Pensioners
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned the Social Insurance Committee's report on pensions. SD moved for approval of the proposal and emphasized that the Pensions Group, in which all parties are included, is crucial for stability and long-term perspective 1. SD argued that the system needs to be reviewed as Sweden ranks low internationally and emphasized the importance of the respect distance 1. M moved for approval and emphasized the work line, where the pension should reflect life income 2. M argued that tax cuts on pensions are a quick way to improve incomes 2. V emphasized the need for higher income pensions and a gas in the system 3. V also proposed an Arne pension for strenuous occupations so that these can retire earlier 3. MP moved for approval of its reservation 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Daniel Persson (SD)
Madam Speaker! We shall now debate the Social Insurance Committee's report 13 Pensions. I would like to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposed decision.
We Sweden Democrats have a motion in this report, but we have chosen not to stand behind it. Instead, there is a special statement from us. Our motion concerns investigating the pension right for child years, but as appears in our special statement, the Sweden Democrats in the committee motion A secure family policy with the child's best interests in focus have presented a proposal that the Pension Group is discussing. The Pension Group now consists of all parliamentary parties, and we have therefore chosen not to submit any reservation on the grounds of the motion.
Madam Speaker! We continue to think that this is an important issue, and we mean that that which concerns pensions should be handled in the Pensions Group. Therefore, we have chosen not to submit any committee motions concerning this report.
In previous years, we have, among other things, submitted motions for equal pensions, expanded possibilities to transfer pension rights so that it also covers cohabitants, as well as abolishing the fee for the transfer of pension rights. We have also submitted a motion that one should have the possibility to pause one's occupational pension. This is something that became a reality on January 1 of this year, after the Pensions Group reached an agreement on this.
Madam Speaker! I have said it before in this speaker's chair: I am glad that a new approach has been taken with the Pensionsgruppen and that all parliamentary parties are now included in this constellation.
Since the Pensions Group was formed in the 1990s, the purpose has been to nurture, manage and develop the pension system. The Pensions Group is a parliamentary working group that focuses on being able to work long-term and create a financially and politically stable pension system. If the issues were instead handled by a committee, there is a great risk that the system would become more politically colored. Furthermore, there would be an uncertainty every four years when there are general elections in Sweden. That the Pensions Group has been expanded is a guarantee to preserve the agreement and the principles on which the system is built.
Madam Speaker! Historically, the Pensions Group has brought stability to our pension system. Over the years, we in Sverigedemokrater have criticized the Pensions Group for it taking a long time before proposals are delivered and that very few proposals have been delivered recently. There has been a trade-off of not making decisions too quickly that could create uncertainty. Longer lead times can mean more well-thought-out and well-coordinated decisions.
Madam Speaker! We have a relatively good pension system. The non-profit organization CFA Institute annually produces what they call the Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index. The data is collected through national survey material and from international information sources. It is an index that accounts for different countries' pension systems.
In the latest comparison published by the pension institute, Sweden ranks 10th out of 48 reviewed pension systems. According to this ranking, our pension system is the worst in the Nordic region. In recent years, we have landed in ninth or tenth place, with similar scores from year to year. We need to review our pension system so that we do not fall further behind.
We also know that there is criticism that the system does not deliver sufficiently high pensions.
Mr. Speaker! There are principles that the Pension Group shall continue to work with, for example, the respect distance. There must be a difference in the pension if one has worked their whole life compared to those who have not. Calculations show that it pays off less and less to work up one's pension. The so-called respect distance is being weakened.
The life income principle means that the pension becomes a reflection of the total work income over the entire life.
The consensus principle is also an important principle that applies in the Pensions Group, as a broad anchoring leads to stability.
Mr. Speaker! It is positive that the Pensions Group is reaching a consensus decision to introduce the possibility of being able to pause the occupational pension. It may be a minor issue, but it is still important that the new group shows that consensus can be reached. They have also agreed to carry out an analysis of the fee level in the pension system and to prepare proposals on how the surplus in the pension system can be managed, that is, the possibility of a gap in the system. Even though these are investigations, they have nevertheless agreed to look into these issues.
It will be interesting in the future to follow the Pensions Group's work in the new constellation and see what happens with the questions regarding the contribution level and a possible gas in the system. In my speech, I have touched upon a number of issues that the Pensions Group will continue to work on. The Pensions Group has a substantial task ahead of it, but I believe that the new constellation will be able to handle this and deliver in the future.
Mats Sander (M)
Mr. Speaker! The Social Insurance Committee's report 13 Pensions concerns many. It deals with about twenty motions from the general motion period.
Pensions are one of our most important welfare issues. For everyone who has taken responsibility, worked a whole life, contributed to society and built Sweden strong, the pension shall be a security. For us Moderates, it is crucial that work shall pay off, not only in the paycheck but also in the pension envelope.
Security is not just about quick solutions or short-term reforms. Secure pensions are built on stability, long-term perspective, and work. That is why it is positive that Minister for Pensions and Social Insurance Anna Tenje has gathered all the parties of the Riksdag in the Pensions Group, where we can work together to develop long-term reforms that strengthen the pension system without jeopardizing its stability.
Mr. Speaker! Sweden has one of the world's most stable pension systems. It is based on the simple principle that the pension should reflect life's income. This means that the pension is not something that the state distributes arbitrarily. It is a right that every individual creates through their work. That is why the work line is so crucial. The more people who work, the more who work full-time, and the more who work longer into their later years, the higher the pensions will be. Therefore, the government promotes the work line.
We prioritize jobs over benefits, more pathways into work and stronger incentives to work more. In this way, more people can receive a higher pension. But we also see that the work principle in the pension system has been weakened. The principle of life income has been eroded through various supplements, and it has led to the respect distance shrinking, that is, the difference between the one who has worked a whole professional life and the one who has not. That was never the purpose of today's pension system.
It is a problem when people who have worked for decades see that their pension is barely higher – or even lower – than the pension for those who have never been in the workforce.
For us Moderates, it is obvious that it should always pay to work. Therefore, we have lowered the tax for people who choose to work at older ages. In the last two years' budgets, we have lowered the tax on pensions specifically.
Strengthening the work line in the pension system is a long-term process, but lowering the tax on pensions is the fastest way to improve pensioners' income here and now.
Mr. Speaker! We know that women, on average, have lower pensions than men. This is not due to the pension system but to the labor market. Women work part-time to a greater extent, and female-dominated occupations often have lower wages. But we see a positive development – the pension gap is narrowing. We are not satisfied, but we have come a little way on the right path. To achieve more equal pensions, we must strengthen women's opportunities in the labor market, with more full-time jobs, better working conditions, and higher wages.
We also need to increase knowledge about pensions. People should receive clear information about which choices affect the size of the pension so that more can make conscious choices regarding their future finances. Therefore, the Pensions Agency has a mandate to inform both today's and, perhaps even more importantly, the future's pensioners.
Mr. Speaker! We need a pension system that is long-term and stable. That is exactly why we have the Pension Group, which works on developing stable and anchored proposals. So we build a sustainable pension system together – through long-term agreements.
Mr. Speaker! I have spoken about pensions and security, about why the work principle is crucial and about the importance of long-term decisions. Pensions are about security, and security is built on stability, work and responsibility. We stand for a pension policy that is strong enough to withstand crises, fair enough to reflect life income and stable enough to function for generations to come. I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.
Isabell Mixter (V)
Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating pensions and motions from the general motion period regarding this.
All people should be able to live on their pension and be able to look forward to a life of security after a long working life, where one can afford to buy that cup of coffee in town and perhaps a gift for the grandchildren. People should also be able to feel a security in being able to retire at a reasonable age. If one has had a heavy job that takes a toll on the body, one should also be able to retire earlier than if one has had a job that is not as strenuous. It is reasonable.
That is not the case today. Today, around 200,000 Swedish pensioners live with a low economic standard. Over half of the country's pensioners have such a low income-based pension that they are entitled to a guaranteed pension.
Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet ensured in 2022 that the guaranteed pension was increased by 1,000 kronor per month. This was enormously important and has led to fewer pensioners now living with a low economic standard.
When the pensioners who are worst off receive higher incomes, it creates pressure for improvements even for other pensioners. When the pension system was launched in the 90s, it was promised that the pensioners in the new system would receive 60 percent of the salary. This has not been delivered – today it is down to 45 percent – and Vänsterpartiet has long demanded that the income pensions be raised.
Since the autumn of 2023, we have been part of the Pensions Group, which decides on changes to the pension system. There, we are now pushing for the income pensions to be raised so that the pensions reach the level that was promised when the system was introduced. A "gas" needs to be introduced into the pension system that allows the pensioners to share in more of the money that exists in the system. The contributions to the pension as a share of the wage contributions need to increase.
The retirement age has been raised and is now 67 years. Vänsterpartiet was fundamentally opposed to that increase as they did not simultaneously ensure the introduction of work environment measures that would enable all people to manage to work until 67. Even before the increase, there were many in strenuous occupations who could not manage to work until retirement. For those in a low-paid occupation, the extra years of employment do not also provide much more in the wallet at retirement.
The raised retirement age may be reasonable based on the assumption that we live longer and thus can work longer. But the reality looks very different for different workers. Most commonly, women in education, health, and social services do not have the strength to work until retirement. Among all employed people aged 50–64, 12 percent assess that they will not be able to work until retirement age. Among Kommunals members, seven out of ten are worried that they will not be able to work until retirement age. Sweden would therefore need an Arne pension like the one in Denmark. In Denmark, occupational groups with particularly strenuous work can retire earlier.
Mr. Speaker! This is something Sweden also needs. We need a pension that provides redress for Katarina, Maria, Anton, Torbjörn, Ahmed, and all others who have carried children in preschool, poured concrete, driven buses, and scanned goods at the checkout – those who have carried our welfare on their shoulders and have kept the wheels turning in this country. They, like all other elderly people, deserve a secure and reasonable pension – not to be forced to live as impoverished pensioners because they do not have the strength to work until retirement age.
We also need to ensure that the conditions in the labor market are improved. Constant cuts, streamlining, and a high pace mean that many simply become worn out at work. The work environment needs to be improved.
Following pressure from Vänsterpartiet, an age factor was introduced in the sickness insurance, which makes it easier to finish work early. This is good but far from sufficient, as said. Therefore, we want to ensure that those who have worked a long working life and worn themselves out are given the opportunity to retire early without it burdening the pension, as with the Arnepension in Denmark. This is something we are driving in the Pensionsgruppen.
Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet has no reservation today as the questions we raise regarding pensions are handled in the Pensions Group. I would, however, like to emphasize here in the chamber the importance of the Pensions Group being able to move from words to action and solve the problems that exist regarding the pension system today.
Malte Tängmark Roos (MP)
Mr. Speaker! A small calendar oversight means that I am standing here instead of Märta Stenevi, and for the sake of simplicity, I just intended to move for approval of our reservation in this report.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.