ticket across the entire country.

The Liberals will continue to fight for all young girls and boys who are suffering and who struggle with eating habits and beauty ideals. We do this with a right to a personal contact person in BUP and with a new school health service that sees every child and ensures that one gets to meet a counselor.

Stockholmers deserve better, and Sweden deserves to be spared a left-wing government. Stockholmers deserve a government that delivers to the people who uphold this city, so that there is hope under the bridge again.

(Applause)

In this speech, Mauricio Rojas (L) and Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M) agreed.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! When Magdalena Andersson wants to win an election, she promises everything to everyone but refuses to say who will pay. We know how it went the last time they were in power. They raised or introduced 46 different taxes over eight years. Still, Sweden's national debt was higher then than it is now. Inflation was 10 percent. Mortgage interest rates were heading towards a tripling.

Now they want to do this again – the Social Democrats, with their completely new mortgage tax, and the Left Party, with a reintroduced property tax. That is what they are actually clear about, but they are not clear about the fact that it will cost. Bank after bank says the opposite. If a tax on mortgages is introduced, mortgages become more expensive – it is not rocket science. It is exactly like food becoming cheaper when we lower the tax on just food.

The red-green parties are now trying to hide their planned tax increases, because they know that the Swedish people do not want them. But we will expose them. We know that hard-working Swedes cannot handle more and higher taxes.

My question to all voters, today and all the way until election day, will be this: Can you really afford a red-green government?

(Applause)

In this speech, John E Weinerhall, Gustaf Göthberg, Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström, David Josefsson and Viktor Wärnick (all M) as well as Erik Hellsborn (SD) concurred.

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! In these days, young people run out from upper secondary schools with their graduation caps on, and young adults graduate at universities and colleges all over our country. They have read, calculated, tinkered, written exams, fixed engines, practiced, and opposed. There is joy and pride.

To all of you who are celebrating now, I want to offer a big congratulations. Sweden is proud of you, and Sweden needs you.

At the same time, many young people are worried about whether there will be jobs now that their studies are finished. It is not so strange when youth unemployment is almost 25 percent. Since Ulf Kristersson became Prime Minister, almost 100,000 more have become unemployed – a full bus every day has been sent out into unemployment.

Four years ago, Ulf Kristersson promised to reduce unemployment. Did he mean 100,000 more unemployed?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am traveling to Linköping next week to celebrate one of these newly graduated students. This particular student will have an engineering degree in her hand. Very hard work has led her there, and very much hard work lies ahead of her after this degree. I mean that it is precisely that kind of effort that should pay off in Sweden.

Unemployment in Sweden is to a very large extent about that very many people have come to Sweden who cannot speak Swedish and who do not have education or experience. If one receives 320,000 asylum seekers over eight years, one orders increased unemployment. If one spices this with 10 percent inflation and a recession, all other unemployment also increases.

Now you promise to do the same thing again: increase the number of asylum seekers and pursue an economic policy with increased taxes that will raise inflation. It is you who create the problems and we who clean up after you.

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Did anyone hear an answer?

That cleaning up means that Sweden gets almost 100,000 more unemployed. Ulf Kristersson has sent a full bus into unemployment every day. Youth unemployment is almost 25 percent.

I was at KTH last week. There, the newly graduated engineers are very worried about whether they will get jobs in Kristersson's Sweden. One in four young people on the labor market is unemployed. Ulf Kristersson is shifting blame, but it will not create a single job in Sweden.

Behind every figure is a person who is not given the chance to show what they are capable of and whose adult life is pushed into the future. There is a Liam, a Vera, a Fatima, a Johan, and an Ali. What does Ulf Kristersson say to all those young people who will start their adult lives in unemployment?

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is indeed fine that the Social Democrats are now opposed to the policy that they themselves previously pursued and which created these problems. It shows a certain sobering up, after all.

We have created new conditions to manage the Swedish growth and the labor market. We have brought down asylum migration to low levels so that we get a chance to focus on integration. We have brought down inflation so that we can use the strength of the Swedish public finances. We have gone from the bottom to the top in the growth league. This means good conditions.

As Magdalena Andersson knows, we have a protracted recession influenced by war in the world, trade wars, and many other factors. With these conditions, however, we see opportunities for all those people who strive every day to lift both themselves and Sweden. I think it is fully understandable that young people are worried that AI will affect their jobs, but the more we can know about the technology, the more people will be able to work with AI – not against AI.

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! As it happened, Ulf Kristersson stood in the speaker's chair and spoke about himself in connection with housing costs. The Moderates describe the new rental model they are now campaigning on as a type of reform that would mean that collectively negotiated rents are replaced by rents where the tenant and the landlord agree on the rent. This is what we call market rents. It would shock-increase the rent for 3 million people every month.

It is not enough with that either. The Liberals and the Christian Democrats have also stood behind this, so it will become a reality if Ulf Kristersson gets four more years.

Now reports have been produced on what this would mean. It would mean 3,000 kronor more in rent. It would drive pensioners from their homes. It would drive families with children into homelessness. Why is this so important to you, Ulf Kristersson?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! A lie does not become better because it is repeated. I am the party leader and Prime Minister. There are no proposals to introduce what Nooshi Dadgostar calls market rents.

The fact is that a government at one point was stumbling close to introducing market rents. It was the left-wing government that we jointly ousted. That government, with the Social Democrats at the helm, wanted to introduce market rents. You and I stopped it together, Nooshi Dadgostar.

What is happening now is something completely different. You want to reintroduce the property tax. If you look at what it would cost people all around our country, you see, for example, that it would cost 25,000 kronor a year for people in Malmö, 20,000 kronor a year – if I remember correctly – for people in Borås and 24,000 kronor a year for people in Jönköping.

We managed to remove the property tax so that people who had houses but did not have high incomes did not have to leave their houses and homes. We want to reintroduce it. Such hypocrisy!

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! It seems that Ulf Kristersson has arranged things when it comes to his own manor, which he has refrained from paying property fees for.

(Applause)

Now I think many Moderates will become very upset. What I read out was, in fact, what the committee decided that the Moderates should go to the election on. I know that Ulf Kristersson's party board wanted it to only apply to new production, but the Moderate Youth League stepped in and struck it out. Now the Moderates are going to the election on introducing market rents in the entire stock. That would mean shock-increased rents for Sweden's 3 million tenants.

I want to say this to all families with children and tenants out there: The Moderates are now going to the election on raising the rent by 2,000, 3,000 or perhaps even 4,000 kronor. The Moderates want to drive people from their housing and homes. They want children to be forced out of their homes. And no, we do not want to introduce a property tax.

Answer this now!

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! On the blue and yellow side, there are no proposals to introduce market rents – it is that simple. We stopped the proposals on this that were in this chamber. We did not do it in any other way, but we did it by ousting the government.

On the red-green side, there are formal parliamentary motions where it is demanded that a mortgage tax be introduced for all people who have ordinary mortgages and where it is demanded that property taxation be reintroduced for all people who own a property.

It is fascinating. Here you stand and make things up, Nooshi Dadgostar, to avoid talking about how you intend to drive people from their homes. You are the most left-wing government alternative that has ever existed in Sweden, at least since the days of the wage funds. We will stop you.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! On June 1, the wage floor for labor migrants was raised to 33,400 kronor. This means that people who do the right thing, work and pay taxes, risk being deported. With the Prime Minister's own rhetoric, it seems to mostly affect food delivery drivers and cleaners. It is true that catering staff, bakers, and chefs are affected. I think it is derogatory of the Prime Minister to look down on an entire industry – the Swedish tourism industry, which is a fundamental basic industry in Sweden.

The new wage floor has gained an additional dimension for the youth who are hoped to stay in Sweden following the government's new announcement. The limit is moved from 18 to 21 to obtain an independent residence permit, but meeting a wage floor of 33,400 kronor is difficult for a 21-year-old.

The Prime Minister said in his opening speech that effort should always pay off. But the raised wage floor will continue to send out people who have done everything right and who work in Sweden. Why does it not apply to everyone that effort should pay off?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! There is a fundamental difference in perspective here. The Centre Party essentially wants free immigration. We do not. I can have respect for that position, but we do not think so.

We have had large-scale immigration to Sweden – so large that we cannot manage the integration. Everyone sees this, all the time. We have had a regulatory framework that has allowed people to come to Sweden as labor migrants from other countries – outside the EU, that is, and primarily Asia and Africa – for 13,000 kronor a month. It did not work. It was abused, and people were exploited. They became crime victims and committed crimes. Add to this a couple hundred thousand people who are already in Sweden legally, who do not work and cannot support themselves.

It is absurd to ask people to come from other parts of the world to jobs that others could take here in Sweden. That is, we changed that policy. You want to go back to the old policy, increase asylum migration and make it easy to come to Sweden as low-skilled. That path has been tried. We do not intend to do it again.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! I believe that the Prime Minister and I were for liberal immigration at approximately the same time in the 90s. We have both left that position, if I have understood correctly. I have at least done so.

(Applause)

We are conducting a restrained, strict immigration policy. This is not about low-wage earners. That type of job was not good in this context. This is about a collective agreement being a collective agreement. The Riksdag and Swedish politicians shall not decide which wages are to be set on the Swedish labor market.

There are shortages, and it is the companies that understand who they are. If a baker who receives a basic salary does not even get to count on the compensation one receives for working nights, it will result in us deporting important key persons even within the tourism industry. Why is it important to deport those who are important pillars in the Swedish tourism industry?

Why is it important to deport those who actually behave correctly? They have studied here. We have invested a lot in education in people who can continue to live their lives and have a job in Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is precisely those who are not to leave Sweden.

Now I understand that the Center Party has decided on a left-wing government. Let me therefore turn directly to you who usually vote for the Center Party, to you who care about entrepreneurship, agriculture and forestry – you who believed that the Center Party was a bourgeois party that stands in the middle but does not want a left-radical government.

Now the Centre Party has finally come out of the closet. Most of us already knew that they want an S—V—MP government, even though they themselves are not even needed in such a government right now. The Centre Party's role will be to legitimize the most left-radical government that Sweden has ever had. A vote for the Centre Party is a vote for the Left Party and for higher taxes on labor and entrepreneurship. My message to all of you is that the Centre has given up on you. You can give up on the Centre Party.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! There is a point where politics stops being about common sense and starts being about symbols. The government's deportation policy has long since reached that point.

When young people who came here as children, who have grown up in Sweden, attended Swedish school and lived their entire lives here receive notices of deportation, something has gone seriously wrong. The government has now been forced to back down from its heartless policy after massive criticism from the general public against the deportations of teenagers.

Mr. Speaker! Due to the Tidö government's fundamentally inhumane view of humanity, many are asking what the next step will be. Who will Ulf Kristersson be in the line of fire next time?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! We inherited a patchwork of migration policy failures that all shared the same underlying meaning, namely to increase asylum migration to Sweden. 320,000 arrived in eight years. Miljöpartiet was one of the master architects behind this, who made certain retreats amidst tears. It was not impressive. It was constant amnesties and constant exceptions.

The laws we are talking about are from 2016 and 2021. Now the government is ensuring that people who have behaved well are not forced to leave Sweden because their parents' residence permits do not also cover them.

The big question is not this, but it concerns those who commit crimes in Sweden. We are presenting a proposal that those who commit crimes in Sweden that result in harsher punishments than fines shall be forced out of the country. You vote against it. You remain in the old migration policy. It was bad for Sweden. We are changing it.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Prime Minister may have temporarily found a heart somewhere in the filing cabinet. But Ulf Kristersson does not answer my question, so let me answer it myself.

If the government continues on the same path, we already know who risks ending up in the line of fire next time. It is the healthcare staff needed in elderly care. It is the engineer that the company cannot afford to lose. It is families that will be torn apart because the government wants to make migration policy even harsher. It is about people who have built their lives here and who are already a part of our society. That is how the government's deportation policy works.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! A straw man is being painted here, and then one shoots at the straw man. What am I supposed to do about that? It is meaningless to say it in that way.

What we are doing now is ensuring that those people who come to Sweden and contribute to our country, support themselves, pay taxes to the common good, respect our laws and want to be a part of our community, not only are allowed to stay but can also become citizens. That is the policy we pursue. Furthermore, we want to ensure that those who come here and abuse everything we stand for and commit crimes – Islamists, extremists – and who fundamentally do not want the Sweden we have, are not allowed to stay.

It is a fairly simple principle. Effort should pay off. Crime should be punished. Sometimes one might think that you think exactly the opposite. We do not.

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Before the last election, the Moderaterna and Sverigedemokraterna promised gold and green forests. Now, in the final party leader debate of the mandate period, it is time to take stock.

Jimmie Åkesson promised to be the guarantor of welfare. Result: alarm reports from Skåne's maternity care, frozen micro-mat 14 times a week in elderly care in Hjo and worsened school results. Åkesson promised to abolish the deduction for everyone working in welfare. Result: The unfair deduction remains, and hard-working people lose thousands of kronor a month and receive a lower pension.

Jimmie Åkesson promised to go into opposition if the welfare system were to be worsened. Result: The welfare system was worsened, and families affected by unemployment get to feel firsthand what a betrayal from the Sverigedemokraterna costs.

Mr. Speaker! Ulf Kristersson promised that unemployment would decrease. Result: Almost 100,000 more are unemployed.

Ulf Kristersson promised to get the economy in order. Result: The Tidö parties are saddling the Swedish people with debt of 200,000 kronor per minute, every day, all year round, to lower the taxes for the very richest.

Mr. Speaker! The final account of Tidö shows that Sweden has been weakened at a time when we should have been becoming stronger. When the party leaders from Tidö are now permitted to reply to me, they may therefore tell the Swedish people why there is such an enormous distance between rhetoric and results, between what the Tidö parties promised before the election and what ordinary people with ordinary jobs and ordinary wages encounter in their completely ordinary everyday lives.

(Applause)

In this speech, Sanna Backeskog, Jim Svensk Larm and Anna-Caren Sätherberg (all S) agreed.

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! In my opening remarks, I raised the Left Party's problems, to put it mildly, and the scrutiny that has taken place regarding the Left Party and its strong links to Islamism, terror romanticism, antisemitism and the like. In the remarks, I also posed a very clear question to Magdalena Andersson, who is to form a government with the Left Party or at least with the support of the Left Party.

I noted no answer to that question in Magdalena Andersson's second speech, so I ask it again: Will Magdalena Andersson let a party with widespread Islamism and terror romanticism into her government, or can she promise here and now that Vänsterpartiet and its lousy values are kept away from government power?

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Antisemitism, Islamism, other forms of extremism or racism do not belong in Sweden. That is not what Sweden is. That is not what Sweden should be.

Therefore, it is incredibly important that every leader, every person, every citizen marks it as soon as it appears, regardless of where in society, where in politics, and in which party it appears. We all have a responsibility for that.

Here I can note that Vänsterpartiet has noted and acted on the revelations that have come to light.

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! There was no particularly clear answer to the question, but perhaps one could still infer that the answer is yes: Vänsterpartiet will be let into the government despite these rotten values, because they have made their mark. They have made their mark when the media has revealed dozens of extremists, Islamists, and people who praise Hamas's attack on October 7.

People who represent Vänsterpartiet celebrated Hamas's attack on October 7. Magdalena Andersson seems content with the fact that Vänsterpartiet has now pushed them off their ballots and is therefore prepared to let them into the government.

I choose to interpret it that way, and I regret this. But it is a welcome news for the Swedish people and those who are to vote on September 13.

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Whether it is antisemitism, Islamism, or other forms of extremism or racism, they have no place whatsoever in my Sweden. But unlike Ulf Kristersson, I do not hand out ministerial posts before the election.

Ulf Kristersson has been clear that a party that had 200 people with Nazi connections on its ballots in the last election should be given the keys to Rosenbad – a party that only during this parliamentary term has had one Member of Parliament who has sung Nazi songs and another Member of Parliament who had an idol image of Hitler.

That party shall get the keys to Rosenbad. The party shall get posts as Minister for Foreign Affairs, Minister for Defence, Minister for Finance, Minister for Education with responsibility for research, and perhaps Minister for Culture with responsibility for minority issues – a party whose leading representatives do not think that Jews or Sámi can be Swedes.

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Let me return to economy and taxes.

Most of the Social Democrats' tax increases are hidden from the Swedish people, but on a few points they are open. The Social Democrats want a mortgage tax that will cost an average Stockholm household approximately 800 kronor per month. Vänsterpartiet wants a property tax that would cost a family in Malmö approximately 25,000 kronor per year. Miljöpartiet wants to return to a fuel taxation that increases the price of diesel by 10 kronor per liter.

This is before counting in the budget hole that exists in the Social Democrats' budget and which must be covered by other tax increases. If you add that to the mortgage tax, it would cost a regular family with children 4,400 kronor a month – 4,400 kronor a month!

My question is not directed at the Social Democrats, but to the Swedish people: Can you really afford a red-green government?

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Let me quote Ulf Kristersson himself: First he creates a straw man, then he begins to shoot at it.

Ulf Kristersson paints a scenario that will never occur. I understand that Ulf Kristersson is stressed and pressured, but it is not good to start believing in one's own fantasies.

It is clear that Ulf Kristersson is very reluctant to speak about the results of his own policy. We have talked about the high unemployment. We have talked about growth below our potential and record numbers of bankruptcies.

Ulf Kristersson talks about the economy, but Ulf Kristersson has received the most extensive criticism from the Fiscal Policy Council that any government has ever received, which is not so strange when one has had a budget deficit of 363 billion.

What happens if they get four more years? How much will they indebt the Swedish people to lower the taxes for the rich?

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Magdalena Andersson's interest in the national debt appeared the day she was no longer Finance Minister. Previously, there was a higher national debt than the one we have today. "We have Europe's best public finances" it sounded like at that time. But the public finances are better today than what she left behind four years ago.

The Social Democrats believe that one can raise taxes without anyone noticing and without it having any consequences. They believe that one can introduce a mortgage tax on the banks that will simply disappear, that no one will see and that no one will notice. But such taxes will lead to increased mortgage costs.

Vänsterpartiet believes that one can introduce a property tax that will only affect a few people. Others will not notice anything.

That is not true. They are dodging the question about tax increases for the Swedish people. They refuse to tell the consequences for completely ordinary families with children. We will expose them.

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! One does not get the feeling in this debate that Ulf Kristersson wants anything other than to intimidate with the opposition.

(Applause)

The truth, Ulf Kristersson, is that nine out of ten get more in their wallets with the Social Democrats' policy. We have a long series of proposals to improve things for ordinary families and create more jobs. During my years in the government, 300,000 new jobs were created, but with your policy, there are 100,000 more unemployed. You have made medicine more expensive, and I want to remove that. I want to increase the child allowance, which has decreased in value. I want to abolish the unfair deduction, and I want all hard-working people who started working and toiling immediately after high school to receive a dignified pension, a workers' pension.

That, Ulf Kristersson, is to take Sweden's hard-working people seriously!

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! Due to the Tidö parties' decision, labor immigration has been halved during this parliamentary term. The result of that is 28 billion in reduced growth and almost 10 billion in lost tax revenues.

Magdalena Andersson says she is passionate about both growth and welfare. Yet, her party is for the tightening of labor migration and seems to think that the recent increases of the wage floor are the pinnacle – even if one has a slightly different formulation in their policy.

I can understand that the Social Democrats do not like labor immigration when the wages are not in accordance with collective agreements. But now the wage levels are absurd.

Why do the Social Democrats support a policy that has made Sweden 28 billion poorer? Why is it good that the government has deprived healthcare, school, and care of 10 billion in tax revenues?

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist for the question.

The system that has existed has resulted in many people in Sweden being exploited and receiving wages far below a reasonable standard of living. The system has benefited criminal fraudsters and made it difficult for serious companies to compete on the labor market. Therefore, we have voted yes to these proposals.

But fundamentally, we want a completely different arrangement for labor immigration. We mean that when there is a labor shortage, people should be able to come here and work for wages in accordance with collective agreements, regardless of the wage level. But when there is no labor shortage, people should not come here, because then the employer has another purpose in bringing people here, for example, to dump wages and conditions or cheat in other ways. We say no to that. We want, therefore, a completely different arrangement. If there is a labor shortage: yes. If there is no shortage: no.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! We agree that companies that cheat are not good for the economy.

But I received no clear answer as to why it is good for growth to deport those who want to work in Sweden right now.

What do the Social Democrats want when it comes to all the young people that Sweden has invested in? I know that the Social Democrats initially thought that the deportations of teenagers were not something to fight so much about. Now these can stay until the age of 21, which is good. But if they get a job, they must still earn 33,400 kronor, and it is completely utopian that someone who has just graduated from high school should receive that salary.

How do the Social Democrats reason regarding ensuring that those who have just graduated should be able to stay here and work?

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats already said in January that we wanted to see a solution so that diligent teenagers who have done everything right are not deported. Before the election, Jimmie Åkesson and the Sverigedemokraterna spoke about the return migration train, but then it turned out that the return migration train consisted of diligent teenagers rather than criminals and crooks.

It is completely the wrong way to go, and that is precisely why we want a different order for labor immigration. If there is a labor shortage, one should be able to come here and work with a salary in accordance with collective agreements and be allowed to stay in Sweden and become a part of our society. If there is no labor shortage, one should not be here. This would mean that, for example, all the nursing assistants who have been deported would not have been deported because Sweden has a shortage of nursing assistants.

(Applause)

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I think the atmosphere during the debate has been a bit cranky, a bit "but you, then – and you, then", so to speak. Now we shall see what mood Magdalena Andersson is in and if I can invite her to a more policy-oriented dance regarding healthcare.

Perhaps one or another noted on their way here today that we provided cake. It was not just a kind gesture because we are a friendly party, but we celebrated that during this mandate period we have succeeded in cutting the healthcare queues by 36 percent.

(Applause)

However, a piece of bitter almond was hidden in the cake, and I regret if anyone received just that piece. Under the leadership of Magdalena Andersson's comrades in Region Stockholm, the healthcare queues have indeed increased by 22 percent.

My question is quite simply: When will the Social Democrats admit that their healthcare policy does not seem to be working?

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I believe it will become an exchange of remarks where we stand and hit numbers at each other's heads. The information I have is namely that the waiting times in Stockholm have been shortened and that there are thousands more doctors and nurses now than when the Kristdemokraterna were part of the government. Furthermore, more patients are satisfied with the care. This can be compared with Tidöstyrda Skåne, where the average waiting time for visits and surgery is significantly longer than in Stockholm – if we are now to hit regions at each other's heads.

But perhaps that is not what we should do. Instead, we should perhaps talk about how we can ensure that Sweden's regions get better conditions to do their jobs so that people receive care in time. For that, a long-term and stable financing is needed, and we have a concrete proposal: to increase the state's support to the regions in line with the increasing costs, i.e., an indexing of the state grants. What does Ebba Busch think about that?

(Applause)

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Ebba Busch thinks it is a bad idea because of the shared responsibility. The 21 regions actually have full responsibility for healthcare, but then the state is supposed to try to compensate for their shortcomings. It becomes messy. I want instead to abolish the regions and let the state take responsibility for healthcare in all of Sweden, so that even your zip code does not determine what care you receive.

We have added 25 billion more to cut the healthcare queues. The money has gone towards operating cataracts, hip joints and hernia, and we have had a superb outcome when we have given performance-based money to cut the healthcare queues. But this arrangement is not sustainable in the long run.

Magdalena Andersson is recognized as being good at and seems to enjoy counting, and there is still a difference in reality and outcome. When S governed at the national level, the healthcare queues doubled. Now we have shown that when we govern at the national level, we have succeeded in cutting the healthcare queues by 36 percent. The difference between creating and cutting healthcare queues seems to be an S.

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! The truth is that the difference is a pandemic. At that time, it was necessary to cancel a lot of other care in order to treat those with covid. I believe that Ebba Busch also thought that it was a good idea.

The truth is that under this government's rule, the cost increases we notice every time we enter a store have also been felt in healthcare. But instead of providing the regions with funding conditions, Ebba Busch and other ministers have chosen to lower the tax for themselves and other high-income earners by 6,000 kronor every month. The result of that is that Sweden now has the longest healthcare queues ever measured.

But I would like to cooperate with Ebba Busch on a stable funding of healthcare throughout the country, because that is what the Swedish people deserve.

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I intend to continue where my friend Ebba finished and speak about healthcare, more specifically eating disorder care. I have met the young girls and boys who are struggling to survive, who testify to how every meal is a struggle and who tell how the Social Democrats' eating disorder policy in Stockholm has led to moldy food, pieces of glass in the food, and sludge that no one in here would want to serve to their children.

My question to Magdalena Andersson is quite simple: Are you satisfied with the Social Democrats' management of the eating disorder care for young and vulnerable girls here in Stockholm?

(Applause)

(TALMANNEN: In the Riksdag, we speak via the Speaker.)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Obviously, there are improvements to be made or problems regarding the food in the eating disorder care. Many have testified to this, and there has been reporting on it. On the other hand, the queues to the eating disorder care have been shortened in Stockholm so that almost one hundred percent now receive care in time. It is a positive development in Stockholm.

Just as I told Ebba Busch, we can use Stockholm as an example. Simona Mohamsson used the eating disorder care in Stockholm as an example, and I can use Tidöstyrda Skåne as an example. There, they have now invented the concept of the BB-armchair because there are no beds for newly released women, and babies are wiped with coarse wipes instead of soft ones.

If the Liberals now care about healthcare, perhaps one should see to it that money is spent on just healthcare or school instead of lowering the tax for the very richest, as has been chosen to do during the last four years.

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Magdalena Andersson never wants to take responsibility for her party.

The Liberals and the government have invested billions to shorten the queues and doubled the support for eating disorder care, but it is Magdalena Andersson's party that governs in Region Stockholm. It is Magdalena Andersson's party in Stockholm that has shut down eating disorder clinics. It is Magdalena Andersson's party that has shuttled patients around like hockey pucks, without care. That is what the children here in Stockholm testify to.

My question remains simple: Is this what a young girl or boy who needs to receive help all the time in their everyday life can expect in the rest of the country if, against all odds, there is a change of power this autumn?

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Liberals might want to take responsibility for their policy in Tidöstödda Skåne, if we are now going to talk about taking responsibility.

We have had a government that over four years has failed at many things. One of the absolute biggest failures is the fact that one has chosen time and again to spend billions on tax cuts for the richest instead of ensuring that one finances good healthcare all around the country. We have had the longest care queues that have ever been measured.

You are not funding the school. We have falling school results and disruption in the classrooms. We have Annelie in Hjo who has to eat frozen food seven days a week because the municipality cannot afford lunch boxes. This is the result of four years with the Liberals in government. Who is it that is going to take responsibility for that?

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not intend to change tracks, even though a great deal of very interesting things have been said in the debate so far as one would like to think things about. I will surely have the opportunity to do so at a later time.

I note that Magdalena Andersson avoids the question of whether she intends to let Vänsterpartiet into the government or not. She does not hand out any ministerial posts in advance, she said. And she does not need to do that, but I still expect some kind of announcement before the election regarding a party that has the type of tendencies that Vänsterpartiet has. There, values and trends flourish that are anti-democratic, that are anti-Semitic and that glorify terror and massacres on innocent civilian people.

There, Magdalena Andersson remains liable. I think it is weak leadership, Mr. Speaker. It is weak leadership to not be able to more clearly distance oneself from a party with those types of currents. I also think it is weak leadership to shift the question onto me and Ulf Kristersson, who is Prime Minister. That is not what the question is about.

It is common knowledge that even the Sverigedemokraterna have had problems with more or less suitable persons and people with extremist views. The difference between Sverigedemokraterna and Vänsterpartiet is that for a long time we have had a systematic work to get rid of those people, while Vänsterpartiet has seen a chance to get more votes by attracting these extremists. That is the big difference.

It is enough to look at any train since October 7 where Vänsterpartiet participates. There we can see these Hamas activists and other things. It is a gigantic difference. Magdalena Andersson remains the one responsible, Mr. Speaker.

(Applause)

In this speech, Chris Dahlqvist, Rashid Farivar, Patrik Jönsson, Patrick Reslow and Martin Westmont (all SD) agreed.

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats are running for election on making everyday life better for hard-working people through more money in the wallet and higher pensions, among other things by removing the unfair "karensen".

Quarantine is an expensive and unfair situation for everyone who works hard but cannot work from home during a mild cold. It concerns police officers, construction workers, teachers, industrial workers and military personnel. For them, it is about thousands of kronor.

The unfair deduction does not only hit hard against the salary during the month one is ill, but the deduction is also a hidden pension trap that results in a lower pension for the rest of one's life. It is about thousands of kronor for people who have worked a full, long professional life.

Mr. Speaker! Before the election, Jimmie Åkesson promised to remove the ceiling for all welfare personnel. He betrayed that promise, but my question is another: Why does he think that police officers, construction workers, and firefighters should receive lower pensions just because they cannot perform their jobs from home?

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not think so. Then we can move on to what Magdalena Andersson actually wanted to talk about and what she actually only talked about, namely the clearance.

It is true. We received 20 percent of the votes in the election, Mr. Speaker, and then one cannot push through 100 percent of one's policy. Magdalena Andersson knows this. She has held heavy positions in minority governments and knows that one needs to do things that one perhaps does not think are the best and that one sometimes must refrain from doing things that one thinks are good because one does not have a majority in the Riksdag with one.

Since Magdalena Andersson thinks it is so important to get rid of the quarantine deduction, it is unfortunate that there is that red line against talking with us. We are, in fact, possible to talk to. One could have talked with us about this issue and tried to find a solution. But that has not been done; instead, one throws out one's own proposals in the Riksdag and expects us to vote for them. We naturally do not do that without first negotiating the proposals, Mr. Speaker.

(Applause)

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

Magdalena Andersson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now I did not ask about the allowance for welfare workers, which is a broken promise, but about the allowance for everyone else – construction workers, firefighters, industrial workers, teachers, bus drivers and many others who lose thousands of kronor in pension because they cannot work from home during a minor cold and who lose thousands of kronor the month they are sick.

The tax deduction Jimmie Åkesson does not want to remove. On the contrary, Jimmie Åkesson has read the pamphlets of PR people and lobbyists and told me that it would cost 40 billion. But if it is the case that he has now let go of the lobbyists' pamphlets and wants to remove the tax deduction for everyone, it would be a very welcome turn from the Sweden Democrats.

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I have not read any pamphlets from lobbyists, Social Democrats, or anyone else.

I note, however, and it is a reasonable perception, that if one abolishes the tax reduction for children, it will cost money. There are different figures. We can say it is 10 billion. It might be 20 billion. It might be 40 billion. But it costs money. It is something I am quite convinced that Magdalena Andersson agrees with.

It is clear that one in opposition can say: "We shall abolish the tax reduction for work. It is unfair." But if one then has no financing for it – which the Social Democrats do not have for their proposal, Mr. Speaker – one shifts that cost over to those who are employers.

Magdalena Andersson has devoted this debate to talking very much about unemployment. How does Magdalena Andersson think unemployment will be improved by us throwing over 10, 20 or 40 billion more in costs at those who are to employ people in this country? It is completely illogical, Mr. Speaker – completely illogical.

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! When the Left Party was involved and had influence over Sweden's state budget, we improved the sickness insurance rules significantly because so many people were being left without insurance at that time.

But when the Sweden Democrats are allowed to participate, the exclusions increase and, for example, the rejections of the sickness benefit increase by over 33 percent. That was what happened last year – 76 people were denied sickness benefit every day last year. Again, the government and the Sweden Democrats pretend that severely ill people can work full-time as painters or bakers, which are heavy and complex jobs.

Now you have started a wave of benefit reductions. Why have you prioritized that? It is Sweden's workers who pay into their own health insurance. Why, Sverigedemokraterna, have you caused a new wave of benefit reductions?

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! This is constantly recurring. We have prioritized, it is even called, to initiate a new wave of decommissioning.

The Sweden Democrats have, during this mandate period and actually during all mandate periods that we have been in the Riksdag, worked for a generous and reasonable health insurance. We continue to stand firm on that.

Since it is the case that there is no majority in the Swedish Riksdag for the improvements that we would like to make in the health insurance, those who could possibly create such a majority in the Swedish Riksdag have red lines against talking with us, Mr. Speaker, and then it becomes very difficult to negotiate such types of proposals.

That is why the parties on the left wing within the opposition have simply chosen not to make these improvements, because it is more important not to talk with the Sverigedemokraterna. It is truly a prioritization, in contrast to what Nooshi Dadgostar claims about me and my party.

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is completely incomprehensible what Jimmie Åkesson is talking about. We have submitted as many proposals as possible in the committee and in the Swedish Riksdag regarding changes to the regulatory framework and on improving the health insurance. But the Sverigedemokraterna have rejected them.

We have even produced an investigation on the care day. The Sweden Democrats saw to it that it was concluded, actively. They have opted out of this issue. It was not important enough that Sweden's wage earners should have a good health insurance. And now there are case officers at Försäkringskassan who claim that severely ill people should be able to take completely normal full-time jobs and therefore deny them insurance.

Why, Jimmie Åkesson, do you not do more to change this? Are you proud of yourself when you expose seriously ill people to yet another wave of layoffs?

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We are not sitting in the government. This question is also not something covered by the agreement we have with the government, so we are quite free to act in the issue of the health insurance in the way we want.

Once again, the problem is that there is no one else to talk to. The parties in opposition beat their chests and say: "We are submitting proposal after proposal. We have submitted these proposals. There are masses of proposals." The Left Party has even conducted its own investigation right here in the chamber. Then they expect us to support this here in the Riksdag without us even talking to each other first. So that just doesn't work. Nooshi Dadgostar knows that.

Remove these damned red lines instead! Be prepared to talk with everyone who can create reasonable majorities in the Riksdag! Then maybe we can do good things together. I am completely open to that. It is you who constantly say no and have done so for many years now.

(Applause)

(NOOSHI DADGOSTAR (V): You have not put forward a single proposal.)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! Ahead of the 2022 election, SD presented a rural program with 85 election promises for the Swedish countryside. But rural policy seems to have been low-priority for this government. We in the Center Party have therefore reviewed all of SD's rural election promises from 2022. It emerged that approximately 10 percent of your election promises are fulfilled – 11 of 85.

The development does not look so good. The police stations across the country have become fewer. The state presence has deteriorated. The government and SD ignored the ownership rights in the forest in the constitutional law investigation – they deferred the issue to a new investigation.

It is quite obvious that SD's priorities in negotiations with the government have been to dismiss employees within healthcare and school, which the countryside is crying out for, rather than to fulfill their goals for those who live and work in Sweden's rural areas. The Sweden Democrats' betrayal of the countryside is a fact, and the voters should realize it.

I would like to know if Jimmie Åkesson can list his five best proposals for the development of Sweden's countryside moving forward.

(Applause)

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I have not read the Centre Party's review. I imagine that it might not be completely objective, but it doesn't matter. It is always interesting, so I am happy to take part of it. But if I noted correctly, it is therefore 11.85 percent of our election promises that are fulfilled.

Then I wonder, Mr. Speaker, what percentage of their election promises Centerpartiet has fulfilled during the last three years. None at all, I believe. They have simply not had any influence. They have disqualified themselves from influence. And now they have gone all the way and chosen to support a social democratic Prime Minister completely openly. They have, therefore, not pushed through anything of what they promised in the last election. We have, at least almost 12 percent. I am not satisfied with that, but it is better than zero.

One can ask the question back: What percentage of her election promises does Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist expect to get through together with Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet in a red-green government?

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! Jimmie Åkesson will, of course, be made aware of our review. It was 11 of 85; I shall be careful with the figures.

I actually did not hear any answer to my question, which was which are the five most important priorities for Jimmie Åkesson and the Sverigedemokraterna moving forward in rural policy.

There are many things in rural policy that are very important. The Center Party has, for example, said that our fourth election promise is that 50 billion are needed for the countryside, primarily to be able to ensure that small schools can remain through a special small school law and that small healthcare units can remain in the countryside, because the countryside is more than the price at the pump.

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I can think of one thing that the Centre Party has contributed during this parliamentary term. It was when Sollefteå Hospital was closed. It was the Centre Party that pushed for that, regarding the countryside.

It is very good things that Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist brings up. We will also go to the election on enabling village schools and community schools to remain both in rural areas and in the countryside. It is very important for everything else so that people can stay. If the school disappears, people will move, and then everything else moves away from there too – not least job opportunities. It is a very good proposal.

The Center Party says that they will invest in green industries and do so with half a billion. We allocated 1.6 billion to protect Swedish food production in the budget that I believe we made a decision on as recently as yesterday.

It is clear that there is a huge amount of things to do. However, I do not think that one should underestimate that fuel is a crucial matter for people in the countryside – both in food production and privately. This we understand, and therefore we want to keep fuel costs low.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats often speak about safeguarding Swedishness and about traditions, cultural heritage, and that which makes our country unique. However, there are few things that are as Swedish as our nature: the forests where we pick mushrooms, the lakes where we swim, the beaches that are open to everyone, and the landscapes that generation after generation have grown up with.

Still, the Sweden Democrats have time and again stood behind weakening the protection of just this nature. The Sweden Democrats want to dismantle the shore protection. Valuable nature areas are opened for exploitation, and the protection of the forest is weakened. I find this strange.

My question to Jimmie Åkesson is simple: If the Sweden Democrats are serious about preserving Sweden, why does it not apply to Swedish nature?

In this speech, Rebecka Le Moine and Jan Riise (both MP) concurred.

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I agree with the description that Sweden is fantastic, and it is important that we stand guard over things that are unique to our way of life and that are unique to our country. This is something the old parties in this assembly have been incredibly bad at for a very long time.

Just nature is perhaps the most Swedish thing there is. Our relationship with nature is probably completely unique, and it is manifested, not least in the right of public access (allemansrätten) and other expressions.

This becomes a bit interesting considering what Daniel Helldén said in the speaker's chair not so long ago. He spoke about enabling more green base power – but what is green base power? I can only think of one type of power, and that is hydropower.

Speaking of nature, I must therefore ask Daniel Helldén: Which untouched rivers does Miljöpartiet intend to exploit in order to enable more green base power?

(Applause)

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! It is obvious that Jimmie Åkesson has not been listening when we have talked about what green base power is, but we can have a special seminar about it.

What Jimmie Åkesson never answered is what happens when we have finally built on the shores that you are involved in letting be exploited and when valuable natural areas have been exploited and it is no longer possible to regret it. That is why nature policy is about responsibility. I do not think I hear any responsibility for what the Sverigedemokraterna say they protect.

This is not just about us who live today, but also about the next generation. I believe we have a responsibility to hand over as much nature as we ourselves have had a part of. Unfortunately, the Sweden Democrats seem to mostly think that these short-term interests weigh more heavily than the responsibility. Therefore, I wonder what concrete proposals the Sweden Democrats have to protect Swedish nature, because I did not hear that.

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

Jimmie Åkesson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Nature can certainly be protected in different ways, and there are certainly quite a few perceptions about what is the right way to do it. There are not many opinions I share with the Green Party, and I do not think I do so in this regard either.

I received no answer as to which rivers are to be exploited in the name of nature.

We want to enable serious forest owners in Sweden to manage their forests. I do not think it is an issue we should push over to the EU. I do not think it is reasonable to, as the Miljöpartiet advocates, build large solar parks on functional agricultural land – perhaps the best we have in this country. It is a completely insane policy.

If that is what Miljöpartiet means by protecting nature, then I am not on that side at all. We shall protect nature, but we shall also utilize the fantastic opportunities we have in this country so that people can have quality of life and live good lives. There we differ very, very much.

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs a new political direction more than ever. We must move away from the Tidö policy, where people are pitted against one another.

Families in Sweden cannot endure four more years of right-wing politics. Everyone who goes to work every day should get to share in a growing economy. Therefore, it is time to shorten the working hours. We shall strengthen healthcare, invest in the pensioners – not in the billionaires. We shall build affordable housing and transition for the climate.

A strong left-wing party in government is the only thing that can secure Sweden from right-wing politics, as the Center Party has given a clear message: They want to change the Prime Minister, but the goal is a government that continues to pursue right-wing politics.

Yesterday, Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist said in Studio Ett that the party shall become so large that V is not needed. So this is the Centerpartiet's plan to force Magdalena Andersson to continue on the path towards increased economic inequalities, more sell-offs and poorer security at work.

If you want a clear shift in Swedish politics, it is the Vänsterpartiet you should vote for this year. You may never have done it before. You may be wondering. This year, however, it is time to lend your vote to Vänsterpartiet. If we are to fight unemployment and not the unemployed, and ensure that families with children can afford to do something fun on vacation and that healthcare takes precedence over lowered capital taxes, Vänsterpartiet needs to grow even more.

If we get your vote, we will ensure that the red election promises regarding equality given in this election campaign are also fulfilled.

Sweden is worth so much more than this government and this policy.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to set aside tax policy and other matters.

We have all read Expressen's revelations about how at least 25 candidates for Vänsterpartiet have praised terrorists. They celebrated Hamas's murders and rapes on October 7, 2023. They praised suicide bombers as martyrs, and they justified violence and murders of civilians – the antisemitism has been recurring. Several of these people have Nooshi Dadgostar gladly posed with.

It is good that Nooshi Dadgostar has excluded several of them from the party, but we all know that this is not about isolated incidents. These views seem to exist deeply and broadly among the Vänsterpartiet members and candidates.

It is so incredibly harmful for the democratic struggle against antisemitism and against violence as a political strategy. What signals does this send to Sweden's Jews and to all those who are subjected to terror when the fourth largest party in the Riksdag has candidates who question the Holocaust and support terror?

I wonder: why does Nooshi Dadgostar believe that people with these values seek out just her party?

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! There is no place for racism, neo-Nazism or antisemitism in Sweden. People's equal value is what builds our democracy. It is what makes us strong: that we trust one another and that we build this country together. That is what we in the Left Party will always stand up for. It is the core of the workers' movement's message.

That is why it is very important that, in just a few hours, we ensured that these individuals were removed from the positions they held on the municipal lists. We will also tighten the routines that can be tightened.

One must nevertheless admit that sometimes individuals appear who do not share the parties' values. The Center Party certainly knows this well too. One must then act quickly and forcefully and ensure that they disappear from these places.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! I hear what Nooshi Dadgostar is saying, but I do not understand if she is trying to describe why people with these values seek out Vänsterpartiet.

These people are, however, welcomed into the party. Take the example of the man in Karlskrona! Already in 2006, it was reported that he had been expelled from a folk high school for having praised an al-Qaida leader. And it has continued since then: Hamas, the Houthis, Hezbollah – he has praised them all. At the same time, he represented Vänsterpartiet in the municipal council. He took pictures with Nooshi Dadgostar in 2021 and 2023. Vänsterpartiet's office in Karlskrona was warned that he was a terror-promoter, but before the election in September, they still put him on the list again.

Mr. Speaker! The political parties must distance themselves from violence and terror, always and everywhere. Despite that, I note that I am the only party leader in the opposition who has requested a reply from the Left Party today. I do not understand Nooshi Dadgostar's answer. It is good that she excludes individuals, but what will Nooshi Dadgostar do to ensure that antisemitism does not find its way into this chamber on a left-wing mandate this autumn?

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! We have acted, and the individuals who have shared things – either several years ago or now – are no longer on the lists. There is no place for racism and antisemitism, nor for supporters of genocide, in this chamber. That is our opinion.

There are occasions when people appear whom one has not been aware of and who have done things that are very serious. We know that this has happened even in the case of the Center Party. There, a number of older and younger men have appeared who have done things that are very, very serious and which I assume do not permeate the Center Party. The crime of abuse against children is very serious, and I know that Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist is passionate about it being combated with force – just like that those persons should not represent the Center Party when they appear.

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I perceive that Nooshi Dadgostar is tired of talking about her terror-loving comrades, so I think that we shall instead talk about the Left Party's criticism of the performance-based purchase billion in healthcare.

Here is the fundamental question of whether the state should be able to steer towards shorter care queues or not. Just this model with clear requirements has resulted in that we have been able to shorten the care queues. Let us look at the number of patients who in April 2026 had waited longer than 90 days and compare it with the number in February 2025, Mr. Speaker! Even here, I have brought completely new figures as a gift to Nooshi Dadgostar. The number of women who have waited for a cataract operation has decreased by 70 percent, and the queues for hip replacement surgeries have decreased by 47 percent.

Nooshi Dadgostar wants to remove exactly that which enables these improvements. Why does Vänsterpartiet want to risk that thousands of people have their operations cancelled?

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! Of course we do not want to risk it – on the contrary.

With Ebba Busch and with the Kristdemokraterna in the position of Minister for Health and Social Affairs, we have experienced the longest healthcare queues ever. It is not actually that strange, because this is an ideological issue. KD, Ebba Busch and all the other conservatives – including the Sverigedemokraterna – will always prioritize large tax cuts over a general and common welfare and a strong healthcare system across the entire country. That is why we saw an enormous wave of layoffs across all of Sweden at the same time as Ulf Kristersson stood next to me and said that no one would be laid off in Swedish healthcare.

Everyone notices this today. Patients and staff – everyone who is in the healthcare system today – notice the large cuts and the prioritization that this government is making. If you invest in something, it is clear that something else suffers damage, and that is the problem with the very measure that Ebba Busch is talking about.

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Nooshi Dadgostar is so miserably bad on welfare issues that it is almost not fair to have this debate.

People talk about welfare, but in reality, the healthcare queues have become longer every time Vänsterpartiet has supported a government. The time before Vänsterpartiet supported a government, the queues doubled. Then a Kristdemokrat joined the Ministry of Health and cleaned up. The time before Vänsterpartiet supported a government, the healthcare queues also doubled. And don't bring the pandemic into this, Nooshi Dadgostar! The queues increased before the pandemic and continued to increase long after it.

It doesn't matter what rhetoric one uses; the reality is that we have succeeded in cutting the healthcare queues for women with forward tilt by 70 percent. Does Nooshi Dadgostar deny that? This is a fact that has made a difference. It is a healthcare policy that has made a difference. We have spent 25 billion more to cut the healthcare queues, but above all, we have the knowledge and the heart to lead the healthcare in Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Christian Democrats' problem is that they lack both knowledge and heart. One only has to look at what the Swedish people decide when they are to choose a party: the Christian Democrats are very close to being voted out of the Riksdag. Perhaps it is time for that now. You simply cannot manage to run the healthcare system, Ebba Busch.

I have long, long experience of Swedish healthcare. Resources were needed, and more staff were needed. Vänsterpartiet's major equality reform, with 30 billion kronor to raise the wages for healthcare staff in Sweden, was needed. We need to ensure that people get the care they are entitled to in all of Sweden.

If one ensures that we get the longest care queues ever and then makes a small improvement, one can of course stand here in the chamber and speak about it – about how good and great one is. But the Swedish people see through this, Mr. Speaker. They will vote out Ebba Busch and the rest of the balloon in September.

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! No one could have missed Expressen's top 25 list of antisemites and terror-mongers in Vänsterpartiet. I am not surprised, as it is not the first time we have read about such revelations. It is obvious that Vänsterpartiet needs help to keep clean.

Therefore, I have a proposal for you, Nooshi Dadgostar. It is simple: Ask all your candidates to sign a declaration of intent stating that they stand behind a two-state solution and a Palestine free from Hamas! I actually have a ready-made template with me here today. Are you prepared to come by and borrow it, Nooshi Dadgostar? Are you prepared to demand this of your members? Or will the Swedish people have to live with the possibility of terror-mongers appearing in social welfare boards around the country – or in the government?

(Applause)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! There is no place for racism, antisemitism or supporters of genocide in this chamber or, we believe, in Sweden at all. Sweden needs to stand up for the equal value of all people. That is the movement we come from – that we build this country together and that those who do the work should be paid for their effort.

There is, however, only one thing that Simona Mohamsson is known for, and that is that she hugs neo-Nazis. If it is a hug she wants, I can perhaps offer that – but preferably not, honestly. The Liberals have such big problems, and no one believes in them anymore. I therefore understand the desperation in Simona Mohamsson's eyes, and I actually think that Simona is a person who is worth much more than this. Run while you can, Simona!

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I think Nooshi Dadgostar can keep her sympathy to herself; I do not need it.

This has become Nooshi Dadgostar's tactic – to try to dribble away from her own responsibility. But you are no Felicia Schröder, Nooshi Dadgostar. This is your responsibility. It is you who wants to bring the party that is now built by terror-romanticists and Hamas-supporters into Sweden's government.

The Swedish people deserve an answer. Are you prepared to demand that your candidates take a written stand against antisemitism and terror romanticism? Or do you intend to wait until Expressen's next 25-in-top list before you do so?

(Applause)

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: I must remind the Minister that we do not use "you" as a form of address here in the chamber.)

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Mr. Speaker! I understand that it is now a tough situation for Simona Mohamsson.

Of course these persons should be removed. They have now, and perhaps even for a large number of years ago, shared things that absolutely do not align with the Vänsterpartiet's values. All parties certainly need to sharpen their routines at lower levels.

But the Liberals have a great challenge because they cooperate with a party whose leading representatives have idol pictures of Adolf Hitler and whose party leader joined in the praises of the murder of Olof Palme. In that party, there is a large number of gang criminals embedded, and the party leader joined when they still wore uniforms at the party meetings.

Let me therefore say that I do not take lessons from such a liberal representative.

(Applause)

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! It has escaped no one that Sweden enters the next mandate period with serious economic challenges. Growth averaged a modest 0.8 percent per year from 2023 to 2025. This placed us in 20th place out of 27 in the EU's growth league.

The government has long claimed that we are now at the top of the growth league. The Prime Minister did so again today. It is false. The truth is that according to Eurostat's report from June 5, we are in 25th place out of 27. Growth was negative in the first quarter compared to the preceding quarter.

The single most important thing we can do to reverse this development is to create more jobs. Jobs are, in fact, something as extraordinary as an economic miracle cure. Every person who moves from unemployment and benefits to a job with a salary of 25,000 kronor represents a gain for the public sector of 300,000 kronor per year.

Sweden today has the third highest unemployment in the EU. If we instead performed like the average country in the EU, we would have 45 billion more to spend on that which builds Sweden better: healthcare, school, care, climate, environment, defense and security.

Mr. Speaker! This parliamentary term has served as an experiment and is an example of what does not work to create more jobs.

This is what we want to do differently: We will make it cheaper to hire, not more expensive. We will seek an agreement on energy, not a conflict. We will give more people a chance at vocational training that provides jobs, not come with promises that are buried in investigations about it. We will make it possible for companies to earn money from the green transition, not increase emissions and scare away investments at the same time. And we will do everything with the long-term perspective that families, companies, and administration need, not borrow money for short-term political gains.

Jobs must increase, emissions must decrease and welfare must function in all of Sweden – because Sweden can do more.

(Applause)

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I can agree that there need to be more jobs and that emissions must be reduced. But the healthcare queues also need to become shorter. There is a very large difference between the regions' tax revenues, and the differences will become greater between the healthcare regions if the state does not provide more money. Therefore, KD seeks the voters' support to achieve a unified national responsibility for healthcare, so that your zip code does not determine your access to pain relief or your chance of surviving a cancer diagnosis.

With our policy, the state takes collective responsibility, regardless of where in the country one lives. The queues decrease, and our policy can mean that we shift the power from regional politicians to staff and patients.

The Center Party often speaks about decentralization. But why does the Center Party choose healthcare politicians over healthcare staff? Why does the Center Party let the party come before the patient?

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the question.

In the Center Party, we are convinced that it is best understood locally how to design one's healthcare. It is about understanding those who are close. The Center Party does not believe that a central authority in Stockholm with half a million employees will be the best – even if it may sound efficient – when it comes to understanding how healthcare should function in Strömsund, in Hoting, and in many rural areas around Sweden.

That is why we submitted a proposal yesterday that a simplification of the healthcare policy and administration is needed, so that the local health centers will exist. It is something that the emergency care constantly repeats, namely that too many of those who come in would have needed to receive care and support for their diagnoses much earlier. It is primarily about those with multiple illnesses. And those with multiple illnesses are often older and live in our rural areas.

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist's main argument here for why we should not do as Denmark and Norway have done and abolish the different regions is, therefore, that the Center Party believes that at the local level, they know best.

Is that why, at the local level, it has been ensured that we have an all too small primary care in relation to hospital care? Is that why the Center Party at the local level has decided to close Sollefteå Hospital, for example? Is that why, at the local level, it has not been ensured that people in need of care receive care in time?

I believe. I believe in church. I believe at home. And I believe more in Vårdsverige. Why should we have it worse in Sweden than the Norwegians and the Danes have it? They have made this healthcare reform, and the evidence is clear. Accessibility has improved, efficiency has increased, and quality is heading in the right direction.

Why should we have it worse in Sweden, Centerpartiet?

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! I know that Ebba Busch has also traveled around in Sweden. But Denmark is a small, flat country. They have completely different conditions. Norway is, as Ebba Busch knows, a very wealthy country with a completely different distribution model for how one can distribute money in the country. It is therefore difficult to compare with those countries and say that they are a role model for how we can do in Sweden.

I do not just believe, but know that when power is centralized, it is very easy with a stroke of a pen to remove that which is far away. It does not affect any person that a civil servant in Södermalm will meet at Ica. But as a local politician, one must stand by one's decisions and be able to say: "Yes, we closed that health center or that school for these reasons." That is why it is important to have the local anchoring for the healthcare to function.

However, it does not work well today, because it is far too administratively heavy. Therefore, we say that we must have new legislation. It must be possible for regions and municipalities to challenge the state and say: "We want to fix this and manage this in this way. You, the state, must prove why we are not allowed to."

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Yesterday, the Center Party announced that they now belong to the socialist bloc. It is a bit sad. Stureplanscentern is now dead and buried. Thoughts on lowered taxes on entrepreneurship, jobs, and savings are but a memory. Instead, they choose socialist tax-increase politics and a view that implies they do not believe that companies play a role in our welfare.

On that, one has also given up on the fact that Vänsterpartiet is to have influence, during a week where we have heard about their terror romanticists and Hamas-shillers.

My question to Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist is: Can she guarantee that Vänsterpartiet will not have ministerial posts in the next government?

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! It was a very game-theoretical question in the policy debate we are having today.

I do not equate the policies of the Liberals and the Sweden Democrats, Simona Mohamsson, and I will not accuse you of standing for the same things as them. I know that you cooperate on your own terms. In the same way, it is with us. We are still liberals. We are a bourgeois party. We have concluded that what is best for the Centre Party and for Sweden is to ensure that a vote for the Centre Party ensures that Sweden does not tilt to the left. We have been crystal clear that the Left Party cannot sit in a government that the Centre Party supports.

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! You could call it game theory, but it is politics that it is about. I am well aware of what I have done to be able to push through my politics. I and my party are cooperating with three parties that I know together will be able to implement tax cuts, increase the penalties for dangerous men, build new nuclear power, and ensure that Sweden moves in the right direction.

Let me entertain the Center Party's fantasies that the Left Party will not be in government – fantasies that are far-fetched. How much more socialist policy will we then get? What else can the Left Party decide to tax, so that it becomes even more unbearable to live in this country than if they had been in government?

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! It was probably no one who heard that the Liberals went to the election on the basis that climate emissions would go up, that 13-year-olds would be sent to prison, or that we would send out teenagers who are here studying and behaving correctly. But that is the politics that a liberal and reasonable party chose to implement after the election.

We go to the election on our policy. We also go to the election on not sitting in government with the Left Party, and we mean what we say. For Sweden to stand strong ahead, we know that jobs must increase, that climate emissions must go down, and that we must achieve a welfare system that works in all of Sweden. That is what we go to the election on, and we know that it is not an agenda that the Left Party can implement together with us.

(Applause)

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to turn to everyone who is following this debate via television or radio. Now you have heard the different political alternatives. That which has received the most attention regarding what the government has achieved has had to do with what we promised before the last election. We have put order on the large-scale migration and the many shootings, made it cheaper to refuel and furthermore strengthened ordinary people's finances. Now a family with children has 5,000 kronor more in their wallet thanks to our policy, as the Prime Minister has pointed out.

This has led to many media headlines. But at the same time, the KD heart has pumped out reforms that strengthen our welfare. It has not received as much attention. Today, I have been able to say that we have succeeded in turning the situation for the healthcare queues; they are now cut by 36 percent. They have thus decreased by more than one third. We have lowered the price of dental care by 90 percent for all of Sweden's seniors. We have introduced a leisure card so that every child can have a meaningful leisure time even if mom or dad is without a job for a period. We are making historical investments in child and adolescent psychiatry and better transitions to adult psychiatry for those in need of this. We are also the first government to see involuntary loneliness as a real health problem.

Mr. Speaker! The left side is tempting in this debate with more welfare, but it would come together with complete red-green chaos. Therefore, I want to say to all of you who are listening that the choice does not stand between hard and soft measures. It is possible to cut both migration queues and healthcare queues. One can bring order to both the energy supply and welfare. With KD, you get the best of both worlds: a conservative policy with care for the human being.

(Applause)

In this speech, Christian Carlsson, Hans Eklind and Magnus Oscarsson (all KD) concurred.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! My question is perhaps both hard and soft.

One and a half years ago, the AI Commission presented its conclusions and proposals. It was done half a year earlier than planned because AI development is accelerating so rapidly. We need to present this faster than we intended, said Carl-Henrik Svanberg. This is completely unique for a Swedish investigation, I believe.

The Minister for Digitalization himself, the Christian Democrat Erik Slottner, who received the commission's proposal, commented to TT: "I would not use the word acute." And one might say that the government has lived by that motto. In one and a half years, the government has only implemented a handful of the 75 proposals that the AI commission presented. Despite the proposals being fully investigated, they have ended up in new investigations at the Government Offices.

How can Sweden be a part of the AI development and not just a bystander on the sidelines who sees itself overtaken by the competitors?

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to innovation, Sweden is a beacon, a light in the dark. Within the Swedish people and Swedish companies, there is a strength that we need to unleash to overcome our rather difficult and serious problems. Sweden and Europe risk being squeezed between Trump, Putin, and China. We shall be leading even in the AI transition – not in all areas, but in some decisive critical areas where we become indispensable and it is not possible to bypass Sweden. It is an important part of the strategy.

The AI strategy that the government has decided on is an important first step. But it needs to be combined with the measures we take next year. We are changing the entire history of environmental assessment in Sweden and moving from 328 different instances to one instance. We believe that the type of massive simplification proposals, combined with a sharp AI strategy, is crucial to unleashing the power of Swedish entrepreneurship.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! The government has spent approximately half a billion on an AI strategy. Other countries are spending thousands of billions. We know, for example, that development requires what are called sandboxes, where one can observe the development while simultaneously doing something. It is not possible to regulate sufficiently smartly and make decisions here in the Riksdag; instead, we need these types of regulations, which the government does not dare to release.

We know that this would be fantastic for the pharmaceutical industry, the automotive industry, and the energy sector. All our Swedish main industries will be transformed with AI. But we are lagging behind, because our legislation is too slow.

In what way is the Minister for Enterprise working to establish those types of sandboxes, so that we can be at the forefront and be able to do it?

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! This is another area where the Centre Party and the sitting government could work more to pave the way for entrepreneurship. We have plenty of this kind of entrepreneurship in Sweden. We are leading in Europe when it comes to so-called unicorns. We have an extremely strong startup scene, but we need to get better at ensuring that these companies can grow and bring more capital into Sweden.

When I speak with the business community, I do not hear that they want us to introduce all parts of the AI strategy. Some proposals were perhaps not the best – we have moved forward with the best proposals. What is being pointed out are simplifications, simplifications, and simplifications, as well as access to capital and energy. Now we have priority in the research and innovation bill for, among other things, test hubs and sandboxes.

What would be absolutely most harmful for Sweden would be a rollback of the energy policy that is currently paving the way for fossil-free base load and more nuclear power, which is what a sustainable AI strategy needs.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Riksdag risks soon making a historically harmful decision to abolish the municipal veto against uranium mining. The criticism from local communities and municipalities has been massive. To alleviate the concern, the Tidöregeringen has instead promised a new municipal veto against the mining of alunschist.

The problem is only that there is no such veto. No investigation is presented, and there is no timetable for when it is to arrive. What the government is doing is removing the municipalities' veto against a promise of a new veto at some point in the future.

Mr. Speaker! The Christian Democrats often speak warmly about decisions being made as close to the people as possible. But when it comes to uranium mining, it suddenly seems that no longer applies.

I would therefore like to ask Ebba Busch: When will the government's promised veto arrive?

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! My plan is – it is in any case what is in my calendar – that I will be able to tell more about it next week.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! It is an exciting announcement, if it is an announcement at all, since you have been dragging this out for ages. You want to abolish the veto, and then a veto will come at some point in the future. The reasonable thing is to start by ensuring that it remains.

When the minister says it will come next week, it is to deceive the municipalities. One must take everything in the right order. Now the municipalities risk losing the veto. We have no idea what the government will come up with.

It is clear that the government and the Sweden Democrats are trying to mislead and trick the Swedes into something that is extremely dangerous. It is possible that there will be cake next week. I do not know.

It is fundamentally about very large interventions in land and water. Miljöpartiet will not accept that. We say no to uranium mining, even in alumschist, and yes to local self-determination.

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Sometimes cake is needed, and sometimes uranium is needed. Sweden and the world need more uranium because we need more nuclear power and more fossil-free baseload power, or if one prefers, green baseload power, which I too can imagine calling it.

We have safe and secure methods for mining uranium. Then there is a very precise permit process for how it is allowed to proceed. Therefore, it is unreasonable to have a municipal veto against it.

Regarding slate, there is no proven method today for mining it in a safe way. Therefore, we have said that we want to investigate a municipal veto against this, but it shall not be in the way that has been done previously.

The local must have the opportunity to say its piece, and the companies must have the local with them. If the research is changed here, it is possible. But right now, that basis does not exist. Therefore, we think that this has been a reasonable way forward.

At the same time, Sweden nevertheless becomes a stronger mining nation, and Sweden and Europe become less dependent on China than we are today. So we build Sweden strongly and respectfully.

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The unrest in the Middle East once again shows something we have known for a long time. Sweden's fossil dependency makes us vulnerable, and it costs not least for agriculture.

When we speak with farmers, the question returns: How do we strengthen faith in the future? At the same time as rising prices on fossil fuels squeeze margins, climate change is already hitting harvests through drought, water shortages and extreme weather. It is unsustainable.

All parties in here agree that we must support agriculture in times of crisis. That is good, but it is not enough. Long-term solutions are required that make agriculture less vulnerable and more resilient.

Mr. Speaker! Last week, Miljöpartiet presented several proposals that make Swedish food production fossil-independent. It is about promoting the alternatives, making agriculture self-sufficient on sustainable fuels, investing in electrification, and facilitating for farms to produce electricity themselves.

We want to introduce a bio-premium that makes it cheaper to refuel with renewables and replace the government's subsidies for fossil agricultural diesel with a green agricultural deduction that lowers the tax on jobs and entrepreneurship. This is absolutely necessary if we want to solve crises for real and not just manage the consequences when they are already here.

As Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson himself usually says, but rarely succeeds in: We must keep two thoughts in our heads at the same time. Therefore, my appeal to all parties in here: If you are serious and want to support Swedish agriculture, stop subsidizing the fossil and start investing in the agriculture's resilience. It is good for the climate, it is good for the economy, and it is good security policy.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden's excessive coastal protection has held back the countryside for far too long. When the Riksdag voted through certain relaxations of the coastal protection last year, Miljöpartiet voted no. They wanted to keep completely absurd rules where a dug ditch can stop a family from building a terrace. It is a policy that originates from the desks in Stockholm and not from the reality in Småland or Jämtland.

An investigator is currently looking into this. When he recently stated that he wants to strengthen the municipalities' control over the shore protection specifically to allow for development in rural areas, the Green Party called it madness. Apparently, it is madness that rural residents should be able to develop their land and live near the water if they so wish.

My question to Daniel Helldén is: Why does his party want to treat the countryside as a national park for city dwellers, something one visits from time to time, where scrub and mosquitoes take over the open landscapes, instead of as regions where people and nature live together?

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The coastal protection is something that we must safeguard. I hope that the Centre Party also sees it that way.

Changes were made to the investigation that was subsequently hammered through. We were against it. We thought it went too far. There were certain things that needed to be done and changed; we agree with that – but not everything.

We think that moving forward we must safeguard the most Swedish things we have, the right of public access and the shore protection. What will happen with the proposals that the government will likely present – we don't really know, as they don't really want to tell what is going on – is that they will be loosened in such a way that we will not have any beaches to go down to. There will be a sign stating that it is a private area.

It will affect biodiversity and confine people in a way that we do not want to see.

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

Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is important that the municipalities are given the opportunity to decide how construction should take place. By building closer to the water, the calculations can work out, so that one can actually build in the countryside. Now the bank says no. But the Green Party also says no to that. What do you think Daniel Helldén, what will remain of the countryside if those who live there are not allowed to develop their land?

Many rural municipalities are slowly withering away. If we do not give them the power to reverse the development, the Miljöpartiet will get what it wants. The people will disappear and nature will take over. A city dweller paddling by will escape seeing any houses near the water's edge, absolutely. But it is so dense with brush and so many mosquitoes that one still will not be able to land anywhere. It is that type of shore we are talking about.

How does Miljöpartiet think that one can use and develop the countryside with this?

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! There are already exceptions being made, for example the LIS rules which allow the municipalities to have jurisdiction over areas. It is fundamentally the county administrative board that is involved in that. We do not think that one should go any further. There are areas where one is allowed to do this.

The more general loosening of the shore protection would be incredibly harmful for Sweden, and it concerns all shores. When I lived in the countryside for many years, I could note that even a shore that perhaps is not that swimming beach can be something that one wants to reach. One does not want to see that sign that says it is a private area.

The interests that cause people to build near the shore are harmful considering what is lost. If support is now needed to build, it is not the shore protection we should loosen, but there are other ways to solve the issue. These we must find.

In this speech, Jacob Risberg (MP) agreed.

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I think we should talk a bit more about healthcare.

The election this autumn is a crossroads if we are to have order in migration and order in welfare. Miljöpartiet in Region Stockholm has shown what happens when the Greens are allowed to be involved in governing. MP designed the procurement of special psychiatry for adults as a pure price procurement; the lowest price was the only basis for assessment.

The results have shown themselves: Care is offered with less than half of the resources that have previously been allocated. Severely ill people no longer receive the care, the support, and the treatment they need, and it is failing in both queues and continuity. Staff have been put on short notice, and many have resigned. Several testimonies point to severely worsened working conditions and ethical stress, but the green politicians boast about a surplus for psychiatry of over 500 million kronor.

The question is actually: When did monetary value become more important than human value for Miljöpartiet? Is this what awaits healthcare at the national level this autumn?

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Let us begin with care at the national level. The Tidö parties have not provided the money that the regions need, and this applies generally throughout the country. More funds must be allocated there, and we also need to index the support.

The problem is the long-term perspective and getting this to work in a good way. The Tidö government has not done what was needed.

I know that there have been problems with psychiatry in Stockholm. An investigation has been commissioned, and this is being reviewed and is currently being audited. This will be handled when it is seen that more things are actually needed. A package of measures has also been presented for these parts so that patients do not fall between the cracks.

I also think it is interesting in context that the queues in the Stockholm region were longer when the Christian Democrats sat there and ruled.

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

Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The exciting thing is that we then had a red-green government at the national level.

The result is very clear. Red-green rule at the national level = the healthcare queues increase regardless of the pandemic. Christian Democrats in the government at the national level = the healthcare queues decrease. It is exactly the same now.

This is the reality. Sometimes we have ideological debates, and there one can think and feel differently. That is how it works in a democracy. But when we have shown that our policy makes a difference and that we have cut the healthcare queues by 36 percent, there should not be so much to discuss.

I do not distrust the Green Party's good intentions, and I want to have a serious discussion about psychiatry here. But Stockholm has, therefore, been the worst at using the performance-based funds, and one boasts about running with a half billion plus on psychiatry despite so many being affected.

In Stockholm, the queues are increasing by 22 percent. If Stockholm could have been removed from our national calculation, the healthcare queues would instead have decreased by over 40 percent. Something is wrong with the red-green healthcare policy.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! There is surely no one who would boast about such things. It is a strange thing to say.

A review has been conducted, it has been gone through, and measures have been taken for this. We know that the healthcare area is complicated. In an area where Tidö governs, Skåne, the queues are longer than in Stockholm. There, the problems are greater, and that has to do with the governance that exists there and which does not take responsibility. In Stockholm, they have gotten to the bottom of the problems and fixed them now.

Ebba Busch speaks warmly in favor of nationalizing healthcare. A government investigation where different parties participated saw the proposal rejected outright and argued that it would become an enormously large agency. Instead, one should ensure that the care receives the resources it needs so that the regions can do this in a good way and not have to look at how they will manage the finances and create various special solutions.

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I see that Daniel Helldén was about to leave the rostrum. Is he trying to avoid me?

Daniel Helldén has said that he wants the Left Party in a red-green government. That raises questions. When I read Expressen's top-25 list of antisemitic members and candidates in the Left Party, I could not stop wondering: What does Daniel Helldén think about the party he wants to let into a red-green government? Does he believe that the Left Party deserves ministerial posts?

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Antisemitism is something that should not occur in Sweden. It must be removed. Almost everyone, I would say, in this chamber – I do not know what it is like with the parties on your side – stands united.

I think the Left Party has acted on what has happened. I have understood that the party excluded these persons and removed them from the lists before the whole thing came out. That is good, because we need to get rid of this.

When it comes to government participation, whoever it may be on our side, we in Miljöpartiet say that we want to see a majority government, where the parties that are needed should be included. Then things can be put in order, and things can move forward – instead of a party sitting outside the government that actually rules everything, as has been the case for the Tidö parties.

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! You can run, but you can’t hide. It became very clear here that Vänsterpartiet will be required in the government to achieve such a majority government.

I welcome the Green Party's rejection of antisemitism and terror romanticism. It is important for Swedish democracy that we have broad support behind this, because such values do not belong in Sweden.

However, one important question remains for the Swedish people: Can Daniel Helldén promise here and now that Miljöpartiet does not intend to let Vänsterpartiet into the government if these terror romantics continue to be uncovered?

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

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I note that the Left Party has quickly removed these individuals. Should any more appear, I assume that they will also be removed. I guess that the Left Party has gone through all its lists and checked that there are no more, but I will leave that unsaid.

When it comes to which government is formed, the Green Party has said that we have no problem with the Left Party in the government. We also have no problem with the Center Party in the government.

Miljöpartiet wants to see a majority government that ensures we are taken out of the quagmire we have seen during four years with the Tidö government, where emissions have been increased and it has been made so that Swedes, especially families with children and single parents, are struggling and do not get what they need. Instead, taxes are lowered for those who are rich. We see a development regarding the environment and the climate that is terribly harmful for Sweden.

I look forward to seeing a new government, in which Miljöpartiet is included, that is a majority government and that takes care of Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I do not think that Max wanted to die. I think he felt that it was him who was at fault, that he did not fit in. In the end, he could not take any more.

So says mother Linda in Svenska Dagbladet's much-publicized investigation Why did Max die?

Max was only 13 years old. The bullying in school took his life.

It should not be that way. Bullying does not belong in our society. Every child has the right to go to school without a knot in their stomach.

Still, we know that is not the case. According to Friends, up to 140,000 children can be exposed to bullying. Still, there are many out there who make important efforts to help children and young people who are suffering – parents who react when others behave badly, teachers who notice the student who is being ostracized, and associations that, like Friends, are there for children when they need someone to talk to.

These are good examples that show every day that there is an adult world that is willing to step forward to create safety in school for every child.

But it should not be up to individual enthusiasts to stop the bullying. It is the whole society's responsibility. We must step up the work.

The Liberals want to see a mapping of the bullying and insecurity in and outside the classrooms. It is our responsibility, our damned obligation, to ensure that what happened to Max does not happen again.

(Applause)

The party debate was hereby concluded.

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