Examination of the proposal for Prime Minister
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M votes yes because they have received a mandate for change and want to solve crises through the Tidö Agreement 1. L votes yes for liberal economic policy, nuclear power and a new direction for the school 2. S votes red as they consider that the government base leads to increased inequalities and cuts in welfare 3. MP votes red because they argue that the policy creates mistrust, increases inequalities and slows down climate work 4. C argues that Sweden should be governed by a heavy weight because it means implementing SD's policy. SD votes yes as the voters have voted for a new direction 5. KD votes yes as the Tidö Agreement is a solid reform agenda. V votes red as they consider that the governance ignores people's reality and lacks ambitions to protect welfare 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
TALMANNEN
The Riksdag shall, according to Chapter 6, Section 4, second paragraph of the Instrument of Government, examine a proposal for a new Prime Minister within four days. The proposal shall, according to Chapter 11, Section 3, second paragraph of the Rules of Procedure, be tabled twice.
Testing of the proposal for Prime Minister
I submitted the proposal on Friday, October 14, that Ulf Kristersson, Moderaterna, shall be appointed Prime Minister. Ulf Kristersson has stated that he intends to form a government consisting of representatives from Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna, and Liberalerna. The proposal has now been tabled twice and shall be examined at today's meeting.
Tobias Billström (M)
Mr. Speaker! The outcome of the election on September 11 meant that the Swedish Parliament received a new majority, consisting of the Moderaterna, Sverigedemokraterna, Kristdemokraterna, and Liberalerna. Our four parties have received a mandate from the Swedish people – a mandate for change.
We have taken that mandate very seriously, and on Friday the Tidö Agreement was presented, an agreement that takes its starting point in the major societal problems that Sweden has. It concerns several parallel crises: the serious crime, the immigration and the lack of integration, the energy crisis which has led to extreme electricity prices, long healthcare queues, disorder in schools and the economic situation, with many fears for both the country's and the households' economy. And all this is happening in the most serious security policy situation since the Second World War.
Change is not only necessary; change is now also possible. These just-mentioned crises will need to be solved simultaneously. We feel great humility before the task and are aware that it will not be easy to turn the development around. With such large problems in so many areas at the same time, it will take time. But we are now ready to start the work.
Many citizens in Sweden experience anxiety about the future today. They feel worry over the war, crime and the economy, but also over the political division and the harsh climate of debate. Sweden needs a Prime Minister who wants to unite the country, not divide it.
We have gathered here in the chamber today for a vote on the Prime Minister. The Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson has announced that he wants to form a government consisting of the Moderates, the Christian Democrats, and the Liberals, which will cooperate closely with the Sweden Democrats in the Riksdag. With a focus on objective policy, we will together implement reforms that solve the major societal problems.
Mr. Speaker! A new spirit is needed in Swedish politics. The Moderates vote today yes to Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister.
Lena Hallengren (S)
Mr. Speaker! Sweden faces a testing time. There is war in Europe, with a deteriorated security situation for Sweden. The economy shows inflation figures and rising interest rates with increased food prices as a consequence. Ahead of the approaching winter, many are worried about how they will be able to pay their electricity bills. In such a time, Sweden needs a proactive government with the ability to handle parallel crises and simultaneously prepare Sweden for the future.
The policy that the new government base wants to pursue will lead to increased inequalities and greater division in our country. It is a right-wing policy that will lead to deterioration for ordinary people - an economic policy that risks making Swedes poorer by driving up inflation and raising mortgage interest rates, while simultaneously forcing cuts in schools, healthcare, and elderly care. It is a policy that risks facilitating the criminal element's new recruitment because preventive work and the fight against segregation are not prioritized.
It is not a policy that builds Sweden strongly for the future. The incoming government abandons the ambition that Sweden should become the world's first fossil-free welfare nation. We risk both the climate and large investments for more jobs. Promises from several parties regarding the rule of law, humanism, and international solidarity are betrayed.
Mr. Speaker! The state's finances are in good shape. The national debt is the lowest in a very long time. But we are heading towards a recession. Now it is up to Kristersson's incoming government to make the difficult prioritizations that are required when Sweden heads towards tougher times.
Mr. Speaker! The government that is now finally facing a vote is a remarkable construction. The three smallest parties in the government basis, all of which worsened their election results, are to form a government, while the largest party stands aside and dictates the terms. It will be a government with a weak room for maneuver, where every decision must receive a green light from the Sverigedemokraterna - a government that is only two mandates away from a government crisis.
We Social Democrats went to the election as an individual party with our own policies, prepared to cooperate broadly. For that, we received increased support from the voters. As Sweden's leading opposition party, we will scrutinize the government and its supporting parties. We will be a rock-solid opposition against what we believe is wrong and constructively push for what our voters desire. If there is a genuine will within the incoming government to find broad and honestly intended agreements on issues important for the country, our door will stand open. But every democracy deserves a serious opposition, which carefully scrutinizes the government's work and offers an alternative policy.
The constitutional mandatory vote on the Speaker's proposal for a new Prime Minister also involves, in practice, a vote on the government's support base and, indirectly, on its political program. When the Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna, and Liberalerna have now chosen to form a fragile right-conservative government, completely dependent on the Sverigedemokraterna, we will vote red in today's Prime Minister vote.
Mats Persson (L)
Mr. Speaker and honorable members of the Swedish Parliament! Sweden is a fantastic country. In a very strained security policy situation, our country is worth defending. When it is currently blowing on the international markets, a small, open economy like Sweden's is dependent on a responsible economic policy. In a time of great global climate problems, we in Sweden shall take our responsibility for a more sustainable world.
The Swedish people have voted for change. After eight years with the Social Democrats in power, the voters now want to see a policy that tackles Sweden's problems.
Every year, 16,000 children leave school without being eligible for upper secondary school. Delays, welfare dependency, and separatism fracture the sense of community as Sweden now heads in the wrong direction and becomes increasingly segregated. A failed energy policy causes electricity prices to skyrocket and emissions to increase.
There is a legitimate expectation among the Swedish people that we elected representatives shall deal with these problems - an expectation that politics shall facilitate people's everyday lives, increase safety and push back crime, an expectation that our children shall learn more in school and an expectation that we shall take responsibility for the climate and not pass the problem on to our children and grandchildren.
Mr. Speaker! We Liberals are expectant. The Tidö Agreement contains important reforms for our country, for Sweden. Let me begin with the school, our time's most important issue.
We all win, here and in Sweden, with a good school. That is why a new direction for the Swedish school and Swedish school policy is now needed. We need to have a focus on knowledge and on increasing the teachers' authority in the classroom. We need more special education teachers and more smaller teaching groups so that the young person who needs more support in school also receives it. We need more reading in school. We need to ensure that we invest in the school all the time, every day, all year round.
We need a new free school law that involves profit limitation during the initial period for the operator who wishes to establish themselves, and if there is a failure in quality, there must be clear consequences. This is a policy that clearly means more children learn to read, write, and count. That is how we build a good future, and we all win from that.
Mr. Speaker! Many Swedes are worried about their electricity bills. The energy policy of recent years is a failure - it cannot be described in any other way - with decommissioned nuclear power driving up electricity prices and causing us to now burn oil at full throttle all over Sweden.
With the Tidö Agreement, a massive and much-needed reassessment of Swedish energy policy is now taking place. Now there will be investments in new nuclear power. Now there will be investments in solar energy and wind power, and above all, we ensure that we take responsibility for the climate by wanting the electricity to be fossil-free at all times. That is where our focus lies.
Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs to take decisive action against organized crime. With the Tidö Agreement, reforms are being made for higher penalties, better tools for the police and prosecutors, and more resources for the justice system. But it also requires investments in preventive measures to save young people from starting the criminal path. Therefore, better powers for social services and strengthened cooperation between the police and social services are needed.
Now, major efforts are being made against honor-related violence and oppression. Among other things, innocence checks and conversion therapy are being criminalized, and the penalties are being tightened. The work against men's violence against women is being strengthened. The rules on restraining orders are tightened with geographical stay bans, which means that the restraining order is significantly expanded. The penalties for violence and sexual offenses are being tightened. It is a new, just criminal policy.
Mr. Speaker! We need to invest in welfare, and now investments are also being made in healthcare and welfare. Primary care is being expanded. The right to a permanent doctor contact is being developed, and a national plan to strengthen maternity care is being drawn up. LSS is being improved, and the goal is to realize a state responsibility for personal assistance.
Mr. Speaker! A new government will pursue a liberal, bourgeois economic policy. It is a responsible economic policy that does not shift the cost onto future generations. It is also a policy that recognizes that it is the companies, not we politicians, who create the prosperity in society and build our society.
It should pay to work. Income taxes shall be lowered, and a benefit ceiling shall be introduced. It should pay better to save, which is a liberal and bourgeois virtue. The tax on savings is lowered through a basic deduction where the first 300,000 saved in an investment savings account are made tax-free.
Mr. Speaker! Sweden shall be a modern and open country that takes new steps to strengthen freedom. The independence of public service media shall endure, and their long-term funding shall be maintained. Public service activities shall be developed as part of the democratic infrastructure.
A constitutional investigation on how the right to abortion can be strengthened is being carried out. Now we are moving from expectation to action. All of this is in the Tidö Agreement, which is the basis for the government formation that is now to take place.
Mr. Speaker! Sweden is now getting a liberal, bourgeois government. The Liberals will therefore vote yes to Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister.
Per Bolund (MP)
Mr. Speaker! Honored members! Sweden is a country that, in the eyes of the world, has stood for equality, openness, and tolerance. We are a country that has led the way and which has decisively chosen to leave the dependence on fossil fuels behind.
Around the world, our country has been seen as a pioneer, someone to look up to when it comes to the climate transition, gender equality, and that all children should have the same security and rights regardless of background. So it has been.
Miljöpartiet campaigned on continuing to build what has made Sweden good and strong – to reduce emissions, increase equality, and strengthen the welfare. We want to create the new green folkhemmet, built on trust and cooperation. In a restless time both in Sweden and in the rest of the world, we know that the way forward is to together build a society that is even stronger and even more resilient. It is in times of unrest such as these that it is most important to keep a cool head and also to keep the heart warm.
Mr. Speaker! Now we are going to head in a different direction. We are going to get a government that deliberately creates mistrust, increases inequalities and builds walls between people. Together, Sverigedemokraterna, Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna and Liberalerna stand for an authoritarian, conservative and nationalist government policy, where the losers, as usual, are those who already have the least.
As usual, it is the most vulnerable who suffer so that short-sighted, populist interests can come first. What we see is a reverse Robin Hood policy: taking from those who have the least and giving to those who already have. Those who will benefit will be those who already have both assets and power, and on the other hand, this policy will deliberately create a shadow society with insecurity, increased legal uncertainty, and polarization. It is a shadow society that will be a perfect breeding ground for future social insecurity and future crime.
It is also a society that is increasing child poverty, where children who have moved to our country or have "wrong" parents no longer qualify for the welfare that we have fought so hard to build up. They are left to live without a long-term security as a basis for their lives and will not even have the chance to grow up with their parents.
For the Green Party, which has fought for so long to strengthen children's rights and succeeded in making the Convention on the Rights of the Child Swedish law, this is a very dark development.
Mr. Speaker! I have read the entire palace agreement. It is a policy tailored to create insecurity and build walls between people. I am convinced that it is primarily a party that is celebrating today, and it is not the Moderates or the Christian Democrats, and it is absolutely not the Liberals. What we have before us is a weak government that sits completely in the lap of the Sweden Democrats and despite this governs on a fragile majority with an overweight of only two votes.
The politics during the coming years will with great certainty be characterized by everything that Miljöpartiet has fought against: increased child poverty, a divided society with increased inequalities, a diminished global responsibility, a deteriorated welfare, and not least a total slowdown – not to say a shift into reverse – on climate work. This is serious, because right now the world is in desperate need of countries that take the lead and show the way when it comes to creating a sustainable future.
Sweden is now heading in the opposite direction. We will see a wrecked environmental and climate work which, if other countries follow our example, would cause the climate crisis to strike even more mercilessly against the world's most vulnerable. What we can see now in the floods of Pakistan, the extreme heat of India, and the famine of Somalia, with billions of people at risk of poverty and starvation and with 100 million people fleeing, will only get worse. This is, above all, a betrayal of future generations, who will have to live with the effects of our failure in a wrecked climate.
Mr. Speaker! Nowhere in the Palace Agreement is the difference between words and actions greater than in the environmental area. This agreement does not contain a single proposal that can reduce emissions and our climate impact here and now. On the contrary, there is a series of proposals that do the opposite and significantly increase emissions in the transport area, in the energy area, and for the business sector.
Still, representatives claim to stand up for our climate goals and the Paris Agreement. This is serious. In a society where words mean nothing, citizens lose faith in the political system. Instead, tell the truth about the consequence of the policy you are now planning for, namely that you are dismantling Sweden's environmental and climate work. To stop the climate efforts that reduce emissions here and now and invest everything in a policy that, if it even works, possibly can only have an effect when it is too late is to abandon Sweden's climate goals. It is to abandon the Paris Agreement. You are throwing away the last few years' great steps forward in order to instead feed an increased fossil dependency and thereby also feed the war chests of oil dictatorships.
Mr. Speaker! That we as a country have been firmly determined to rid ourselves of the dependence on the oil that finances both Putin's war machine and some of the most authoritarian countries in the world has made us a threat and a target for those who want to maintain the current order. In a world where we currently have far too many capricious men with their finger on the button, I and, I believe, many with me are very worried about what this government means for Sweden's role in the world.
Miljöpartiet has for a long time stood at the forefront that we must get rid of the oil dependency and the security policy threat that it poses. We have felt the harsh winds that blow and the hatred that is created when one stands up for a new future built on renewable energy and a circular economy, and I feel a great concern that we now, instead of taking the important steps forward that would be needed, will take large steps backward.
We are now moving towards abandoning a long, proud tradition of being a solidary aid country and instead looking out for ourselves and the short-term convenient. The suffering ones will, as usual, be those who are already poor, those who do not have a strong voice of their own.
The world has already seen too many governments that dismantle environmental work and at the same time let the gaps grow both nationally and globally. Thoughts turn to Bolsonaro's Brazil and to Trump's USA. Now Sweden is moving in the same direction.
Mr. Speaker! It is telling that civil society as a whole, almost all organizations that are now fighting for a more sustainable and a more and more solidary society, warn against the effects of the palace agreement. It concerns World Wide Fund for Nature, Bris, Save the Children, Amnesty, Red Cross, Civil Rights Defenders, Nature Conservation Association, Greenpeace, Act, Church of Sweden, Woman to Woman, We Effect and many, many more. We take their warnings seriously. We will be their voice in opposition to the policy that will now be pursued.
Mr. Speaker! We in Miljöpartiet believe in a better world. We want to see a society with increased equality, strengthened welfare and reduced emissions. We want to see a society that cooperates, that is just and and solidary, a society that also actively combats climate change, protects biodiversity and manages to think long-term, a society that builds bridges and not walls.
We know that such a world is possible. But it is not possible with the authoritarian, nationalist politics that Ulf Kristersson's government wants to push through.
Mr. Speaker! Miljöpartiet believes in people. We believe in the future. Therefore, we will today vote against Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister.
In the speech, Janine Alm Ericson, Emma Berginger, Camilla Hansén, Annika Hirvonen, Linus Lakso, Rebecka Le Moine, Amanda Lind, Rasmus Ling, Emma Nohrén, Jacob Risberg, Märta Stenevi, Elin Söderberg and Ulrika Westerlund (all MP) agreed.
Annie Lööf (C)
Mr. Speaker! Today's vote on the Prime Minister signifies a paradigm shift in Swedish politics. Never before has a xenophobic, nationalist party been given the keys to the Government Offices. Today we vote on Jimmie Åkesson's government and policies, which Ulf Kristersson is set to implement.
Centerpartiet gave clear messages ahead of the election. We went to the election as an independent, bourgeois liberal party led by our green, libertarian values. For Sweden's best, we wanted the incoming government to pursue a liberal policy anchored in the center in order to find the answers to the challenges we face and at the same time break the division and the polarization that risks paralyzing Sweden's political capacity to act.
Unfortunately, there was no green bourgeois liberal cooperation. It became a conservative shift in power. It was a liberal crash landing with enormous concessions to an explicitly anti-liberal party. Sweden will now be governed by an October agreement - an "ok". It is an "ok" that will be heavy to bear for liberal bourgeois parties when they now have to implement the Sverigedemokraternas policy area by area.
Two things are clear to us ahead of today's vote. For the first, we now see for the first time since the breakthrough of democracy in Sweden a government that is completely dependent on the Sverigedemokraterna. What we warned would happen during the election campaign has now happened. But what we said during the election campaign, what we promised our voters, remains firm: the Centerpartiet will not let through a government where the Sverigedemokraterna are included or where the Sverigedemokraterna are given decisive influence over every decision and the entire government's budget.
Secondly, not all options have been exhausted. There are government constellations and collaborations that have not been fully tested, collaborations between parties in the center where we could have achieved a policy for security, businesses, the climate, and the countryside without compromising on legal certainty, tolerance, humanity, and faith in the future.
There is still much that unites the parties that successfully governed Sweden in a coalition government for eight years in terms of ideas. I want to believe that the Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna, and Liberalerna still maintain the defense of the individual's freedom and security, the idea that welfare and prosperity are created by healthy, growing companies, and that openness and cooperation with the rest of the world are crucial for Sweden's future.
That is why it makes me so distressed that these three former alliance colleagues have now turned toward a completely different path: to implement the Sweden Democrats' election program. The right-wing government that will now likely take office faces a complex and challenging mandate period. It is extra difficult in the very uncertain global situation we are currently in. We have war in our immediate vicinity. Sweden is in the middle of a very sensitive NATO process. We see how the climate crisis continues with unabated force and how inflation and electricity prices are skyrocketing.
It should be time for consensus across block boundaries, not confrontational, conservative politics built on a shaky foundation. Sweden would have needed a different path.
Mr. Speaker! Today's vote is not primarily about Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister for the Center Party, but rather about what power position one is prepared to give the Sweden Democrats. It is a completely new situation in Swedish politics when a xenophobic party is partly part of an organized cooperation with the incoming government and takes a place in the Government Offices, and partly has the entire core of its program accommodated in the agreement that forms the basis for the government.
This is anything but liberal politics. The Center Party does not want to give this power over how Sweden is governed to the Sweden Democrats. We do not want this anti-liberal policy to be implemented, and therefore the Center Party's parliamentary group will vote against today's prime minister vote and against the policy that Ulf Kristersson has presented.
We will be an independent and active liberal opposition party. We will continue to push for a policy for Sweden's best, for a country where people get to decide more over their own lives, for more economic and social freedom, for better care of the environment and climate and for a secure welfare that gives everyone the opportunity to realize their dreams regardless of circumstances, regardless of where you come from or where in the country you live.
In a stormy political climate, the Center Party stands firm in our liberal values. We will be constructive in cases where there is an opportunity to find other majorities without compromising on openness or humanism. This applies in particular regarding defense and security, where every responsible Prime Minister should think twice before placing power and decisions in the hands of a party that as recently as this spring could not choose between Biden and Putin.
The Center Party's voice and our strength will be clearly noticed moving forward. A strong liberal force in the center of Swedish politics is more important now than ever as an alternative to a government where the Sweden Democrats are the dominant political force.
Jimmie Åkesson (SD)
Mr. Speaker! It is not we here in the chamber of the Riksdag who give parties political influence, but it is the voters who do so in a democracy. Now the voters have spoken. People have voted for the parties they believe have the best remedy for the problems we face, and then we get a result. And it is based on that election result that different parties get different parts of their policies through, not primarily depending on how we vote here today. How we vote here today is a consequence of how the voters voted on September 11. I wanted this to be said, Mr. Speaker.
We are faced with serious problems in Sweden today. We have an uneasy and uncertain world, much more uncertain than in a long time. We have an uncertain economic situation. We have an energy crisis with almost unrealistic electricity and fuel prices. We have crime with gang violence and shootings. We have segregation, division, and polarization. Our welfare is challenged by inflation, labor shortages, and demography.
Parts of this can, of course, be blamed on the rest of the world. The outgoing government, in particular, has been good at doing so throughout the election campaign. But to the highest degree, a heavy responsibility rests on the governments of recent decades, from left to right, the governments that have ruled our country. The mismanagement has been palpable, just as has the lack of crisis awareness, consequential thinking, and grounding in reality. This we citizens in Sweden have had to suffer greatly for.
But finally, Mr. Speaker, the voters have voted for a new direction, a new start for Sweden. Now it is important that we get a stable government in place; a government with a stable parliamentary anchoring. We would have gladly seen a majority government. That would be good for Sweden after many years with weak governments. At the same time, I and my party throughout the entire election campaign have been extremely clear that it is the policy that must stand at the center. It is what the government does that is important, not what the government looks like.
Now there is a government basis that agrees on the direction for Sweden, which is capable of reaching agreements on the difficult issues to meet the challenges we face and which has the possibility to give Sweden the necessary new start. Sverigedemokraterna, Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna and Liberalerna have found a way forward.
We are now in agreement on the crime policy. Crime shall be pushed back. Safety shall increase. Crime victims shall be given redress.
We are in agreement on the immigration policy. A paradigm shift must occur from irresponsibility and lack of requirements to order and tidiness, reasonableness and common sense.
We agree on the energy policy. We have had a government that has torn apart perhaps the world's best planned energy system; a more or less fossil-free energy system has been torn to pieces. It is now possible to rebuild the stability in the long term.
We are also in agreement on substantial parts of the welfare, on the direction for the school, on the direction for the healthcare, on the elderly's economic conditions. We are in agreement on maintaining the unemployment insurance at the current level. It is quite right that the Sweden Democrats have a completely decisive role in this as the largest party among the four in the government base and as a parliamentary guarantee for the government that is to take office.
We are ready, Mr. Speaker, to let a new government through because we have, through negotiations, assured ourselves that it is a government that will do sufficiently much of what is necessary to be able to break and reverse the development.
We are also ready to take responsibility in the parts where we have reached an agreement with the incoming government. We will act loyally, and we will honor the agreement that has been concluded. This also applies to the other parts. In matters not covered by our cooperation, we will act like the other parties in the Riksdag, that is, seek broad support for our policies and for our proposals.
Sweden has finally been given a new chance at the eleventh hour. It is for this reason, with both joy and confidence, that the Sweden Democrat parliamentary group will today vote yes to Ulf Kristersson as Prime Minister.
In this speech, Pontus Andersson, Tobias Andersson, Ludvig Aspling, Sara-Lena Bjälkö, Bo Broman, Dennis Dioukarev, Staffan Eklöf, Mikael Eskilandersson, Josef Fransson, Ann-Christine From Utterstedt, Jörgen Grubb, Fredrik Lindahl, Linda Lindberg, Angelica Lundberg, Adam Marttinen, Thomas Morell, Eric Palmqvist, David Perez, Patrick Reslow, Michael Rubbestad, Jessica Stegrud, Robert Stenkvist, Jimmy Ståhl, Johnny Svedin, Sven-Olof Sällström, Björn Söder, Per Söderlund, Victoria Tiblom, Eric Westroth and Markus Wiechel (all SD) agreed.
Ebba Busch (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Difficult problems are best solved together. That basic idea is what we reinforce when we now choose a new Prime Minister and, in the long run, a new government.
On September 11, the Swedish people voted to give Sweden a new start for change. They had seen what years of political division had achieved, and they chose to give support so that we shall go a different way forward.
Passivity and sluggishness have in many ways been characteristics of the time that has been. It has caused parts of our folkhemmet to be allowed to decay.
Historically long healthcare queues, record numbers of shootings, playgrounds that have become crime scenes, unfair burdens on the countryside, and an energy and electricity crisis that hit many companies and families hard – that era reaches its end today.
There is talk about the October Agreement. People try to give it catchy, shorter abbreviations. I can understand that someone who is strongly influenced by a policy and breathes the spirit in which the January Agreement was written has difficulty understanding the type of cooperation that will now characterize the coming four years.
The January Agreement was strongly characterized by keeping one party out rather than what was agreed upon for the future. It was characterized more by proudly displaying scalps taken from the other counterparty in the so-called cooperation than by acting for Sweden's best interests.
The Tidö Agreement is an agreement for Sweden. If it is to be shortened in any way, it is perhaps rather "ös:en". It will certainly be full-on "ös" in the reform agenda in the coming years so that all of Sweden can function.
In my world, it is fully permitted, but neither particularly liberal, constructive nor in a good democratic spirit, to keep a party out of negotiations, to say that we are ready to negotiate with you, you and you, but not if you also negotiate on substantive issues with party X, even though it could make a difference for the most vulnerable, those who need political unity and leadership most of all.
We have gathered, four parties, and jointly formulated the most solid reform agenda in decades. We know what our goal is: to recreate a Sweden that people can rely on. And we are ready to get that job done.
We Christian Democrats do not believe that it is the role of politics to solve all people's problems for them. Politics promises too much if it promises a paradise on earth, because politics can never create the good life for people. But politics can provide the conditions. This insight is one of the most important reasons why I became a Christian Democrat specifically—the understanding that politics has its role, which it must fulfill, but that a good society is built from the bottom up by ordinary people, families, associations, and companies in their everyday lives.
This is reflected in the political line that the new government will pursue. For us Christian Democrats, the goal is that this mandate period will build and strengthen the state's most fundamental functions - that which simply must work, that which everyone must be able to rely on working in this country.
Listen to the welfare, not least our healthcare. That there are now over 200,000 people who have waited illegally long in healthcare queues is a sad failure that requires national leadership to solve. It will now begin to get on track.
Only the state can push down crime and maintain the monopoly on violence. Therefore, I am proud that the reforms we call the Adrian laws will now be introduced.
We are carrying out a reorganization of the energy policy to ensure that there is emission-free and affordable electricity throughout the country for the sake of households, for the sake of Swedish competitiveness, and for the sake of the climate transition.
We are tightening the migration policy to give Sweden a reasonable opportunity to manage integration for real and create a stronger us, and we are strengthening the position of the family and civil society.
It is restless times in our global environment and here at home in Sweden. Certainly, things will happen during this parliamentary term that we cannot foresee today. But there are reasons to be hopeful about the future despite everything. Things will not be solved overnight; that is how it is. Change takes time. Such is the nature of democracy. But now the work begins. And now it is important that we come together as a country. There are no societal problems that are insurmountable for the Swedish people.
We are now getting a government in place that is ready to lead and make the difficult decisions. Not everyone will be satisfied with everything, but one can trust that this government will have the common good in mind.
Just because we want to be a government for the whole country, it is my hope that all members in the chamber want to be involved and contribute in the way that is possible. We will not always think alike; we all know that here. But my hope is that we can work forward in a constructive spirit, reach agreements where it is possible and seek broader settlements where it is possible.
When it comes down to it, we all, the vast majority in this country, actually want the same thing: that more people should get the opportunity to live a good life, that injustices should be rectified and that what is broken should be fixed. And difficult problems are best solved together.
Therefore, the Christian Democrats vote yes today to Ulf Kristersson, leader of the Moderate Party, as the new Swedish Prime Minister.
In this speech, Acko Ankarberg Johansson, Magnus Berntsson, Camilla Brodin, Christian Carlsson, Hans Eklind, Cecilia Engström, Jakob Forssmed, Magnus Jacobsson, Ingemar Kihlström and Magnus Oscarsson (all KD) as well as Jessica Stegrud (SD) agreed.
Nooshi Dadgostar (V)
Mr. Speaker! Sweden may be heading into an economic crisis. How deep and serious it becomes depends on how the incoming government chooses to handle it. But already, Sweden's families are struggling with a cost shock – high food prices, high housing costs, and transport costs that are skyrocketing.
Then the new right-wing nationalist government takes the opportunity to visit a castle. It felt like "we were in another world," a castle visitor tells the media, comparing the castle stay to Harry Potter's school of witchcraft and wizardry.
Perhaps that is exactly why the Palace Agreement so totally ignores people's reality. But Sweden's families live in the harsh reality, not in a magical castle. We become poorer every day as prices soar. With the sky-high inflation prevailing today, we will face an automatic cut in welfare if extensive funds are not now added as compensation. But no ambition to protect welfare is mentioned in the Palace Agreement. What might be just around the corner is a "steel bath" that only has its counterpart in the 90s cuts in healthcare, school, and elderly care.
We all remember the election campaign. There, quick solutions were promised by this government option on everything from electricity bills to crime fighting. But after election day, it seems to be a different tune. The Prime Minister-designate suddenly speaks of a task that is to span three parliamentary terms.
The high electricity prices are here and now. All of this was supposed to be solved with nuclear power. I remember a debate with Jimmie Åkesson where he said that nuclear power would be completed within three years. From the Moderates' Elisabeth Svantesson, it sounded like it would take a hundred days. It doesn't sound like that anymore. Johan Pehrson's already well-known words perhaps express it most clearly: "When you go to an election, you say one thing before the election. Then the election is carried out. Then you say one thing as well after the election."
They have promised and promised. Now we shall see if they keep their word or will deliver.
If there is a housing shortage, there is not a single comma to be found in the palace agreement. It is only prisons that are to be built. Not one word mentions the hundreds of thousands of young people who want to move out from home, the men and women who want to separate, or those who need to move for work and education. Not a single krona shall be spent on the Swedish people's right and opportunity to live better, cheaper, and more comfortably. If you want somewhere to live, you have to commit a crime. Apparently, it is prison cells that the Swedish people are to live in, not rental apartments.
And the market school system shall be allowed to continue as if it were not a world-unique failure. The agreement for the castle proposes only cosmetic changes in that area - a classic commissioned job from the large commercial school corporations. The giant corporation Academedia has already sent out the press release welcoming the proposal. They shall be allowed to continue plundering the Swedish school system and extracting hundreds of millions from our children and teachers. The school oligarchs have become satisfied. Ulf has been clever.
They have completely abandoned the climate transition. We are living in the 2020s. It is urgent now. We do not have time for the complete passivity that characterizes the climate policy in their agreement. It is a passivity that implies large continued emissions and, moreover, large missed opportunities for jobs across the entire country.
But, Mr. Speaker, there is a lack of clarity on all points. The right-wing nationalist government agrees to introduce what they call lack of integrity as a basis for deportation. We will therefore now have a kind of morality police in Sweden.
We in Sweden, after 100 years of democracy and a historically strong welfare construction, have moved away from what unfortunately still exists in authoritarian countries around the world. The economic policy with a focus on the welfare expansion eradicated the basis for many of the social problems that existed in society. We have historically lifted people out of poverty, given people work, and built security systems and a very strong welfare.
But now we shall return to the 1930s, when social problems were reduced to individual defects or characteristics. The construction of the People's Home is the opposite of the right-wing nationalist regime's castle-building, where general systems are eroded and where social citizenship is conditional.
In the Palace Agreement, it is established that one must not exhibit lack of good conduct. Those who are involved in prostitution or substance abuse - or if "otherwise there are unequivocally established remarks regarding the lifestyle" - risk deportation due to lack of good conduct.
Mr. Speaker! This opens up for life-threatening legal uncertainty and an authoritarian arbitrariness, for who will then establish what constitutes a lack of integrity? It is surely Jimmie Åkesson, Ulf Kristersson, Ebba Busch and Johan Pehrson. God save us.
My parents fled to freedom from the oppressive Iran. They could never have believed that Sweden would so clearly turn towards the authoritarian path. What is happening in Sweden now is frightening.
Mr. Speaker! At its worst, the palace negotiations have gone for the Christian Democrats and Ebba Busch. There is nothing other than plans, mapping, and investigations. It is nothing that will be implemented for real, of course, but it is such things that fit well at press conferences. The most important thing seems to have been to preserve what already exists: a privatized healthcare system where patients get stuck in long care queues. It is precisely this policy that her friends in Region Stockholm have just been fired for.
When it comes to the high-cost protection for dental care, this pattern returns. Everything that is good for ordinary people is buried in investigations, and here it is, of course, extra noteworthy. There is already a fresh dental care investigation that was recently presented to the government; no new one was needed. Had you meant seriously that teeth are a part of the body, you would have launched this already tomorrow, but it suits best to just talk at press conferences and not implement policy. Obviously, that election promise was not worth a drop of water either.
What is clear, however, is that the absolute top of society, in the midst of the current crisis, is to receive a substantial rain of gold. No investigations are commissioned there. New tax subsidies for the ultimate top layer are not something that needs to be investigated. There, it is just a matter of full steam ahead, for what is people's right to a functioning health insurance and increased pensions worth when Kristersson keeps the castle in order?
The Palace Agreement is a marriage between xenophobia and the right's economic policy. You can rely on the fact that this very palace wedding is one of the most expensive in Swedish history for those who were not on the guest list, with cuts, unemployment, and lawlessness that will hit people hard.
Åkesson has delivered when it comes to all the Sweden Democrats' election promises regarding refugee policy and legal issues, but the talk about safeguarding the Swedish people's welfare was just talk when the Sweden Democrats themselves got to decide. In the Tidö agreement, the word deportation is mentioned 16 times. Regarding health insurance, however, there is only a single sentence, and it cannot be read in any other way than that more people are to be cast out of health insurance.
Mr. Speaker! As a single-issue party, SD, Åkesson simply must have crawled under the floorboards in the castle bed when the part about immigration in the agreement was finished. "This became a real victory weekend," he probably thought. The welfare and security systems, the traditional right-wing parties were allowed to do as they pleased with—SD couldn't have cared less.
Everything is the immigrants' fault; it is never the fault of their own policies. They shift the blame for low wages, poor working environments in healthcare, and eroded welfare systems.
Whose fault are the crimes committed? "The immigrants', of course," answers Jimmie Åkesson, who himself is a member of the most criminally burdened minority in Sweden, that is to say the party Sverigedemokraterna.
But now the Sweden Democrats themselves have risen, moved into the Government Offices and received prestigious positions and assignments. Politicians who blame others but do nothing themselves have not really been my thing - ever.
Mr. Speaker! During the previous parliamentary term, we in the Left Party used our mandates to stop a rent shock for millions of tenants. We improved the rules in the sickness insurance, lowered the tax for the long-term ill, and raised the basic level of the sickness benefit by 1,000 kronor.
When we were able to influence a prime ministerial vote less than a year ago, we implemented the largest increase in pensions in modern times. Now, people are being hit hard by the price shock, and therefore the Left Party will submit a proposal in the Riksdag to move forward the adjustment of sickness benefit and guarantee pension, which otherwise usually takes place after the turn of the year.
This year has been a trial. We need a crisis policy for Sweden's families - not just for those who already have the most.
Vänsterpartiet will be there for you who are affected by cuts in healthcare, school, care, and the safety nets, and for you who, solely because of your background, are blacklisted and singled out by the incoming government's policy.
Vänsterpartiet will also be there for those of you who are rethinking and feel that this did not turn out as you had imagined. You are all welcome to participate in the opposition work together with us.
It is now that one can take a stand. If one lets this government through, one also lets through the authoritarian policy and the most right-wing government that we have had in Sweden since the introduction of democracy.
It is now - not later - that we in this chamber decide which side of history we want to stand on. This also applies to the chamber's liberal Members of Parliament.
For Vänsterpartiet, the choice is obvious. Today we will vote red against Ulf Kristersson as Sweden's Prime Minister.
In this speech, Andrea Andersson Tay, Nadja Awad, Lorena Delgado Varas, Ali Esbati, Samuel Gonzalez Westling, Hanna Gunnarsson, Tony Haddou, Maj Karlsson, Birger Lahti, Daniel Riazat, Håkan Svenneling, Ilona Szatmári Waldau, Ciczie Weidby, Linda Westerlund Snecker and Jessica Wetterling (all V) as well as Rebecka Le Moine (MP) agreed.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.