Social economy and financial management

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The Riksdag makes decisions on the state budget in two steps. The first decision sets the framework for all 27 expenditure areas, and the second decision allocates the money to the different appropriations within the expenditure area. The Sweden Democrats, together with the government parties, have negotiated the budget that the Riksdag will adopt.

It will be a budget that has the support of a majority in the Swedish Riksdag, which guarantees stability and political capacity for action. It is a unique strength in Swedish politics, seen in a contemporary political context, because the government base - SD-M-KD-L - is the first in 13 years to have a majority behind it in the Swedish Riksdag.

We have received the mandate of the Swedish people to clean up after the legacy that eight years of red-green rule has left behind. It will not happen overnight, but slowly but surely we are taking steps in the right direction to make Sweden good again.

Today's debate concerns expenditure area 2 Social Economy and Financial Management. The goals for this expenditure area are that the financial system shall be stable, characterized by a high level of confidence, and have the ability to ensure important social functions.

Financial companies shall meet the needs of households and companies for financial services and contribute to sustainable development, and the financial markets shall function well with competition and have a strong protection for consumers. Finally, the state's financial management shall be conducted efficiently.

Within this expenditure area, there are important agencies such as Finansinspektionen, Konjunkturinstitutet, Statistiska centralbyrån, among others.

Social economy and financial management

Mr. Speaker! Financial stability is a prerequisite for a functioning economic cycle, for lending to households and companies to function, for the capital supply to function, and also for the payment services that we use in everyday life to function. Predictability, reliability, and stability – the investments that the Tidö parties are making in this expenditure area are about achieving just these goals.

The Government further proposes that the objective for the financial system shall be expanded to also include a goal of having the ability to ensure important societal functions. Given the security policy developments in the world around us, higher requirements are now placed on critical actors within the financial system to be able to handle, for example, cyber threats.

In today's digitized world, we are dependent on the payment system being resilient even in turbulent times. An example of how vulnerable society is to cyberattacks specifically is the attacks on one of our largest food chains in the summer of 2021, when almost 800 of their stores were forced to remain closed for an entire week.

This happened in peacetime, but one can imagine a scenario where state actors coordinate IT attacks during an ongoing societal crisis of some kind, against the food industry, against fuel stations, and against Swedish pharmacies. What would such a situation look like?

The digitized society has streamlined the economy and made it easier and smoother for us to handle matters of a private economic nature, but it has also made us more vulnerable to disruptions in the payment system. The Sweden Democrats therefore want redundancy in the payment system through increased requirements to be able to accept, for example, cash. This would constitute an important link in our crisis preparedness.

Given the context we are debating today, the government is therefore proposing that the goal for the financial system should also include the ability to ensure important societal functions. I believe this is right and correct and an important first step towards strengthening our civil defense.

In conclusion, the Tidö parties also take action against welfare crime. We must ensure that the Swedish people's tax money goes to what it is intended for - to school, healthcare, care, the justice system, defense, and so on. It is therefore completely unacceptable that up to 20 billion kronor are paid out incorrectly from the welfare systems annually. To reduce the incorrect payments, a payment authority will therefore be established on January 1, 2024.

The agency's mission shall be focused on advanced attacks against the welfare system that individual agencies alone have difficulty detecting. For this purpose, 161 million kronor are allocated for the coming year.

I vote in favor of the proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Adnan Dibrani (S)

Mr. Speaker! Since the parliamentary majority in the first step of the budget process has already rejected our budget motion, I would like, for those who are very interested, to refer to our party motion in FiU1, where one can see what it would have looked like if our motion had been passed.

In Sweden, households and companies are being pressured by both high inflation and high interest rates. Real wages are being eroded, and economic reality is intruding into people's everyday lives. Sweden faces a tough time. The economic situation highlights the need for a secure society where welfare delivers across all of Sweden and where we face tough times together.

Ordinary wage earners have truly taken responsibility. Many companies have also done this, but many companies, especially within certain industries, have not done so and have large profits. For example, food prices have increased by 26 percent over the last two years, and a report this week showed that prices have increased more than costs. One in three families struggles to make ends meet every month. The inflation crisis and the recession affect all of Sweden and all Swedes.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats had hoped that our budget motion would win, because then we could have collectively borne the burden of these difficult times. By supporting all families with children who are having it extra tough and by taking responsibility for the funding of the welfare system, we could have avoided the cuts that seem to be coming.

We propose an extra payment of the child allowance in January, as it is usually tough for many. We also propose 500 kronor more per month for single parents, a rural discount for families in rural areas, and so on. We also submit a concrete proposal to abolish the unfair funkisskatten, which it is completely incomprehensible to me that one has.

The Social Democrats have submitted a budget motion with substantial investments in welfare and in household economies to increase security for ordinary people. One way to do this is to continue expanding the state presence and services throughout the country through more service offices. This is what we fought for during the years we were in government, and we hope that this work will continue, even though much points in another direction.

Unfortunately, the government's budget for 2024 does not meet the situation we face, at least not all the challenges. It requires a responsible policy that puts welfare first, that takes on the fight against the social problems we see ahead of us, and that equips Sweden and the Swedish people for the times to come.

The list of the right-wing government's and SD's election promises just keeps getting longer and longer, for example the high-cost protection, which we highlighted already last year, when northern Sweden was the exception. In my home county of Halland, Falkenberg municipality received some support, but that now has to be paid back. And then there were amortization requirements, falukorv, significantly lowered fuel prices, and so on.

Mr. Speaker! There are actually good things in the government's budget as well, but several of the proposals are extensions of good Social Democratic policy. One example is the strengthened unemployment insurance, another is the extension of the housing allowance to the most vulnerable families with children. They also continue with investments in both the justice system and the police. So, there are good parts.

Mr. Speaker! The government's and the Sweden Democrats' policy is not sufficient given the recession we unfortunately seem to be facing. When I worked at a bank in 2008-2009, I saw what happened to ordinary people when the crisis hit. I saw how welfare had to take the hit and how mass layoffs occurred in school, healthcare, and elderly care. Therefore, I am truly worried about what is to come. I hope it does not become so.

There is a difference compared to the government that Magdalena Andersson led when the corona pandemic hit with full force, when Sweden fared very well from an economic perspective because the welfare was well compensated for the loss of tax revenue three times over. Hundreds of thousands of employees were able to keep their jobs with the help of short-term layoffs, and the Swedish economy recovered quickly.

We Social Democrats believe that politics should instead step forward and take control of the development. We propose that the subsidies to healthcare be doubled. And we want to invest 6 billion kronor in addition to what is proposed in the government's budget. We also want to see a new principle for how welfare should be financed. We want resources to automatically increase in line with inflation so that we do not end up in the same situation as today, where healthcare is forced into stealth savings every year while politicians of different political colors speak of investments – which are eaten up elsewhere.

We want to increase the allocations to the municipal sector by 26 billion kronor next year. We want to use these funds to support families with children who are having it extra tough and take responsibility for the funding of the welfare system, so that the healthcare workers get manageable working conditions and perhaps more friends at work, but above all so that we avoid layoffs and cuts.

Mr. Speaker! With these words, I wish you and all those who work around you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. But I also want to wish a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to my colleagues in the committee and perhaps above all to the fantastic committee secretariat.

(Applause)

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

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! On Lucia Day, we made a decision on the budget frameworks. It was the second time since 2009 that a majority in the Swedish Riksdag stood behind the state budget. It is a sign of strength that we have a government that has strong support in the Riksdag, especially when we are in economically tough times. But this is nothing that we can take for granted.

The expenditure area that we are now debating, I would like to use as an example. Here we have 22 budget items. Miljöpartiet wants to increase the appropriations on 12 of them. Vänsterpartiet wants to increase the appropriations on 4 of them. But 3 of the 4 budget items are completely different items than the 12 that Miljöpartiet wants to increase.

Then we have the Center Party, which instead wants to reduce 11 grant items - and which with precision has managed to hit so that all of these are included in the items that the Green Party wants to increase.

The Social Democrats shall then attempt to gather this together and themselves present a budget proposal in this area which is essentially the same as the government's budget.

It is not at all given that we have a Prime Minister and a Finance Minister who gather support so that there is a majority for their policies and budget. But this provides good conditions for financial stability. And that is exactly what we need, and it is also the core of what this expenditure area is about.

We Moderates urge approval of the government's proposal on how the 20.8 billion kronor that we have in this area shall be distributed. 16.7 billion kronor go to the state's costs for occupational pensions, and an additional 4 billion kronor go to authorities within financial management.

We move for the rejection of the reservation from Vänsterpartiet that the government should appoint a committee, a new group of politicians, to submit proposals to the government on how to carry out its work within Agenda 2030. No, we do not need any more scattered bursts of proposals that go in all possible directions. What we need is a government that prioritizes, that has a budget that holds together, that has the strength to hold onto the pennies, that sees how every tax krona is used, and that fights the inflation that is now making everything much more expensive.

The government is doing this so well that we can assist municipalities and regions with record-breaking support and can carry out the expansion of defense and the justice system that we need. And the government is doing this so well that we can, in addition, lower taxes for people who work and who have worked, so that they can keep more of their money in their own wallets and can prioritize themselves how the money should be used. This is extra important in a time when inflation and high interest rates have eroded wage earners' wallets. This group has not received inflation compensation in terms of their support or income but has been held back.

In addition to the state's annual efficiency of 1 percent, we are implementing efficiencies of an additional 1 percent in the state administration with this budget, of course also within the finance administration. In tough times, everyone must do their part, and especially the state.

In 2024, the Payment Authority will finally be in place so that your and my tax money cannot end up in the pockets of criminals. The incorrect payments from the state are estimated to amount to 18 billion kronor every year. And approximately half of them are suspected to involve benefit fraud. These are funds that are needed in our welfare. These are funds that would have done more good in people's own wallets. Stopping welfare fraud and benefit fraud is a high priority for our government.

The least the state can do is to do what everyone else in Sweden must do, which is to prioritize and turn over the coins. 2 percent may sound like a little, and it is percentage-wise very little in comparison to the redistributions, prioritizations, and spending cuts that ordinary people make. But many small streams become large sums. And in 2024, Sweden, with Elisabeth Svantesson as Finance Minister, will have the lowest tax burden we have had since 1975.

With these words, I would like to take the opportunity to wish a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to those of you who are here, to all my colleagues in the Finance Committee, to the Speaker, to the Chamber Office, and to the Finance Committee's office. But above all, I want to wish a Merry Christmas to all of you at home.

(Applause)

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Regarding expenditure area 2, I refer to our specific statement in the report.

I thought instead to focus on our reservation, which I move for approval. For Sweden to reach the targets in Agenda 2030, it is required that the government continuously analyzes the work and, if necessary, decides on new measures.

Different actors in society must be involved in the work so that it can become as good as possible. Today, there is no state actor that has the holistic perspective required to produce a basis that could serve as the foundation for such a follow-up. Therefore, a politically composed committee was needed with a mandate to continuously produce material for the government in the form of follow-up, evaluation, and proposals for measures until 2030 to ensure that the implementation of Agenda 2030 is driven forward. The Environmental Goals Preparation Group and the Climate Preparation Group are examples of committees that already work in a similar manner.

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is a country where authorities generally enjoy a very high level of trust. This is something I believe we should safeguard and continue to develop. Trust and confidence do not come of their own accord but are something that must be built up and subsequently refined and managed. It takes a long time to build up trust, but it goes even faster to destroy it.

That is why the governance of our state authorities is an important issue, even if it may not always be front-page news in our media. Successful administration creates a foundation for both trust and confidence, but also for economic growth, a well-functioning society, and a well-functioning rule of law.

Administrations and authorities are for the citizens. They shall contribute to public benefit and make life easier and better for individual people and for companies. The activities shall be conducted with as great an effect as possible for every tax krona we invest.

Important keywords for the government's administrative policy are precisely citizen benefit, efficiency, and simplification. These keywords are important so that public employees and managers have the right perspective, but they are also important because citizens and the business community can often perceive it as if administrations and agencies are acting quite the opposite. Therefore, it is important that the government steers the agencies in such a way that citizens perceive that the agencies exist for them.

The government is now taking a major step to streamline the state administration in order to make it leaner and sharper. In the budget bill for 2024, we identify ten agencies that are to become five. During the spring, the identified agencies shall themselves submit proposals on how such a merger can take place. Furthermore, a special investigation shall review how those agencies that have fewer than 100 full-time equivalent employees can become more efficient. The purpose is to reduce the number of agencies and also reduce the risk of double work and overlapping mandates.

In addition, Statskontoret has received two important assignments from the government. On the one hand, they are currently analyzing the agencies' information and communication efforts, as the cost increases for that budget item are four times larger than the general cost increases over time. We want to know why it is the case. On the other hand, they have been assigned to review 41 of the total 45 mentioned agencies in order to potentially be able to phase out or merge some of them.

Another important issue for the efficiency of our agencies is digitalization. Several of the agencies have taken the lead when it comes to digitalizing and introducing new digital services, in order to increase the service for the citizens but also to increase the agency's efficiency. Several agencies have been able to create great benefits in their operations through various AI services, both in the agency processes and for the customers.

It is important that digitalization continues to create greater benefits and more efficient agencies. This is also, I believe, an important part of increasing trust in our agencies.

Mr. Speaker! I am very pleased with the work to streamline the authorities that the government has now initiated. Many parties have long spoken about a more efficient state, but few governments, if any, have done as much as this one to reach that goal. The state should not cost taxpayers more than necessary. The authorities should be governed in a way that promotes efficiency and creates simplification for both citizens and companies. People should feel that the state works for them, not against them.

Mr. Speaker! This debate also covers public procurement. There, the government argues that we can do better – that public procurement can function better than it does currently. The government is currently reviewing the national procurement strategy. The goal is to make public procurement more attractive, not least for small companies and the idea-driven sector. The thresholds for entry into public procurement need to be lower, and procuring authorities must work on setting reasonable and more coordinated requirements so that more actors can and want to participate in public procurement.

During the spring, a more detailed measure will be presented, but the goal is clear. We want to get more value for our tax money. Competition needs to increase, and control needs to be strengthened so that no tax money finances criminal activity and, in the long run, contributes to the deadly gun violence.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I also want to say something about the state's employer policy. We shall have zero tolerance for threats, violence, and undue influence against public employees. We see how serious organized crime is increasingly also pushing its way into the public sector, among other things through undue influence, threats, and violence against just public employees. The Government has now initiated work on a new action plan against corruption, as a support to counteract these types of occurrences.

Finally, I must also say that the government has changed the practice for when heads of agencies retire. Just like in the rest of the labor market, heads of agencies shall also be able to work until the year they turn 69. This is an important measure to retain competence and strengthen the work line, but not least to counteract ageism.

With these words, I would also like to take the opportunity to wish the Speaker's Presidium, the Chancellery, and the members of the Swedish Parliament a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

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

Adnan Dibrani (S)

Mr. Speaker! I agree with much of the Minister's description regarding this expenditure area, which concerns the authorities. I truly believe that the authorities should be efficient. The operations must be reviewed and priorities must be set. Digitalization should be used to the greatest extent possible, as well as all new technology that comes with AI and so on. We have previously heard that it is also important for the municipalities and regions to do the same as what is to be done in the authorities.

But then I have a question. There is an authority, namely the Government Offices, which does not need to do this. What signal does that send to everyone else? When everyone else must save and streamline, the Government Offices shall expand. Furthermore, they have started with the new thing that certain officials, perhaps especially those dealing with issues concerning those who govern, should get a little extra money in their wallets because they work with just this and work so hard, in contrast to the "ordinary" officials. What kind of signal is this to send to all authorities, municipalities, and regions?

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not really know where Adnan Dibrani has gotten the information that the Government Offices are not covered by efficiency requirements. They are, indeed. On the other hand, the Government Offices are not covered, for natural reasons, by agency mergers, as that would be quite difficult to implement. But if it is the one percent efficiency requirement that we are now broadly imposing on the vast majority of agencies that Dibrani refers to, the Government Offices are also covered by this efficiency. I do not really know what Dibrani is fishing for, if I am to be completely honest.

Of course, the Government Offices must also be covered by efficiency requirements and efficiency measures. The Government Offices can become significantly better at digitalization and digitized processes; I can truly attest to that. A major project is starting now, which is to begin being realized next year, as I understand, which we all look forward to very much. I do not have much more to say about this.

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

Adnan Dibrani (S)

Mr. Speaker! There was really no trickery in this. The Government Offices certainly have a mandate to save, but if you look at the budget item, you see that they are instead expanding. Furthermore, there has been talk of hiring even more people to handle the Tidö project and other matters. Now they are also going to get involved in wages and other things. It may be that the Minister does not know this, but I think it sends a completely wrong signal to the other agencies if the Government Offices are the only ones allowed to swell a little extra.

The same applies to the cuts in service offices and other things. One can think what one wants, but for me it is incredibly important that both city and country are allowed to live, that conditions are given for more service offices and other things, and that the state is present in the countryside. Even there you are cutting back - perhaps not as much as I feared, but it is still the case that you are cutting back while we invest a little extra.

It is above all the signal I am looking for. Those at home are told that they must save, but the government itself does not need to do so. How do you think, Erik Slottner, they will receive that?

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! If the signal sent had been that the Government Offices would be exempted from the one percent efficiency requirement, it would have been a bad signal, but now the Government Offices are covered by this.

There may be certain parts of the Government Offices that increase. I will probably have to read the tables a bit more carefully – I cannot say on the spot whether that is the case or not. I also cannot say which these parts are in that case. There may be very good reasons for this, such as a new office having been established. I cannot really answer that; I have to go home and read up on it. The general requirement for efficiency also covers the Government Offices.

Many agencies receive extra budget allocations and increases - for example, the county administrative boards receive increased funds to be able to exercise supervision and conduct environmental assessments at a faster pace. It is not the case that it is forbidden for the government to provide extra funds to the agencies. The Police Authority and the Armed Forces are two agencies that receive incredibly much more funds next year. They are otherwise not covered by the efficiency requirement of 1 percent.

One can therefore have a general efficiency requirement while simultaneously increasing certain other parts if there are arguments that justify it.

I agree with what Dibrani said regarding the service centers – I think this is an important activity. I have inaugurated a number of service centers during my more than a year as Civil Minister. There is no plan to stop planned service centers. On the other hand, there is a plan for how the service centers shall expand their operations. There are also other measures underway to streamline the service centers' operations so that we can get even greater benefit from the money we invest.

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

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Mr. Speaker! Since I was not registered for the debate, I had no opportunity to request a reply to the bourgeois members who have spoken here about efficiencies in the state administration, which I would have liked to do.

In the budget, the law enforcement agencies have received additional funds for crime fighting, but a large part of these funds is consumed by efficiencies. For example, the directors-general of Skatteverket, Kronofogdemyndigheten, and Tullverket have reported that the funds are insufficient for their mandates. In total, these three agencies alone are to save 135 million through efficiencies.

At the same time, the three authorities are getting more work to do - for example, the applications for debt restructuring are hitting record highs this year. Skatteverket has already concluded 180 trial placements for people who were to work with crime prevention. They were going to do exactly what the government - and all of us - want done, but the money will not be enough.

Streamlining of bureaucracy is usually good, but this streamlining is blind because it does not take into account what the agencies are working on. It is not just about bureaucracy for the crime-preventing agencies, but their entire work is affected. Customs may have fewer people in the field. The Swedish Tax Agency cannot work with the crime prevention that is supposed to be done or handle the applications they receive.

This is an efficiency measure that should be withdrawn. Vänsterpartiet is allocating, just as we stated in our previous contribution, money to this appropriation to abolish the efficiency measures of the agencies.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 16.)

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