Examination of the Speaker's proposal for Prime Minister

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.

I submitted the proposal on Tuesday, October 13, that Magdalena Andersson (S) should be appointed Prime Minister in a Social Democratic single-party government. The proposal has been tabled twice and is to be examined at today's meeting.

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

Mattias Karlsson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is in a parliamentary situation that places great demands and involves a great responsibility from all parties in this chamber. The voters have spoken, and now they have chosen their representatives to the Swedish Riksdag. Now it is our task to manage their trust and ensure that Sweden gets a government that has the prerequisites to govern the country. It is not always a simple task; we know that from our own experience. But democracy does not assume that the voters deliver simple election results. It assumes that we who have received their trust are able to handle the results that the voters have actually given us.

Mr. Speaker! There is a circumstance in the formation of the government that deserves special attention. Four parties in the Swedish Riksdag, which together represent 176 seats, i.e., a majority of the members of the Riksdag, have expressed that they want to see Magdalena Andersson as Sweden's Prime Minister. Let us pause there for a moment: Four parties, 176 seats, a majority of the Swedish Riksdag. All four parties have pointed out the same person as their Prime Minister candidate. Yet, we stand here today before a vote where Magdalena Andersson herself has stated that she lacks the conditions to be elected. It is, of course, extremely remarkable. It is not the lack of mandates that prevents Magdalena Andersson from becoming Prime Minister, but it is the lack of unity among the parties that say they want her.

Mr. Speaker! What makes the current situation particularly noteworthy is that it can hardly be described as unforeseen. Long before the election, it was clear that one of the most likely outcomes was exactly what we see now, namely that the Social Democrats would need to gather support from the Left Party, the Green Party, and the Centre Party for Magdalena Andersson to be able to become Prime Minister. Nevertheless, Magdalena Andersson went to the election without giving the voters clear information on how these parties could agree to govern Sweden. Instead, we were told that Sweden needed a strong Prime Minister and that the question of government would be resolved after the election.

But the question of government is not a detail that one can push aside, but it is one of democracy's most fundamental questions. The voters have the right to know not only who wants to become Prime Minister but also how that person intends to gather support to govern the country. It is, of course, understandable why it was politically convenient to avoid the difficult messages before the election, but what may appear tactically advantageous during a campaign risks becoming a significantly larger problem once the votes are counted. And that is precisely where we find ourselves today.

Sweden has ended up in a difficult parliamentary situation; not because the voters have done anything wrong, but because the parties that say they want to form a government have not succeeded in preparing and anchoring a common government alternative. Wanting to become Prime Minister is one thing. Having prepared oneself to be able to govern is another thing.

Mr. Speaker! We Moderates have great respect for the fact that government formations can be complicated. Bringing together parties with different political starting points around a common government policy requires both patience, a willingness to compromise, and responsibility. We know that from our own experience. But I still think that it raises legitimate questions.

Have the four parties that together have a majority in this chamber truly exhausted the possibilities of forming the government that they themselves say they want to see? Have the possibilities of reaching an agreement been fully tested? Or is it the case that the will to obtain power is greater than the will to agree on how it should be used? These are questions that the four parties need to answer, not least before their own voters.

An election result is binding. Those who, together with other parties, have a majority in the Swedish Riksdag also have a special responsibility to seriously examine the possibilities of turning that majority into a functioning government alternative.

Mr. Speaker! A vote on the Prime Minister is naturally about who shall lead Sweden's government, but it is also about something greater. It is about the ability to create stability, the possibility of gathering support for necessary decisions, and ultimately about Sweden's ability to meet the challenges that lie ahead of us.

Sweden needs a government that can take responsibility for the economy, safety, welfare, and our security in a restless world. It is about a government that can make decisions, implement reforms, and take responsibility even when the decisions are difficult. It is therefore not enough that four parties agree on whom they want to see as Prime Minister; they must also be able to agree on the conditions for that person to be able to govern. There is a difference between a mathematical majority and a functioning government basis. That difference has become very clear during the past weeks.

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates have respect for the process that the Speaker is now leading, and we also have respect for the fact that Magdalena Andersson has been given the opportunity to investigate the conditions for forming a government. It is a natural consequence of the parliamentary situation. Now she herself has stated that she has not succeeded in gathering the required support, and that is a message that must be taken seriously. At the same time, we cannot ignore that there are still four parties that together have 176 mandates and who have designated Magdalena Andersson as their prime ministerial candidate. I therefore think it is reasonable to expect that these parties also take responsibility for the situation that has arisen.

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates went to the election with a clear political direction and an ambition to continue taking responsibility for Sweden. We made a strong choice and received increased support from the voters, but we have also been clear about respecting the parliamentary situation that arose after the election. We do not have a majority for the government option that we went to the election on, but that does not change our conviction about what policy Sweden needs.

This means that we, just like all other parties, must face the reality in this chamber. But if it were to turn out that other government alternatives cannot gather sufficient support and parties give new signals that enable a government on our side, we are of course prepared to constructively contribute to exploring other ways forward. Our responsibility is not, after all, limited to our own party's interests; our responsibility concerns Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs a government, a government that has the prerequisites to govern and that can gather support for its policies, take responsibility for the country's future and meet the great challenges that await. But above all, Sweden needs a government that can solve Sweden's problems, a government that can strengthen security, create conditions for more jobs and growing companies, improve the school and safeguard our common welfare, a government that is not content with managing the Sweden we have but that has the ambition to build the Sweden we want – a Sweden that is the world's best country to live in, a country where people can feel security, faith in the future and freedom to shape their own lives and where it does not matter where you come from but where you are headed.

It is this political direction that the Moderates stand for, and therefore we cannot today stand behind Magdalena Andersson as Sweden's Prime Minister.

Mr. Speaker! The Moderate parliamentary group will therefore vote no to the Speaker's proposal to appoint Magdalena Andersson as Prime Minister.

(Applause)

In this speech, Dennis Alvdén, Lars Beckman, Lotta Björklund, Crister Carlsson, John E. Weinerhall, Mats Green, Gustaf Göthberg, Annelie Hastig Olsson, Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström, Caroline Högström, David Josefsson, Fredrik Kärrholm, Joanna Lewerentz, Josefin Malmqvist, Marie Nicholson, Ulrik Nilsson, Peter Ollén, Erik Ottoson, Thomas Ragnarsson, Tony Rahm, Johanna Rantsi, Magnus Resare, Adam Reuterskiöld, Oliver Rosengren, Mats Sander, Maria Stockhaus, Viktor Wärnick and Boriana Åberg (all M) agreed.

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Mr. Speaker, listeners and colleagues in the Riksdag! A little over a month ago, the Swedish people went to the polls. Over 6.8 million votes were cast. Nearly 85 percent of all eligible voters in Sweden participated in the general elections. Now we have, as we know, an election result, and for the first time in 32 years, a sitting government has been voted out by the voters after only one parliamentary term. The Swedish people have voted for a new direction.

The conclusion of the election result and the situation in the country is that a government is needed that can move Sweden forward, a government that ensures we get growth moving and pushes back the high unemployment by viewing the climate transition as an opportunity for Sweden to both reduce emissions and become richer and stronger, a government that secures good school, healthcare, and elderly care in the entire country, a government that creates better conditions to live a good life in the countryside and in the large cities, in the industrial towns and in the suburbs, a government that drives a reasonable migration policy and stops the unjust teenage deportations, a government that ensures that every rural area counts and that every single citizen counts.

The person who has the prerequisites to form such a government is Magdalena Andersson.

At the same time, the election result means that we have a complicated parliamentary situation. Eight parties went to the election as individual parties with different political platforms and positions. In Sweden, we do not have a two-party system. We have a parliamentary democratic system where it is the voters who determine the conditions for the majority conditions in the Riksdag. It is nothing strange. It is not unnatural. It is no crisis for democracy. But it places demands on us who sit in this chamber.

There are deadlocks on the right and on the left that, at least at the current moment, complicate the possibilities of getting a new government in place. The way forward will require that previous positions be reconsidered, for the simple reason that no party has obtained a majority on its own. No one can therefore get exactly what they want, but everyone needs to be prepared to give and take so that Sweden can get a capable government. It will not be easy, but it is necessary for us to get a new government in place. The Swedish people expect that we can work in a responsible and constructive manner with the election result that they have given us.

Mr. Speaker! In recent weeks, a long series of constructive conversations have been held between several of the parties in the Riksdag. The Social Democrats, the Left Party, the Centre Party, and the Green Party have worked together to secure a majority in the Riksdag's committees and to ensure that new committee presidencies are in place, and we have taken joint political initiatives, including to stop the unjust deportations of teenagers. Meetings have also been held at several political levels that have been good and forward-looking, which is good. But despite the positive movements forward, there are currently no conditions in place to form a government that is tolerated by the Riksdag – just as Magdalena Andersson announced when she submitted her final report on her exploratory mandate to the Speaker the other day.

In accordance with the timetable set by the Speaker, the Riksdag shall today take a position on the proposal to appoint Magdalena Andersson as Sweden's Prime Minister.

According to constitutional practice, the person being considered as Prime Minister shall indicate with which or which parties the government shall be formed. Since there is no agreement between the parties, our alternative is that the proposal being considered today is a government consisting solely of the Social Democrats – even though it cannot be overstated that it is not for such a government that the talks have been conducted over the past weeks.

This vote will, as expected, result in the proposal not being passed and the process moving forward.

Mr. Speaker! The Social Democratic parliamentary group will vote yes to the proposal to appoint Magdalena Andersson as Prime Minister.

Our hope is that after this vote we can continue to move forward in the process, so that Sweden can get a new government for a new political direction.

(Applause)

In this speech, Sanna Backeskog, Denis Begic, Teresa Carvalho, Peter Hultqvist, Magnus Johansson, Mattias Jonsson, Gustaf Lantz, Malin Larsson, Patrik Lundqvist, Leif Nysmed, Marie Olsson, Samuel Pettersson, Azadeh Rojhan, Anna-Caren Sätherberg, Peter Söderström, Mathias Tegnér and Andrine Winther (all S) agreed.

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Mr. Speaker! Four parties to the left pleaded before the election for the voters' support to back a Social Democratic Prime Minister. After the election, Magdalena Andersson declared herself the winner, and my Prime Minister, Ulf Kristersson, drew the natural conclusion of the new parliamentary situation in the Riksdag and resigned. Andersson won, she said. And, yes, the red-greens do gather a majority of the members in this chamber. Still, Andersson falls.

Mr. Speaker! It seems strange to me to celebrate with cake if one does not then manage the responsibility that was requested and actually received. But that is exactly where we stand.

When will Sweden get a new government? What will it push through? ”A new direction,” Lena Hallengren said just now. But which direction is it? Will it be socialization, that is, nationalization, of the business sector? Will it be a Center Party-style chaos privatization of some new agency? Will it be raised taxes for those who live, wherever they live? Will it be abolished grazing requirements for cows?

I don't know. But I can guess that if these winners ever get it together, Sweden will not win anything at all. It will be bad for the households' everyday economy. It will be a loss for Swedish school and for Swedish children's upbringing and security during life and for their parents' and grandparents' lives. It will likely be deplorable for Swedish growth, the growth that both gives us a richer everyday life and pays for the freedom and a good life for vulnerable and fragile people, who without us have the very least freedom.

Mr. Speaker! With 176 mandates, one undeniably gathers a mathematical majority. Mathematically, one is the winner. But who is the political winner? Those who should be the winners, Mr. Speaker, are the Swedish people.

The Liberals stand here, to the right, and are ready to take responsibility for the knowledge of children and adults and for a strong social safety net – all financed by an innovative business sector and a liberal market economy.

The Liberals are toppling Magdalena Andersson, Mr. Speaker. We are pressing the red button for a red government.

(Applause)

In this speech, Joar Forssell, Roger Haddad, Martin Melin and Mauricio Rojas (all L) concurred.

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

Daniel Bäckström (C)

Mr. Speaker! The Centre Party went to the election on more jobs, lower emissions, and better welfare throughout the country. Based on that, we received a reinforced mandate from the voters – a mandate we are now tasked to manage. These will be our starting points in all political issues during the coming mandate period, just as they are our starting points in the conversations now being held regarding the formation of the government.

Mr. Speaker! During the election campaign, we were also clear about the following: In order for the direction in these political issues to be shaped in accordance with what our voters want, there are some parties that, in addition to our own, can sit in a government that we cooperate with in an organized manner. These are the Social Democrats, the Moderates, the Christian Democrats, the Green Party, and the Liberals.

Sweden and the EU face challenges, including regarding economic growth, and Nato faces a threatening world, even in our direct vicinity. We in Centerpartiet believe that this gives strong reasons for stability and a policy anchored in the center. Against that background, we have since the election taken constructive initiatives to move the government formation forward.

In our conversations, we have been clear that it is the content of the policy that decides, not that we ourselves should accumulate ministerial posts. The Center Party is therefore not averse to, for example, letting through a government consisting of only Social Democrats, provided that the government pursues a growth-friendly policy clearly anchored in the center.

The conditions for today's vote do not exist. The Centre Party will therefore vote no in today's prime minister vote.

Now it will be the Speaker's task to move the process forward. The Centre Party remains ready for talks that can lead to a stable government that pursues a policy leading to more jobs, lower emissions, and better welfare throughout Sweden. Our door for government participation is open to all those parties that we have previously said we could cooperate with in government.

(Applause)

In this speech, Julia Algotsson (C) agreed.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! One month into the new mandate period, we are today at the first vote on the Prime Minister. We in the Left Party would have liked to see the situation be different, but we will unfortunately have to vote no in this vote – not because we want to, but because we must.

We in Vänsterpartiet have been clear: A government supported by Vänsterpartiet is a government in which Vänsterpartiet is included. It is not about wounded pride; it is about the promises that our members have made to our voters, for a changed Sweden.

The Swedish people expect us, who have claimed to have won the election, to sit down and form a government. The voters who wanted to replace the Tidö government and Ulf Kristersson want to see us four parties take responsibility together. That is not what has happened, and I regret that.

There is, in fact, much to be done. During recent years, households have seen their margins shrink while the government preferred to have coffee with the food giants rather than put pressure on them to lower prices. Today, 700,000 people live in poverty in Sweden, a country that was once the world's most equal. That is almost twice as many as in 2021. We need to strengthen the cash assistance and the sickness insurance, turn the market school into a knowledge school, put a stop to the deportation policy, and bolster the welfare system.

The prerequisite for all of this is that government negotiations begin. The Left Party will gladly participate in those – and constructively.

For some strange reason, it is only called ministerial posts when the Left Party does what most other parties running in elections do, namely say: If our mandates are needed to form a government, we shall also be part of it. It is not about the posts themselves, but about the fact that influence in the government is what is required to get the policy implemented, both in the individual issues and in the whole.

We know this from experience. Through cooperation as a supporting party, we received agreements and promises of improvements. Some were fulfilled, but far from all. The welfare gains were to be removed, but the proposal was defeated here in the chamber because there was no majority for it. The dead end in the sickness insurance was removed, and finally, more were to be entitled to their own insurance. But the government gave new directives to Försäkringskassan via the regulatory letter, and fewer sick people were granted sickness benefit at all.

It is also about stability – about voters being able to count on that what we agree upon actually happens. Under the January agreement, a family week was promised. Then C suddenly rejected the budget that they themselves had negotiated, and the population received no family week. Unstable government bases and an unwillingness to compromise triggered two government crises during the same period. So, one cannot govern a country, especially not in turbulent times.

We have drawn two lessons from this. One is that a government must have a basis that gathers a majority in the Riksdag. The other is that we ourselves must be part of the government we support in order to be sure that what we have negotiated becomes a reality.

Of course, we realize that government cooperation involves responsibility and that sometimes one must stand up for policies that are not one's own. We can compromise and give and take, and we are prepared to see through even those parts of an agreement that are not the Left Party's policies. That is the price of cooperation.

In a democracy, one person cannot decide. Voters from all parties that together form a majority must be given the opportunity to influence. We are four parties who say that we want Magdalena Andersson as Prime Minister. Then we must manage to respect each other's mandates. Otherwise, our prime ministerial candidate has no basis and Sweden has no government.

For five years we have said exactly this: If the Left Party's support is required to form a government, we shall also be part of it. It is not difficult to go back in the media archives to have that confirmed. Already before the 2022 election, we urged the parties on our side to reflect and unite the team. We could already see then that even the Center Party needed to be part of a future red-green government. We failed to unite before that election, and Sweden received a Tidö government.

During these four years, we have been crystal clear: In order to replace Tidö, it is required that the four red-green parties meet and begin to reach agreements. Repeatedly, we have urged the opposition leader Magdalena Andersson to bring the team together, without receiving any response. Therefore, we stand here today without the possibility of electing her as Prime Minister.

Vänsterpartiet has for decades been a supporting party, negotiated budgets and had officials at the Government Offices. But that time is now over. It is not just a decision made by the party leadership, but the decision has been made by the party's highest decision-making body. We already before the election did a great deal of work to get our members and voters to accept that the Centerpartiet can also be needed. Certainly, there are great differences between the Centerpartiet and the other red-green parties, especially in distribution policy, but we knew that already before the election. If one wants to, it is possible to compromise. The Vänsterpartisterna have realized that the change Sweden needs cannot be made without the Centerpartiet.

Even though we cannot choose a new Prime Minister here today, the government base is clear and distinct. It is a question of putting it together. There is still time for that. But then we must first and foremost be prepared to see the parliamentary realities together.

Therefore, I want to say – in all good intentions, Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist: The broad center does not exist. Before the election, it was possible to dream, fight, and hope, but the majority conditions are what they are. There is one side where the Sverigedemokraterna are included and one where they are not. Both of our parties have been able to agree to govern together in red-green constellations in several places in the country. In my own home region, Gävleborg, we have agreed not only in Hudiksvall and Söderhamn but also in the region, where I myself have experience of cooperation from before.

We can agree here as well. As recently as the day before yesterday, we did so regarding the deportations of teenagers, with the view of humanity as the starting point. One cannot exclude a party whose mandate one needs simply because one does not agree on substantive issues. In that case, one solves those issues instead. We need the Centerpartiet, and the Centerpartiet needs us. But we need to be equals in such a cooperation, and that means we shall be parts of a four-party government. The election result gives us the parliamentary conditions we have.

Magdalena Andersson! Vänsterpartiet has been the guarantor that Social Democratic prime ministers have been elected. We would like to be that again, but not as a supporting party but as equals in a Social Democratic-led government. In this election, Vänsterpartiet gained the most of all parties. We are the second largest party in the government base, and our voters shall have the right to influence in the same way as other voters. We demand neither more nor less.

We all know what the result of the vote will be here today. But the time for minority governments with jumping majorities is over. Now, clear leadership is needed. It is time to gather the government base and be clear about who is expected to join the government. Then the next vote will have a much more promising outcome.

Mr. Speaker! I do not want to be misunderstood. Vänsterpartiet went to the election on the basis of joining a government – a government that seriously intends to tackle the injustices in today's Sweden. But we also went to the election on the basis that Magdalena Andersson is our prime ministerial candidate. We can only vote yes in a vote where both of those things are fulfilled. Many probably expected that we would abstain. But as the constitution is designed, an abstention in a prime ministerial vote is in practice a yes-vote. Therefore, Vänsterpartiet will vote no today.

The day we have agreed to give voters from all parties a place in the government, the Left Party will vote yes to Magdalena Andersson. We vote no today, with the hope of soon being able to vote yes.

(Applause)

In this speech, Daniel Bernmar and Jennifer Merelaid Hankins (both V) agreed.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Swedish people have voted for a new direction. We have a red-green majority in the Riksdag. Miljöpartiet campaigned on implementing a just climate transition and building together a Sweden that has been torn apart by increasing inequalities, poverty, and a growing xenophobia. We have received a clear mandate from the voters to reduce emissions, strengthen equality, stop the teenage deportations, and invest in welfare across the entire country. We shall put that mandate into action.

Parallel to the formation of the government, we four red-green majority parties have worked together here in the Riksdag. We have jointly formed a cartel that ensures a red-green majority in all of the Riksdag's committees and in the EU committee. We have negotiated the distribution of chair positions and other assignments, and we have already begun to change Sweden's policy.

In the Social Insurance Committee, we have agreed to draft a stop law to halt the unreasonable deportations of teenagers, a law that ensures that young people who came here as children with their parents are not deported from Sweden. On Tuesday, all parties in the Riksdag stood behind starting that work when we voted in the committee. We are not waiting, but we are keeping the pace as high as possible.

Miljöpartiet, Socialdemokraterna, Vänsterpartiet and Centerpartiet have also changed Sweden's Israel policy when we agreed that Sweden shall push to freeze the EU's trade agreement with Israel. The new red-green majority has also stopped Sverigedemokraterna's attempts at fossil subsidies and sharpened Sweden's climate policy in the EU's work with emissions trading. Our four red-green parties have taken steps forward together.

We are having constructive conversations. Miljöpartiet welcomes that. But it is urgent to address the societal challenges that Sweden faces. We need to ensure as soon as possible that Sweden gets a new government in place that can truly steer the policy.

Every day that Sweden waits for a new government, climate emissions continue at the catastrophic level that the Tidö parties' policy has caused. Every week that we lose makes it harder to keep up with the important systemic changes needed to reduce emissions, decrease unemployment, stop species extinction, increase equality, and strengthen the welfare across the entire country.

Mr. Speaker! Today the Riksdag votes on Magdalena Andersson as Prime Minister, even though we all know in advance that she will not be tolerated by the Riksdag. We interpret this as a way to put pressure on the parties to move forward.

Magdalena Andersson is the Green Party's prime ministerial candidate. Our goal remains that she should become prime minister for a red-green government. However, we will, of course, not allow a government that the Green Party is not a part of.

Magdalena Andersson has herself said that she has not explored the proposal that is now on the table, namely a pure S-government. There is also no pre-negotiated government agreement. In practice, there is therefore no government to vote for, and Miljöpartiet will therefore vote no today.

I want to emphasize that we have a good dialogue with all parties in the red-green majority, and we are working to get a government in place. Miljöpartiet would have liked to see that we had come further today.

Mr. Speaker! The voters have given us a mandate, and we shall administer that mandate. After four lost years with Tidö, Sweden needs a new direction; that is what our four red-green parties agree on. Now we need to quickly form a common project and get a red-green majority government in place that lowers emissions, strengthens welfare, reduces unemployment, and builds our country back together. That is what the Swedish people expect.

(Applause)

In this speech, Leila Ali Elmi, Janine Alm Ericson, Ajda Asgari, Marcus Friberg, Camilla Hansén, Daniel Helldén, Rebecka Le Moine, Amanda Lind, Åsa Lindhagen, Hanna Lindqvist, Emma Nohrén, Jan Riise, Nils Seye Larsen, Nila Vikhe Patil and Ulrika Westerlund (all MP) agreed.

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

Matheus Enholm (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has, under the Tidö government, with the Sweden Democrats as the driver, become a better country – a safer country, a freer country and a more just country.

We must not forget what it looked like after the 2022 election. The failure that the Social Democrats left behind was widespread and extensive. It was sky-high inflation, a migration failure without equal, a moral collapse within the crime and punishment area, widespread lack of accountability, and record-high fuel prices.

Now, four years later, we have pushed back inflation and significantly reduced the shootings. Gang crime leaders are being arrested, and the sentences have been toughened. Asylum-related immigration is down to the lowest levels in 40 years. The lack of requirements is gone, and Sweden is in the process of becoming Sweden again. Fuel prices have been pushed down. All of this has been good for Sweden, both individually and collectively.

Mr. Speaker! What should I do? With whom should I do it? And how should I do it? There was a reason why Magdalena Andersson systematically avoided answering these questions during the election campaign. There were simply no answers. The voters were misled into believing that there was a tangible alternative, but when that hypothesis has now been tested against reality, it has turned out that all that existed were empty words.

We Sweden Democrats warned time and again about the parliamentary chaos that would arise if Magdalena Andersson's side were to achieve success in the election. Now we stand here, in the middle of the storm and in the middle of the chaos. It is obvious that the Social Democrats, with Magdalena Andersson at the helm, completely lack a plan to navigate out of the locked parliamentary situation that we now find ourselves in.

Mr. Speaker! It is hardly a secret that the Sweden Democrats lack confidence in Magdalena Andersson's ability to lead Sweden in the right direction. As a logical consequence of this, the Sweden Democrats' parliamentary group votes today against Magdalena Andersson as the new Prime Minister of Sweden.

(Applause)

In this speech, Alexander Christiansson, Emil Eneblad, Mattias Eriksson Falk, Liselotte Forsberg, Ann-Christine Frohm, Rasmus Giertz, Patrik Jönsson, Kevin Sahlin, Oscar Sjöstedt, Jessica Stegrud, Victoria Tiblom, Martin Westmont and Eric Westroth (all SD) agreed.

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

Camilla Brodin (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Today, this House will take a position on Magdalena Andersson as Prime Minister in a Social Democratic single-party government.

We Christian Democrats have a simple principle: We vote yes to the government-former whose parliamentary base we are part of. Therefore, we Christian Democrats will vote no to the proposal that has been presented today.

We mean that what would be best for Sweden would be a government that continues to manage the successes that the blue and yellow government has won when it comes to inflation, nuclear power, the asylum pressure, the buildup of the defense, the support for Ukraine, and not least the deadly gang violence.

It is also about a continuation that sets the direction forward for a Sweden with a policy that prioritizes welfare and a reforming of healthcare. It is a policy that ensures that ordinary families are always winners and that wants to build Sweden strong, both through development and growth and by taking the fight for our country's values. It is a policy that realizes what we Christian Democrats called the Swedish Dream in the election campaign.

The voters have not given any mandate for a turn to the left. They have voted in a parliament where free enterprise, strict migration policy, reasonable tax levels and a stable energy policy have a majority in the chamber.

It remains for us to jointly take responsibility for ensuring that there is a government that stands behind such a political direction – the direction that the Swedish people have voted for – that can also take office.

(Applause)

In this speech, Lili André, Yusuf Aydin, Mathias Bengtsson, Magnus Berntsson, Christian Carlsson, Hans Eklind, Cecilia Engström, Martin Hallander, Dan Hovskär, Magnus Jacobsson, Kjell-Arne Ottosson, Camilla Rinaldo Miller, Paul Sabo, Carl Wiktor Svensson and Larry Söder (all KD) agreed.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

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