Special debate on trust-damaging party financing

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! Unfortunately, we live in a time when things should be different than they are. Fundamentally, I believe there is a broad consensus in Swedish politics to try to set things right so that Sweden can once again become a safe country with a strong sense of togetherness and trust. This togetherness and trust must apply between people and between authorities. It must also apply between people and authorities as well as between citizens and politics. Trust and safety are fragile things that one must nurture well and act responsibly towards.

Madam Speaker! I believe, unfortunately, that most of us know someone or some people – it could be a parent, a grandmother or a grandfather – who, in the autumn of their lives, have been ruthlessly exploited by criminal networks that have called from Spain or, for that matter, from somewhere in Sweden. These networks have, through various types of trickery, schemes, threats or other means of pressure, made people give up their last savings or, which for many perhaps is even worse, lose their last bit of trust and confidence in the society they live in and the fellow human beings they are surrounded by.

Since I took office as Minister, I have, together with everyone else in this government and many in this chamber, done my utmost to push back the type of insecurity and crime in our society.

Madam Speaker! Some time ago, I was to discuss party financing in Aktuellt. I must say that I had to swallow my bitterness when it began with a report where a person told that they had been contacted to buy lottery tickets. The money from there was to go to the Socialdemokraternas party fund. The person was ill and had said no, but then could not say no any more times and felt that the only way to get away from the whole thing was to finally say yes, buy a ticket, and thereby support a party even though the person did not want to.

We are all, as human beings and as political parties, burdened with errors, shortcomings, and problems. One should never claim to be perfect or flawless. There are always things to improve. That is why scrutiny, transparency, and oversight are very important; all of it is welcome.

Most can be caught having misunderstood a rule or committed an error, but what we have seen and what has been reported in recent weeks regarding a very elaborate and aggressive technique for selling lottery tickets to elderly people - and thereby financing party-political activities - truly raises the question of whether this is how Swedish democracy should be financed and whether this is how the Swedish party system should function.

As elected representatives, we all need to be faced with the fact that questions need to be answered when we receive them. I believe few demand that everyone should always be flawless, but a reasonable requirement on politics and on the state is that one steps forward, answers, and takes responsibility when errors are discovered. I hope that today's debate gives the Social Democrats and Magdalena Andersson the opportunity to answer how they will rectify the problems that have been uncovered and how they will pay back the money to those who have been affected. If those questions do not receive any answer, we face serious reflections regarding how Swedish society and Swedish party politics actually function.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! The subject of today's debate is not gang crime, even though one might think so after listening to Minister Wykman. Today's debate is instead about the financing of parties. This is a large, important and serious issue. We who are participating in this debate therefore have a responsibility to do so with the utmost seriousness.

Since the 1950s, social democracy, just like many other popular movements, has financed parts of its activities, for example studies and member activities, with lottery sales. It has been about finding a financing alongside the party support, i.e., the state grants, in order to independently conduct activities all over the country - in every municipality and in as many residential areas and neighborhoods as possible - and in order to bring politics and democracy closer to the citizens. It is in that context that today's specific debate should be seen.

Madam Speaker! The facts that have emerged in the media review of Kombispel's lottery sales are serious. Aggressive and unethical sales methods do not belong in any business, especially not in a business that our party stands behind, but the Minister must have lived under a stone if he has not noticed that my party quickly made decisions on a series of powerful measures. The contract with the telemarketing company has been terminated, and no external telemarketing companies will be used in the future. The CEO was dismissed immediately, and the entire board has been required to leave their positions.

A new management will now conduct a review of the entire operation, because this is not how it should be done. We are doing our best to rectify what has gone wrong.

Mr. Speaker, if we are to discuss trust-damaging party financing seriously, everything must be subject to discussion, such as how the Sverigedemokraterna and the Moderaterna every year funnel millions of kronor from Swedish municipalities and regions to their party headquarters in Stockholm. These are funds allocated by citizens for local party work. Is that not trust-damaging for the party system?

We can also discuss the findings that emerged from Kalla fakta's investigation of anonymous donations to the parties as recently as a few years ago. It was revealed that several parties had employees and representatives who had attempted to circumvent the regulatory framework for anonymous donations to the political parties.

How did the parties in this chamber react then? My party had an employee who had expressed themselves in a completely incorrect way. That employee was immediately separated from their work duties. In the Moderaterna, that employee who told that one could donate completely anonymously to activities that did great good for the Moderaterna received a promotion instead. Gunnar Strömmer is today Sweden's Minister of Justice.

There is clearly a difference between the political parties. We Social Democrats take responsibility for our party - for what we do wrong and what we do right. We welcome journalistic scrutiny. It is a prerequisite for Swedish democracy.

(Applause)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I view positively that we gather in this chamber today to discuss trust-damaging party financing through lotteries. Public trust in politics risks being damaged when a party finances its activities in a way that does not align with Swedes' views on ethics and morality.

When trust in politics is damaged, democracy risks being eroded. Therefore, it is good that this debate is taking place and that the Tidö parties have already begun the work of ensuring a transparent, legal, and morally justifiable party financing in Sweden.

The background is that the Social Democrats have rigged the system to create advantages for their own lottery sales. In this way, unlike a commercial actor on the gambling market, they have been able to sell lottery tickets on credit to gambling addicts, poor pensioners, and those already in debt. This has been able to occur without reasonable requirements for customer knowledge and without limitations on the profit tax. Furthermore, the activity has been conducted through aggressive marketing towards the vulnerable in society.

Madam Speaker! That against this background, it should be uncontroversial to state that politics needs to take responsibility and review the opaque party financing that the Socialdemokraterna have tailored for themselves. The current order provides an opportunity for those who want to buy support from Socialdemokraterna to subscribe to lotteries. In that case, the party financing does not become public. This lack of transparency and the fact that Socialdemokraterna's highly commercial lottery activities have been granted exemptions from the laws and taxes that other commercial actors are subject to is the reason for the Tidöpartiernas investigation in the area. The writings and revelations of the past weeks regarding deeply unethical sales scripts, paid gang criminals, and deceived demented pensioners only strengthen our view of the need for measures, but this was not the reason for the investigation.

The investigation's proposal is still being negotiated, but if the politicians are to listen to the voters, it is a ban on party-political lotteries that applies - an opinion shared by as much as 90 percent of the Tidö parties' voters.

(Applause)

In this speech, Josef Fransson and Johnny Svedin (both SD) concurred.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! For us in Vänsterpartiet, it is incredibly important that we have a transparent and clear system for the financing of political parties. The most important reason for this is to prevent corruption. We can see what corruption does to countries all around our world. One of the greatest threats to democracy is that the people no longer have trust in their representatives, and few things damage trust as much as corruption.

We in Vänsterpartiet are pleased that there is a system for how parties' funding is to be reported, but we would wish that it went further than it does today. Vänsterpartiet is financed to a large extent by public party support. Otherwise, it is many individual people's small contributions that finance the party's activities. The fact is that it is Vänsterpartiet's parliamentarians who are the very largest contributors. All of this is reported openly to Kammarkollegiet.

But that is not the case in all parties. During the election campaign two years ago, TV4's Kalla fakta revealed that several parties were prepared to try to bypass the regulatory framework to enable the receipt of large individual contributions without the sender being revealed. Besides the deeply immoral aspect of so flagrantly ignoring the rules, this opens up several questions: Has this been done in this way before? What other methods are used? Have the parties that have done this outright put forward demands in the Riksdag and driven policy based on pure commissions from particularly wealthy individuals and organizations?

Madam Speaker! The hypocrisy we will hear from the government parties today will strike the vast majority of those listening to this debate with astonishment. We all agree that what has been revealed about the Social Democrats' lottery activities is not good. From the rostrum, it has already been moralized and will guaranteed be moralized even more over what the Social Democrats have done, and accountability will be demanded. Oh, oh, what accountability it will be demanded! But when the government's own deceitful behavior is highlighted, people will likely wriggle like worms in the rostrum to avoid answering the questions. Hypocrisy and corruption, Madam Speaker. Talk about trust-damaging financing of parties!

(Applause)

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! In the midst of a burning election campaign, just a few weeks before the election in September 2022, TV4's Kalla fakta revealed how several parliamentary parties showed themselves ready to bypass the legislation that was hammered out here in this chamber just a few years earlier, namely a law that is to ensure that our citizens get insight into how our political parties are financed – a law that, therefore, is to ensure that our voters get to know where we get our money from.

Five of the Riksdag's eight parties - the three government parties, the Sweden Democrats and the Social Democrats - displayed great creativity in Kalla fakta when it came to solutions for how one could bypass the legislation from 2018. This was a depressing example of political hypocrisy and of such actions from politicians who seriously damage the citizens' trust in us and thus, in the long run, risk damaging our democracy.

For me as a lawyer and a member of the Centre Party, it is completely self-evident that legislation decided here must be followed. My party colleagues had the same attitude when TV4's reporting team contacted them in 2022, when they clearly said no to the offer of large financial contributions when the condition was anonymity.

Madam Speaker! For a politician to even express a desire to receive contributions anonymously is a betrayal of our voters. They have the right to know who provides me and my party with financial contributions. They have the right to know if something that they themselves are offered to buy, for example a lottery ticket, generates profit directly into a political party's coffers. They have the right to know how I, as a politician, work and that when I try to convince others with assertions and arguments, I truly follow basic democratic rules of the game.

Speaking of the latter: In the Committee on the Constitution, the Centre Party, together with the Green Party, is pushing for increased transparency in political work through an initiative we submitted to the committee already before the summer. This initiative came after the spring revelation in Kalla fakta that the Sweden Democrats used anonymous accounts in their communication on social media – a method used by authoritarian states that we want to put a stop to. We want to see a ban on public party funding being used for things that undermine the democratic order.

Anonymous contributions, misleading sales methods and anonymous accounts - acting anonymously or misleadingly stands in direct conflict with how politics and we politicians should work if we want to maintain a vital liberal democracy. Citizens must be able to expect from me as a politician, and be able to demand that I stand by my opinions, that I stand by which contacts I have in my role as a politician and that I stand by which messages I spread.

(Applause)

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! The telephone scams against the elderly have unfortunately increased, which creates great concern and insecurity. It has gone so far that some elderly people state that they no longer answer when they do not recognize the phone number because they are afraid that someone will deceive them.

The Christian Democrats and the government are now joining forces to resolve this. The Social Democrats, on the other hand, have made themselves part of the problem, which is actually quite difficult to understand.

The Social Democrats have previously been criticized for having obtained tax exemption regarding the lotteries, for selling lottery tickets on credit to those already in debt, and for having driven thousands of economically vulnerable people to the Enforcement Authority.

The latest scandal concerned the Social Democrats hiring a call center in Spain where young and heavily criminal individuals, through aggressive methods, pushed Social Democratic lottery subscriptions on elderly people. It concerns criminals who have been involved in money laundering, serious weapons offenses and violent crimes, and even shootings and murders. The sales have been ruthless and calculated. People who stated they could not afford it have been persuaded, and the focus has been specifically directed towards the elderly and confused who did not understand the terms. It has also emerged that the Social Democrats both approved sales scripts and provided the sellers with calling lists, despite S previously claiming the opposite.

The whole thing is unworthy. It is dishonest. The elderly should be treated with respect, not tricked out of money, not deceived, and not pushed and pressured into buying Social Democratic lotteries.

There is a way for Magdalena Andersson to clean house after the gambling scandals in S. It is to stop the frauds, cancel the subscriptions, pay back the money and end her dirty lottery business.

(Applause)

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! We are, therefore, talking about trust-damaging party financing. It is nothing new. We have talked about it in different ways since the 2022 election and perhaps long before then. This concerns, among other things, the rules for anonymous contributions to parties and support from abroad. This has led to the so-called transparency committee which is now working primarily on issues of transparency and reporting.

In the spring, the revelations in Kalla fakta led to the discussion being expanded to concern issues of how the parties' resources are used and whether it is reasonable that they, including party support, are used anonymously. One can also consider that to be a matter of trust.

There is plenty of testimony about how trust takes a long time, perhaps years, to build but can be destroyed very quickly. Trust-building measures are a crucial part of all social construction for sustainable development.

SVT has over a series of years investigated the voters' trust in politics. It varies, of course, between parties, but generally it has fallen somewhat in recent years. The average is that a little over half of the electorate has high or fairly high trust in us politicians. To my joy, it is Miljöpartiet and Socialdemokraterna who rank highest – at times over 70 percent. It is by all means pleasant to have that trust, but in the name of honesty, seven out of ten is not particularly much. There are, therefore, things for all of us to reflect upon.

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet submitted a referral response in August regarding the investigation on lotteries. We initially argued that party-political work must be seen as serving the public good. That is the only reasonable conclusion we can draw, and therefore, that which is conducted within the framework of party-political work must be judged by the same rules and standards as other activities serving the public good.

In my world, this is about the Instrument of Government 1 §, which states that Swedish democracy is based on free formation of opinion. I think it is an important sentence and a clear statement. Measures that in some way restrict that prerequisite must be extremely well-motivated, and the structure that exists to enable participation and make as many as possible active citizens must be protected and maintained - and strengthened where needed.

For my part, I think this is about being an elected representative. We are here because we have promised our voters to do our best to achieve and realize goals concerning a better environment, sustainable transition, and solidarity with people, animals, and the ecological system. That is, among other things, why it is necessary to be open about the funding. No one should have to suspect or worry that it is being carried out on incorrect grounds.

From the Green Party's side, we stand by what we have said previously. Transparency, openness and clarity are some keywords that can be used. We see no strong reasons not to be clear about who one meets and who provides contributions - and as said, also gladly how the money is used.

We must remember that we are not here for our own sake. We are here for our voters' sake.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! A type of state of exception has long prevailed in the issue of the Social Democrats' party financing. Their method of collecting money has lacked support from citizens but, despite this, has had support in law through a number of large exemptions from Swedish gambling legislation. The Social Democrats have been exempt from gambling tax, which is estimated at 30 million kronor annually. The Social Democrats have exemptions from the ban on selling games on credit. They are not covered by the same bonus limitations as other gambling companies. They have exemptions from certain requirements on customer knowledge and written agreements in telephone sales.

The Social Democrats' preferential treatment for what is today an industrial and now apparently international lottery sale must come to an end. Swedish parties need to be financed in a way that inspires confidence, does not affect lonely and confused elderly people, and does not drive people into heavy debt. The Liberals' firm conviction is that the state of exception must come to an end.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! Many things, to say the least regrettable, emerge regarding the Social Democrats' lottery in this debate and in the media beforehand. We just heard Fredrik Malm speak meritably about the various rule exemptions or fast lanes that exist for the lottery in the legislation.

Kjell-Olof Feldt, former Social Democratic Minister of Finance, already wrote in 2001 that the Social Democratic government utilizes the state's power to favor its own party-political interests. This was written against the background of the lottery that the Social Democrats have.

Information has appeared in the debate here that one can sell lottery tickets on credit, that one does not pay tax, and other types of exemptions. A question that would need to receive an answer is how the Social Democrats reasoned when they introduced a requirement for written form in telephone sales - i.e., written acceptance in retrospect - but then chose to exempt lotteries. How were the thoughts then within the Social Democrats? Magdalena Andersson should answer that question. In her place, Lena Hallengren can obviously clarify this here today. How would it have been if these rules had been in place? Why were they exempted, and how did it happen that they did so? Was it because they had knowledge of what was going on?

Madam Speaker! Many say that one can doubt the truthfulness when the Social Democrat Lena Hallengren says that they knew nothing. This is supported to some extent by some newspaper headlines. "S sells lottery tickets on credit to those in debt and drives thousands to the Enforcement Authority," wrote DN 2017. "S-lottery drove 80-year-old Gun to the Enforcement Authority," wrote Expressen 2017. "S sells credit lotteries to those already in debt," wrote SVT 2017.

Something that is however very troublesome for the Social Democrats when they describe that they knew nothing is, for example, what was written in Expressen in 2023 about A-lotteries' secret scripts to trick pensioners into buying lotteries. Is it possible that S did not know that this type of sales method existed when the media already reported on the secret scripts in 2023? It was obviously a truth that was available to everyone that it proceeded in this way. It was also reported that sellers played the "grandma card" during the sale of S-lotteries in 2023. It was obvious and known to everyone which sales methods existed. One cannot swear oneself free from it.

Now the question is what Magdalena Andersson is going to do with the money that the party has come into in this way. Why is no independent investigation being appointed to look into how it actually happened? The questions need to get an answer, Lena Hallengren.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! I have now listened to Minister Wykman, who represents the party that took the initiative for this debate. It is a debate taking place at a time when Sweden is in an economic crisis. Our growth is at the bottom of Europe, climate emissions are increasing, and people are being laid off in healthcare. But, Madam Speaker, when the Moderaterna for the second time in the entire parliamentary term request a special debate, they focus on the Socialdemokraterna's lotteries.

I devoted my first contribution to explaining which measures we have taken. But I lack a corresponding scrutiny of the Minister. Not with a single word did he comment on Minister colleague Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmers attempts to bypass transparency in party financing. The speaking time perhaps was not sufficient. This is unfortunate, and perhaps the next reply can be devoted to this.

The Minister mentioned something about Gunnar Sträng and telemarketing in the same sentence. I do not believe there was telemarketing when Gunnar Sträng was in a government position.

I want to ask very briefly: Was it not a breach of trust when Gunnar Strömmer tipped off about a possible donor that one can bypass the rules with?

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! First and foremost, I leave it to the Swedish people to judge whether it is a relevant social problem or not that elderly people are called and, with very aggressive methods, persuaded to buy things that they do not actually want, especially in a time when many gang criminals use these methods to commit fraud and steal both the last money and the last trust.

Lena Hallengren seems to be so filled with the millions rolling into her party's coffers that she cannot see at all the despair that exists among many elderly people. This is a very relevant social problem. And, Lena Hallengren, you are part of that problem. We are here today to discuss it, and you should be able to solve the problem.

When it comes to Kjell-Olof Feldt, he wrote verbatim that the S-government is utilizing the state's power to favor its own party-political interests. There were telephones when Kjell-Olof Feldt lived; I want to emphasize that nonetheless.

When it comes to the other problems, I absolutely welcome all forms of transparency and scrutiny. You should also do so.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! Niklas Wykman is upset about telemarketing, but I have not heard of any kind of ban on telemarketing from the government's side. Please come back if any such proposal is to be presented!

I am surprised that the Minister is standing in the speaker's chair and claiming that there is lottery legislation tailored for the Social Democrats. The Minister is well aware that is not the case. What it is about is that there are exceptions for lotteries with public benefit purposes. This includes the sports movement, the temperance movement, disability associations, and even political parties – Social Democrats, Moderates, and Sweden Democrats who have lotteries.

So it is not just about political lotteries, it is about public benefit purposes. There have been no exceptions for lotteries linked to the Socialdemokraterna. It is a lie that I hear the Minister of State is working hard to continue to spread, and I truly regret that.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! Lena Hallengren and the Social Democrats should appoint an independent investigation that shows how this has happened, who in the party knew what, how the directives were given, and how the phone numbers have been used. Lena Hallengren and the Social Democrats should answer the Swedish people on how the money that has now come in by unfair means shall be used. Are they to finance election posters and advertising for the Social Democrats in the next election campaign? Is that how Lena Hallengren and the Social Democrats want Swedish democracy to function?

It is no lies about the Social Democrats that I utter here. I quote Kjell-Olof Feldt, an honorary person, also in social democracy: The social democratic government exploits the state's power to favor its own party-political interests. It is the words of the social democrat Kjell-Olof Feldt about the Socialdemokraterna - not my own.

Madam Speaker! Let me conclude by saying that there is nothing of public benefit in, from the Spanish coast, according to media reports together with gang criminals, selling and pressuring pensioners into buying lottery tickets they don't actually want.

(Applause)

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Questions must be answered, the Minister for Finance said just now. I have a question. It did not go so well the other day when Dagens Industri revealed that the government has commissioned an inquiry into how venture capitalists' bonuses should be taxed.

Here we stand in a burning healthcare and school crisis, and at the same time, the government is working on proposals on how to give the venture capitalists lower taxes on their bonuses. It may be worth reminding oneself that many of the venture capitalists' bonuses already from the beginning derive from tax funds that they have received in order to be able to enrich themselves on the welfare market, i.e., the market that was the total failure of the previous Moderate-led government.

Is it strange, Madam Speaker, if one asks whether the investigation is exactly what Kristoffer Melinder, CEO of the venture capital giant Nordic Capital, bought for that half million that the Moderaterna received from him?

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! I can say clearly and with a clear conscience to Samuel Gonzalez Westling: No money from anyone was needed for the Moderaterna to want to strengthen Swedish defense. No money from anything or anyone is required for the Moderaterna to want to strengthen the Swedish justice system and lock up criminals.

Madam Speaker! Let me also say very clearly: No money from anyone or anything is required for the Moderates to want lower taxes and a better functioning society with a stronger economy and more growth. For that, no external supplements are required; rather, it is what we Moderates stand for and fight for every single day. We want a safer Sweden where the economy can grow and wages can be higher. For that, no external supplements are needed.

(Applause)

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! I have another question for the Minister for Finance: How did the Moderates react when it emerged that the then party secretary Gunnar Strömmer was standing and philosophizing in Kalla fakta about how one could bypass the rules and be able to receive contributions? It was that which contradicted the law and which, a few months later, led to Gunnar Strömmer being promoted to Minister for Justice.

We can hope that the Moderates have thought a bit more closely about how they intend to proceed with such things in the future. But the Minister for Finance could perhaps explain what other arrangements the Moderates have to be able to hide contributions received from private individuals?

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! A very good review was conducted. It revealed errors in several parts of varying degrees of severity. For us, it was self-evident that Gunnar Strömmer stepped forward and answered the questions.

I note that the Social Democrats used the same strategy as now; they shifted the blame far away and fired a person far down in the organization. But this time, the Social Democrats felt, according to all the information we have and what has been reported in the media, which aggressive methods were used. They had, after all, been described in the media before this was uncovered.

That is why Magdalena Andersson needs to step forward, take responsibility and tell what she did after it was revealed that there were aggressive sales scripts. What did Magdalena Andersson do after it was revealed that different tricks were played to trick elderly people out of money?

But Magdalena Andersson is completely missing in this. She also needs to step forward, just as our representatives did, and tell what she has been up to, how her party has enriched itself, and what the party will now do with these funds.

(Applause)

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! Minister Wykman said in his opening remarks that we all make mistakes and that transparency is important, and I also just heard that the Kalla fakta review was welcomed. I am referring to the review that was conducted before the 2022 election, where it turned out that, among others, the Moderaterna were willing to bypass the legislation that existed at the time.

The Minister answered somewhat so when the Left Party's Samuel Gonzalez Westling asked a similar question, but I also heard the Minister start to talk about other parties in his answer. I would very much like to dwell more on what the Moderates did after the revelation that Kalla fakta made in 2022. What measures have the Moderates taken so that this is not repeated, so that the law is truly followed and there is transparency towards the citizens?

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! We have reported all of that – there is a long series of oversight functions and descriptions of how they are followed – and each one can take part in that.

What one has not been able to get a hold of is what Magdalena Andersson and the Socialdemokrater intend to do. No independent review of their activities is being appointed, and Magdalena Andersson does not step forward and is not available to answer questions about what she will do with the money. According to media reports, there are therefore gang criminals conducting activities where they sell lottery tickets from Spain. I do not know if those reports are correct, but at least lottery tickets from Spain are being sold, using very aggressive techniques, to Swedish pensioners and people who actually do not want to buy—and Magdalena Andersson does not answer what she intends to do with that money.

That the Center Party has no interest in this says quite a lot about how deep into the left one has sunk and how far from demanding accountability for something that has gone wrong one is.

(Applause)

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! That was a very strange interruption. I have not yet had the opportunity to respond to Magdalena Andersson, but I will of course do so.

I am very surprised: Now I stand as a member of the Centre Party and ask a question to a Moderate regarding transparency for our citizens concerning how our political parties are financed. That is the question I ask, directed to the Minister. The answer is a shift in focus. I have been a prosecutor, and I know how lawyers behave in the courtroom; one starts talking about other things so that the core issue is not discussed. I recognize that game well, and I find it quite tiresome.

I prefer to stick to the matter, and I want to hear again – in this exchange – what the Moderaterna are doing concretely to avoid what we saw in the 2022 election campaign being repeated. I ask the Minister not to start shifting the focus again.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! We have handled that question with force, and I assume that other parties have also done so; just as the Member of Parliament mentioned, several parties were subject to scrutiny in this. There are no other ambitions or intentions than to live according to the rules that exist.

What is remarkable and what stands out is that even before this was reported in the media regarding the aggressive methods the Social Democrats use in the sale of their lottery tickets, it seems that no conclusions have been drawn or it has not been treated in the same way as previous criticism regarding party financing has been treated. There is simply a gap in the narrative here.

Unfortunately, the Member of Parliament will not be able to respond to Magdalena Andersson, but I agree that she should be here. The question, in fact, is what the Social Democrats are going to do with the money. How should the money be used? Should we see the money used for election posters and campaigns in the 2026 election campaign? Is that really how the Center Party, and all of us, want our democracy to look?

(Applause)

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the discussion so far, Minister!

I am also a bit surprised that the Minister of State sticks to the same story in exchange after exchange. It is very much about how lottery sales are conducted, but now that was not what we were talking about. We were talking about trust-damaging party financing.

I assume that what Lena Hallengren spoke about earlier has been addressed and is being addressed and that we will see an end to it. But otherwise, we had a discussion – at least I had a discussion – about whether we should not nevertheless view party-political activity as a public service activity which should therefore have the same conditions as other public service activities. It has been discussed here that we would need to have the same rules even for a long series of other activities. I want to return to that subject and ask the Minister about it.

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! I do not mean to offend Jan Riise by having a discussion with himself – many probably experience that one gets the best answers that way – but we will probably still have to speak together.

When it comes to the party-political lotteries, one can of course say that everything should be exactly as it is – that it should be a public service activity similar to the scouts, the temperance movement or something else – or one can also conclude that perhaps something needs to be done with all the knowledge regarding this that has now emerged. Perhaps something needs to be reviewed or changed.

Jan Riise seems to rely completely and fully on the Social Democrats now fixing this, but the question remains why the party did not fix it after the 1995 review. Why did they not do it after the 2017 review? Why did they not do it after the 2023 review? Unfortunately, I do not feel very hopeful regarding this, and especially not because an independent investigation has not been appointed. Magdalena Andersson has not answered what she will do with the money.

When it comes to public interest and damaging trust – yes, headlines such as "Several gang criminals linked to companies that sold S-lotteries" are, in my opinion, damaging to trust.

(Applause)

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! I note that the answers continue in the same pattern as before. I therefore return, with a fool's persistence, to the question of whether a public service activity should be allowed to continue.

I am not saying that what we have seen has been good; let that be perfectly clear. I assume that it is handled in the manner that has been described. But with that said and settled, I still think there are reasons to discuss whether party-political activity should be regarded as public-spirited in the sense that it is thereby equated with other types of organizations. I would very much like to have an answer to that.

I can also say, just as a small point, that I have probably spoken with Kjell-Olof Feldt on the phone once. I must therefore give the Minister the right that there were telephones then, even though it is many years ago. But it was not to sell lottery tickets that I spoke with him, I can say!

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! One of many good things about debating and discussing is that one can make visible the alternatives the voters face. A broader consensus can also emerge, and perhaps this was a first step in that direction.

I am fundamentally an optimistic person, and I would like to share Member Riise's optimism that the Social Democrats will fix this. But what causes a bit of a sour taste is that information came to light in 1995 and that the problem was not addressed then. Information has come to light many times since then - for example in 2017 and 2023 - which is almost identical to the information that has come to light now. There have been all the opportunities for the Social Democrats to address these problems, but they have not done so.

It has been one of the grounds for movement when looking more closely at this activity: Are parties to be equated fully with the scout movement, the temperance movement, or cancer research fundraising when it comes to selling lottery tickets? Parties do, after all, have a different function in society to some extent than those movements do, and therefore we have reviewed this issue.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! I want to believe that there is a commitment in this chamber, and a sincere one, to ensure that we as political parties are both open and transparent with our funding. If so, that is good, because that has not always been the case. It is not long ago that it was fully possible to provide contributions to political parties completely anonymously, and there are parties in this assembly—including the Sverigedemokraterna and the Moderaterna—that fought tooth and nail for it to continue being just anonymous and secret.

When we now discuss the issue of trust-damaging party financing, which is the headline of this special debate, I want to ask the Tidö parties: Is it trust-damaging that Gunnar Strömmer, the Moderates' then party secretary and Sweden's current Minister of Justice, tipped off a potential party donor on how one could best contribute anonymously to the Moderates' political activities by going through foundations?

Tips on how to bypass the transparency in party funding could also be obtained from Peter Kullgren, the KD's then party secretary and Sweden's current Minister for Rural Affairs. What is this if not a breach of trust?

Is it a breach of trust when political parties, through advanced arrangements, funnel millions of kronor from the municipal party support to the party headquarters in Stockholm – a support that is intended to strengthen local democracy? Both the Sverigedemokraterna and the Moderaterna do this. We might be able to get an answer on this; there are a few posts left.

Madam Speaker! The Government recently appointed an inquiry where it was clear what the investigator was to come to: the taxation shall be interpreted in the way that benefits venture capitalists. Whether reduced tax for venture capitalists is desirable or not, one can have opinions on, but even worse, or more interesting, is that one of those who benefit is the Moderates' largest private donor. This has been called a direct commissioned job, not by me, but by a professor of tax law. The question is: Is this damaging to trust?

The Swedish people deserve to know whether the Tidö parties take this debate seriously or if it is solely and exclusively a matter of political theater.

(Applause)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am incredibly surprised that the Social Democrats, among their representatives, choose Lena Hallengren, who is being put forward in this debate. Lena Hallengren lied to the entire Swedish people to their faces on SVT on September 12, when she said: We have never given such a mandate, but we assume that the one who does this does it as we have ordered. This is clearly not the case.

A couple of days later, we could read in the media that the Social Democrats' company itself has developed the indecent sales scripts that the gang criminals on the Solkusten use when they scam demented Swedes, and that Lena Hallengren's colleagues push the companies toward unethical sales and themselves travel down to Barcelona when not enough elderly people have been deceived in the recent past.

This may have been unknown information to us, but not to Lena Hallengren. When will she apologize for her company's activities and her own lies?

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! I do not know why I am surprised that the Member of Parliament stands here and gives the impression that he would care about those who are affected by the telemarketing company's unethical methods.

We all know exactly why Tobias Andersson is so interested in the lottery that, among others, the Social Democrats own. It has nothing to do with DN's investigation, but rather it is about turning down the funding tap so that next year there will be a shorter first of May for the Social Democrats. That is what Tobias Andersson is dedicated to. It is this task that you try to fulfill every day in the Swedish Riksdag, in all the places where you are.

I have answered the questions that Tobias Andersson has asked. We have given clear instructions. The telemarketing company is not being used, the CEO has been replaced, the board is new, and we are going to get to the bottom of this.

I believe there is a conflation, which I understand to be extremely deliberate, of the lottery and what is to be considered the Social Democrats and the party. I have not lied, and I will not do so going forward either. I was not aware of the activity that Tobias Andersson cites.

(Applause)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I do not intend to apologize for having run for election to stop the "sosseri" and for a large part of my political work aiming to remove power-corrupted Social Democrats from influential positions in the Swedish public sphere, for example, the former chairman of Kombilotteriet, who at the same time was also chairman of the Swedish Tax Agency.

That the Social Democrats have rigged the Swedish public sphere to enrich themselves and seize power is something I intend to continue to oppose throughout my entire political career. Lena Hallengren can choose to use this as an argument against me, but I wear this T-shirt with pride.

No, it is not about a single telemarketing company. There are honest telemarketers too. Some have even turned down the Social Democrats as a customer because they thought the script was too aggressive. So let us not shift the focus to the telemarketers. Some are so honest that they turn down the Social Democrats.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! When we Social Democrats are informed that we have done something wrong or that mistakes have been made, we act. It was precisely this that I described. Those responsible must face consequences, and we redo and correct.

But what do the Sweden Democrats do when they are caught, for example, running a tax-funded troll factory that spreads both hate and threats? Well, they accuse the investigating journalists of being part of a gigantic influence operation, and they announce loudly and clearly that they intend to continue running the troll factory just as before.

There is a big difference in this, Tobias Andersson. I take responsibility. One makes mistakes – there is no doubt about that – but then it is a matter of improving and doing right instead. We welcome scrutiny in order to do right, but the Sweden Democrats have a different method, namely to hide their murky methods and not protect any means but engage in vulgar debates and say what is required.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! My thoughts and actions go to all the elderly who feel insecure all over Sweden and who are afraid of being subjected to everything from fraud to aggressive sales methods that one cannot say no to.

To bring clarity to this: Is there any of these headlines that you consider does not match reality, Lena Hallengren? "S sells lottery tickets on credit to those in debt and drives thousands to the Enforcement Authority", "S-lottery drove 80-year-old Gun to the Enforcement Authority", "S sells credit lottery tickets to those already in debt", "A-lotteries' secret script to trick pensioners into lottery tickets", "Sellers play grandmother cards during sale of S-lottery", "Young people sell Slotter in Barcelona: 'Trick old people who don't have money'", "Several gang criminals in the company behind S-lottery" and "Several gang criminals linked to companies that sold S-lottery".

Is there anything in any of these headlines or in the media reporting that is incorrect, Lena Hallengren?

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! Since 2017, there is no one who is driven to the Enforcement Authority. When we realized that this could happen, we saw to it that it did not happen. I do not doubt that it could be old headlines that Niklas Wykman is reading out, because it is a matter of finding what attracts a little attention.

We now have a debate with the heading trust-damaging party financing. I must say, Niklas Wykman: Won't you take and offer a reply to tell how you view the fact that you have a colleague in the government who very clearly gave advice and tips on how one could support the Moderaterna anonymously and how one would bypass the transparency that we had jointly decided should exist? Please do tell that!

Tell me also - for I am sincerely curious - about all the measures that the Minister is now going to take home and implement so that no elderly people can be deceived by any companies! I think this is a very worthy task. We Social Democrats do everything to rectify and do right, but I believe that the Minister is missing the mark a bit if he thinks that this is the only thing.

(ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN: I must remind both debaters to address each other as "ledamoten" or by first and last name, not with "du".)

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker and Lena Hallengren! We introduced, for example, written requirements for the sale of lottery tickets via telephone. Lena Hallengren can certainly account for whether it has been followed in this case or not. Lena Hallengren should account for why the previous S-government exempted just the sale of lottery tickets from the written requirement in telephone sales when it applied to everything else.

One of the headlines I mentioned was "A-lotteries' secret script to trick pensioners into lottery tickets". Lena Hallengren argues that measures have been taken regarding all of this. Nevertheless, it is exactly what is happening again. Reasonably, it therefore cannot be that Lena Hallengren and the Socialdemokrater did not know about the methods. There is black and white that they knew about the methods because they have been reported on in the media.

The question now is: What will the Social Democrats do with the money that has been obtained in this way? What will the Social Democrats do with the money that comes from the affected pensioners, and will the Social Democrats appoint an independent review of their lottery activities?

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! We clearly do not get the answers regarding the Moderaternas actions in rewarding their staff member who tipped off about anonymous party funding by letting this person become the Minister for Justice, that they think it is completely irrelevant whether one carries over local and regional party support to the national level or performs commissioned work so that venture capitalists get even more left over.

I gave an answer in my first post on how the Social Democrats and the gaming company have now acted, namely by terminating the agreement with the telemarketing company and not making use of external telemarketing. The CEO has been dismissed, the board has been replaced, and they are going to get to the bottom of what has happened. We did this immediately when we became aware of what emerged in DN's review.

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! The morning when DN's investigative report was published about how a call center in Spain sold S-lotteries to confused elderly people, I was shocked. I felt that this was very similar to what I myself have tried to fight and combat when I worked as a prosecutor against fraud, where exactly the elderly are a group that is particularly vulnerable.

The Social Democrats have accounted for what measures have been taken after this, including no longer using the company that was previously hired. Another problem, however, is whether there are scripts that pressure the elderly. I would like to know a bit more about how the Social Democrats will work moving forward to ensure that such pressuring sales methods are not used.

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! It was not only Malin Björk who was upset by the revelations in the review that DN conducted. Naturally, many others were as well.

I want to first emphasize that even if it is described as such, there has never been a target group that has been specifically elderly confused people. The target group is larger than that.

The question, however, was about not using the corresponding scripts. We are not going to use external telemarketing, so that is a clear and straightforward answer to this. Whether Malin Björk is interested, and it also applies to others, there is a possibility to contact Kombispel and see how they work or have worked.

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank Lena Hallengren for the answer.

I have another reflection regarding this matter of transparency. I mentioned in my speech that it is important to have transparency all the way through. It is important that our citizens and voters know where we get our money from. It is important that our citizens and voters know what we do and how we work. It is naturally also important that the person who in some way, directly or indirectly, gives a contribution to a political party in the form of a surplus in a lottery knows that the surplus belongs to a party.

In the lottery activities that the Social Democrats conduct, this must be stated somewhere, I know, but it could be presented in a clearer way. Then I simply wonder: What are the Social Democrats doing to ensure that those who buy these lotteries actually know that the surplus goes specifically to them?

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! It has never been kept secret where the surplus goes. On the contrary, it has been a reason for many to buy a lot – that one wants to support the operations. Many are members, but many want to support it by buying a lot rather than by becoming members. It has never been a secret, and it will not be a secret in that we are trying to strengthen our revenues. We are proud of what we stand for and have nothing to hide.

(Applause)

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! When Lena Hallengren was confronted with the Social Democrats' lottery scandal in SVT's Aktuellt, I heard her say: We do want to sell lotteries. That is an understatement, to say the least. At this point, there is no doubt that the Social Democrats want to sell lotteries; the problem is how much they want to sell them and how far they are prepared to go.

That the Social Democrats have been blinded by greed and have gone too far in their pursuit of other people's money is clear. What I do not understand, with the benefit of hindsight, is that the Social Democrats intend to continue with this trust-damaging lottery activity at all costs, even though one knows how the elderly are deceived and the poor suffer greatly because of the Social Democrats' own lotteries.

Is Lena Hallengren a goose who just lets everything slide off? How else can one look the elderly in Sweden in the eye and claim that one will continue with this lottery activity?

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! I do not know if Christian Carlsson is an ostrich who has had its head in the sand during this entire debate. I have stood here and in two speeches and also in the exchanges of remarks and said that we will not continue with telemarketing sales. We have terminated this agreement.

We want to sell lottery tickets to those who want to buy them - I am fairly sure I said that, even if it wasn't verbatim, and that is what we mean. Those who want to support the Social Democrats and who long for a different government that stands up for those who are vulnerable, who do not want gigantic tax cuts and so on, must have an opportunity to be members, as in all parties, but also to provide financial support. It has been through lotteries. We will see what it is moving forward.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! The problem is not that the Social Democrats have sold individual lottery tickets to these confused elderly people without selling subscriptions. Do you intend to continue making money from these elderly people who have signed up for lottery subscriptions? What else will you do with the money?

There is a way to solve this, namely to simply stop the frauds, cancel the subscriptions and shut down this operation. The Social Democrats are Sweden's largest party, in a country with high party contributions. S would be a wealthy and well-ordered party even if one did not trick elderly people out of their money or lure economically vulnerable families into buying lottery tickets with hopes of quick money.

It is true that many want more, but I cannot understand why it is so important to continue with these lotteries. The activity is so rotten that there are now more Social Democratic voters who think it would be good to ban the party lotteries than those who think it is a bad proposal. The Social Democrats should listen to their voters.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! It must be Christian Carlsson's dream post to stand here and make these types of vulgar claims that lack any truth.

If it is the case that Christian Carlsson has a lot, I recommend that he contact Kombispel. I also do that for others who no longer want the lot they subscribe to. I will keep my own lot for the foreseeable future.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! It is a bit difficult to know which end to start from, but I can start in 2010. Then it turned out that the Social Democrats call people even though they have registered with Nix to avoid telemarketing. In 2012, Aftonbladet reveals that they have directed collection demands, among other things, against an eleven-year-old girl whom they called and sold to. In 2013, they are fined by the Data Inspectorate for having spread their membership register. In 2016, they are fined by the Gambling Inspectorate for not mentioning who the senders are when they hawk their lotteries. In 2017, a major revelation comes in Expressen about them pressuring pensioners. In the same year, they exempt their own lottery from written confirmation. In the same year, it also emerges that they have driven 8,000 people to the Enforcement Authority.

My question is, based on all of this: Why, Lena Hallengren, is it so important for the Social Democrats that no written confirmation is required when you hawk your lottery tickets and that you should have exemptions from the requirement that one may not sell on credit?

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! It is good that Fredrik Malm from the Liberals requested a reply! I noted, in fact, that in his speech he spoke about how there are so many exceptions for just the Social Democrats when it comes to conducting lotteries.

Fredrik Malm knows that there are not a lot of exceptions. It is as someone has said in a previous exchange: There are exceptions for lotteries that have public benefit purposes. I want to alert the entire chamber that these include the sports movement, the temperance movement, disability associations and all political parties. So do not try to make it appear as if there were exceptions that apply only to the Social Democrats.

However, I think that when it comes to the enumeration that Fredrik Malm makes, it should not be in that way.

Then one can always discuss which measures were taken in which case and who has been responsible for changing this. I have described in two speeches which measures we have taken and will also devote my final speech to that, so that it will be included in the minutes once again.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! Lena Hallengren still avoids answering the question.

What does it imply that one thinks it is very important that one's own lottery should not be covered by the ban on selling to people on credit? Yes, that one can sell to people on credit. Then one has driven 8,000 people to the Enforcement Authority. Is that reasonable?

It is said that, in general, everyone else must be covered by the requirement that those they sell to on the phone must confirm in writing that they have agreed to it and understood what they have committed to. But it is also said that we specifically do not need to be covered by it. That indirectly says that one is prepared to sell to persons without them actually knowing what they are committing to.

With all that has come out repeatedly over the years, I wonder why it is so important for the Social Democrats not to need a written confirmation and to be able to sell their tickets to people on credit. Why is it so important?

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! Those who do not pay an invoice are ultimately driven to the Enforcement Authority. When we realized that this happened to those who had purchased one of our lottery tickets but had not paid, we said that it should not happen. Since 2017, no one has been driven to the Enforcement Authority because of that. We simply do not want that.

I think Fredrik Malm is trying very hard to make it sound as if the social democratic lottery has very special conditions. The public utility lotteries have, for reasons that I think those who made that decision can certainly describe better than I can, the same conditions for how one buys a ticket and pays for it. I find it difficult to see that a social democratic lottery would have different regulations than public utility lotteries.

Now I have 15 seconds to say that we will not cooperate with an external telemarketing company. We have broken that agreement. The CEO has resigned, the board has resigned, and the new board and management have been tasked with getting to the bottom of this.

(Applause)

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! We know that the Social Democrats' lottery has been the subject of recurring scandals. Over a three-year period, more than 8,000 Swedes were driven to the Swedish Enforcement Authority by the fact that they sold lottery tickets on credit to the poor and indebted. Already in 2013, the court prohibited the Social Democrats from handing over the membership lists to the company, but they have continued anyway. And the aggressive telephone sales have been the subject of scandals in waves, which has been highlighted in this debate.

Despite this, the Social Democrats have continued. And by all appearances, they have accelerated their bluff and scam operations by now hiring gang-criminal tricksters on the Costa del Sol in Spain to specifically target the elderly and confused. This has been done deliberately by the Social Democrats, by using their own sales scripts. Given the 28 reports to the Consumer Agency against Kombispel over the last two years, no one could have missed what has occurred.

Madam Speaker! Why have the Social Democrats continued? Why have they allowed society's worst to prey on society's weakest in the name of the Social Democrats? According to Magdalena Andersson herself, it is because they cannot live on donations from capital. But given that the Social Democrats in 2023 received the most money in private donations of all parties, we know that is also a lie. The truth is spelled power and money, Madam Speaker. Those two things are the only things the Social Democrats have ever cared about.

(Applause)

In this speech, Ann-Christine Frohm (SD) agreed.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! I intend to preempt the debate slightly by stating that I am, in fact, not a Social Democrat but a Left Party member. Minister Niklas Wykman obviously had problems recognizing the party designations. I will therefore not be able to answer any questions regarding the Social Democrats' activities. I am happy if I need to answer questions regarding the Left Party's activities.

I have a question for the Sweden Democrats. We have understood that the Social Democrats' lottery is important to them. But what is the actual situation regarding the self-financing of the political activities? The Sweden Democrats nevertheless stood out in Kalla fakta's investigation as the party that did nothing at all when these facts emerged. The other parties that one cooperates with rewarded their representatives in some cases and in other cases, on the other hand, they got rid of them.

But how do the Sweden Democrats think about this?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I shall try not to mistake a Left Party member for a Social Democrat, even though I believe that for many voters it is difficult to tell them apart from time to time.

The reason why the question is relevant for Vänsterpartiet is that an investigation has looked into the issue, and this is now being prepared in the Government Offices. Sooner or later, the question will come here to the Riksdag. Here, we are to decide whether we wish to see, perhaps, a ban on party-political lotteries or at least an equalization of the Socialdemokraternas party-political lottery with other commercial lottery activities.

It is questions that Vänsterpartiet will need to take a position on, preferably before they come to the Riksdag but at the latest when they are handled here. Member Samuel Gonzalez Westling is welcome to answer how they stand on it.

When it comes to donations, the member is welcome to inform me if he knows that my party would have received any illicit donation that we have not accounted for. According to Kammarkollegiet, our party was at almost zero kronor in donations in 2023.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Now it's the same mistake again, I believe. I cannot answer those questions.

If a proposal comes to the Riksdag, we will, of course, handle it according to the procedure that the Riksdag has. We receive the government bill, it is processed in the committee, and then we submit a proposal based on that. That is how the work functions here where we are.

Now I became a bit thoughtful about what Tobias Andersson says. Admittedly, one reports nothing to Kammarkollegiet. But one still has a foundation, which stands very close to the party. A very large amount of money has been collected there, at least during 2022. Now, one has not followed the regulatory framework and submitted the report to the County Administrative Board, which one is supposed to do. That is also somewhat remarkable. The deadline passed a long time ago.

We can still, since one has that type of revenue, consider who are the financiers of the Sweden Democrats' activities.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I want to inform the members that I do not sit on any foundation - on the topic that we should try to distinguish between different representatives during the debate. The members are welcome to ask those questions to those who sit on that foundation, which, among other things, the Sverigedemokraterna support. It is therefore not our foundation, but a foundation that does Sverigedemokratiska things and which the Sverigedemokraterna naturally support. But those are questions that should be asked to them.

However, the Left Party has so far during this debate not taken a position on the proposals that the investigation concerns. I could think that the least one can expect from the Left Party is that they say: No, we want to clarify that we think it is wrong when gang criminals deceive innocent Swedes.

One might think that it would be some kind of foundation for a position in this debate. Vänsterpartiet should be able to take a stand on something as fundamental as that they do not approve of gang criminals with the Socialdemokrater at their backs blowing up innocent Swedes. But Vänsterpartiet has not said that.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! I will begin by saying that I am a member of the Green Party and not a Social Democrat. However, at some point we have sat in the same government. That is perhaps familiar.

I want to bring up an expression that Member Andersson used in his first speech - "shadowy financing" - and link it to lively ideas about receiving anonymous donations. Now, apparently, nothing came of that, if I understood correctly. No donations came to Sverigedemokraterna.

I still want to ask a question about this. You obviously had a proposal regarding a framework for receiving anonymous donations. But perhaps it was the case that the journalist never intended to give anything.

During my last seconds of speaking time, I must say that I took the arguments regarding the target group for the lotteries very much to heart. I happen to be born in 1957 and belong to that group. I do not think that one should talk about people who are demented and confused, but it is about older persons. In very many cases, they are wise people with full control over their lives.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! The company's activity has explicitly been to target elderly and confused persons, at least according to the media. The media reports that the company has received a direct mandate to engage in this.

We have also been able to read from the company's accounting that they have not developed their own sales scripts, but have received them from the Social Democrats' company. When the company during a period did not sell enough lottery tickets to the elderly, Social Democrats flew down to push the company to fix their figures. These are not my words, but this can be read, if one so wishes, in the media.

No, I am not accusing the elderly and I do not claim that all old people are confused. But just in this case, confused elderly have been the main target group, according to certain media reports.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! It was an interesting aspect: that it is possible to obtain registers on confused elderly people. As far as I know, there are no such notes in public registers at all. It would look very peculiar, and if they did exist, I would probably also end up there.

How has this happened? Selecting people based on birth years is possible; I receive such calls myself. But can Member of Parliament Andersson possibly answer how, among people who have certain birth years, they have managed to distinguish those who would be particularly easy to manipulate, convince, or persuade to enter into expensive and long-term commitments with just the Social Democratic Party or any other in that regard? That is what I am curious about.

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Judging by everything, the Social Democrats' membership register has been used to locate those who are particularly easy to manipulate. Then, the personal data has been shared with the company that, in turn, has deceived these confused elderly Social Democratic members.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! We have now heard many and long condemnations from the four government parties, but not so much self-reflection.

Not a word has been said about the Christian Democrats' clever idea to split up secret donations so that they would instead go to individual candidates' election campaigns, which was revealed by Kalla fakta. In that way, one would hide who was the donor. One of the authors of the idea was rewarded with a ministerial post and is today the Minister for Rural Affairs. His name is Peter Kullgren.

Not a word has been said about the Sverigedemokraternas stiftelse with the chief ideologue at the helm, who openly asks for money but cannot even manage to submit year-end accounts to the County Administrative Board on time. Who is actually financing the operations, and what political proposals are it is that have been sold?

The Liberals at least got the one who was responsible for the secret arrangements to go, but no party went as far as the Liberals in trying to hide secret donations. Furthermore, there is evidence to assume that it is something that is commonly occurring. They even have a consultant who arranges everything for them. But then we also know that the Liberals sell out everything they can of the common good, not just laws but also property, and often and gladly to their own friends.

And the Moderates - shouldn't they be ashamed, Madam Speaker? For years, people here have spoken about the importance of following the law, and then the party secretary gives advice on how to hide donations to the Moderates in order to circumvent the law. That man, Gunnar Strömmer, was rewarded with the position of Sweden's Minister for Justice.

Hypocrites, hypocrites, Madam Speaker, hypocrites, hypocrites!

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Now the debate is beginning to draw to a close, and Member Samuel Gonzalez Westling has had many opportunities during the debate to clarify how Vänsterpartiet views the proposals from the investigation that the Tidö parties have commissioned, which are currently being prepared at the Government Offices. What is Vänsterpartiet's position on letting the Social Democrats' lottery be handled as other commercial lottery sales? How does Vänsterpartiet view the exemptions that the Social Democrats currently have from gambling tax, bonus limits, requirements for customer knowledge, and on not selling on credit and so on?

Will the Left Party vote for such a proposal if it is presented here in the Riksdag? Or does one want to let the Social Democrats be exempt from common legislation even in the future?

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! The debate is about the financing of parties, not about legislation or an investigation into lotteries. But I can answer. We have no direct views on whether there should be public lotteries. We think they are something that is good, but we assume that they are managed correctly.

What has emerged is that something has occurred that is not particularly proper regarding the sale and that it concerns a certain company. But this company does not only have the Social Democrats as a customer, it has also had other customers.

Vänsterpartiet has submitted a proposal that we should review how, for example, we can ban telemarketing services. We want to go much further. We do not think this activity is okay, regardless of what is being sold. One should not deceive any human being in any way.

My question back to Tobias Andersson is therefore: Do the Sweden Democrats stand behind our proposal to ban telemarketing services?

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

Tobias Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I personally think it would be an extreme proposal to ban an activity simply because the Social Democrats misuse it. There are other actors who engage in significantly more decent telemarketing, telephone sales. We have seen that individual companies have declined the Social Democrats' company as a customer because they felt that the sales scripts presented had been far too aggressive and had targeted the wrong target group.

There are, therefore, honest and decent telemarketers as well. It just seems to be that the Social Democrats' companies have had bad luck every time they have hired a telemarketing company and never succeeded in securing an agreement with anyone who engages in decent telemarketing. They have always had the misfortune of finding those who recruit gang criminals and deceive the elderly.

The Left Party often speaks about tax cuts and the risks associated with them. Why is it not wanted that the Social Democrats should pay gambling tax for their activities?

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Now we have it in black and white regarding this matter of telemarketing. It would work perfectly well, for example, to introduce an inverted Nix register with an opt-in possibility, so that one registers if one wants to be called by telemarketing services. But it seems quite obvious that the great anger from the Sverigedemokraterna is not directed at older people being deceived by telemarketing companies, but rather at the fact that it happens to be the Socialdemokraterna who have hired this company, which, as I have understood now, they intend to stop using.

Then the big question is why the Sweden Democrats think such companies should be allowed to continue their operations as long as it is not about selling social democratic lotteries. It is indeed only the lottery activity that they want to prohibit. This also concerns a number of other organizations, for example within sports and among public benefit associations.

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! After Kalla fakta's revelation in August 2022 regarding how several parties tried to circumvent the rules on transparency in party funding, we in the Center Party were quick to present proposals on how we can strengthen the regulatory framework and make it more robust, so that it cannot be circumvented. It is obviously needed.

We have also submitted several other proposals to increase transparency for our citizens. One pressing change is to ban foreign funding of our parties. With unrest and full-scale wars in our vicinity and a decline for democracy in the world at large, we must strengthen our resilience against foreign interests and foreign powers. They must be prevented from finding ways to influence our society by, for example, sending contributions to political parties. Otherwise, the risk is that they will weaken Swedish interests and our democracy.

That is why we in Centerpartiet welcomed it when the government last year appointed an inquiry to review much of what we have submitted proposals on. This is happening in the 2023 transparency committee, which is to submit proposals at the beginning of next year. Within the framework of that work, the question of a ban for parties to use anonymous accounts has also been raised. But the reports I have received from that work have unfortunately not been particularly satisfactory. As recently as a few weeks ago, the message was that the issue would not be investigated there.

I note that some complicated issues can be handled in fast tracks by this government while others are put on the back burner or seem to be delayed in various ways. I know that the oversight committee meets tomorrow, and I expect that something will be on the table then. We politicians must be transparent, regardless of whether it is about where the money comes from, who stands behind the lotteries being sold, or who delivers political messages on social media.

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! During the debate, a long series of deficiencies that have existed within the Social Democrats for a long time have been exposed. Various types of errors or scandals that have been associated with their lottery year after year have been read out. Now we have a new such major scandal that reminds very much of how it has been previously. It is happening again. I therefore have a very simple and straightforward question for Malin Björk.

I have expressed that Magdalena Andersson should appoint an independent investigation that reviews the Social Democrats' lottery and can provide answers through transparency and scrutiny. I have also said that Magdalena Andersson should report how the Social Democrats intend to use the money that has come into the party through this sale.

My simple question to Malin Björk and Centerpartiet is: Are you prepared to agree to these demands that Magdalena Andersson should clearly state how she intends to use the money, as well as that an independent investigation should be appointed?

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the question. As I have expressed during previous exchanges, the Centre Party also considers it urgent that the Social Democrats take measures to address what is clearly completely unacceptable sales methods. We know that such methods have occurred within the framework of the telemarketing companies that have been used by the Social Democrats. What we have urged the Social Democrats to do is to be transparent about how they intend to find out about these matters. In the same way, we have urged the Minister to clean up in front of their own door.

We are concerned that all parties take responsibility for how they receive their money and that it happens in a transparent and correct manner. That is the answer I can give the Minister today.

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! For a long time, we have seen media reporting about the Social Democrats' lotteries: "S sells credit lotteries to those already in debt", "The lottery drove 80-year-old Gun to the enforcement authority", "A-lotteries' secret script to trick pensioners into lotteries". This was, therefore, known by the public and the Social Democratic leadership even before this scandal was uncovered - if one had taken part in what is written in the newspaper, of course.

Now we have seen a scandal that is unparalleled. I welcome the response from the Center Party and Malin Björk. I interpret it as that the Center Party and Malin Björk stand behind the demands I have put forward that Magdalena Andersson should step forward and appoint an independent investigation, so that clarity is brought to how the Social Democrats have acted in these issues and what the connections look like, but also tell how she will use the money.

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

Malin Björk (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the presentation. I have not taken a position on exactly how this is to proceed. However, it is my starting point towards all political representatives and all political parties that every party needs to do its utmost and be transparent. Here it is obvious, I would like to say, that we have major problems. We have seen that during the years that have passed. We have seen it through Kalla fakta's revelation two years ago, DN's revelation about the S-lotteries and Kalla fakta's revelation this spring about anonymous accounts.

The Minister now does not have the opportunity for further remarks, but I am eager that the government and the Moderaterna take responsibility for those citizens we have known about who spread political messages in social media.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Many Social Democrats have allowed themselves to be upset in recent weeks. It has been said that one is sad, furious and upset. One crocodile tear here and there has also been shed, not least from the one ultimately responsible: the Social Democrats' party leader, Magdalena Andersson. Kombispels' CEO has had to go, and the board members of the Social Democrats' wholly-owned subsidiary were urged to leave their positions.

But perhaps it is more people who should be allowed to go within the Social Democrats. Persons in the S leadership were warned already at least a year ago that the party's lotteries are sold using methods that cannot be defended, DN reports. On May 3, 2023, Expressen revealed "A-lotteries' secret script to trick pensioners into buying lotteries." Since May 2022, Kombispel has been reported 28 times to the Consumer Agency. 18 of these cases concern telephone sales. Several cases concern people with dementia who did not understand what they bought.

The Social Democratic party leadership, with Magdalena Andersson and party secretary Tobias Baudin as ultimately responsible, have thus had information. But one has not taken responsibility for the situation and stopped the activity. Why has Magdalena Andersson not acted when the Social Democrats have treated the elderly so poorly? An apology would be appropriate. But above all: Cancel the subscriptions, pay back the money and shut down the lottery activity!

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! There were many harsh words regarding the Social Democrats' lotteries, but also justified criticism of the sales methods. This has also been conceded by the Social Democrats.

But how seriously intended is the criticism actually, and how great is the concern for the elderly who have been subjected to this telemarketing company? It is actually not only the Social Democrats who have made use of it, but it is also many other companies.

We in Vänsterpartiet have presented proposals that would stop these types of unserious actors. But what do the Kristdemokraterna say about deceiving the elderly? Are we in agreement about stopping this, and will the Kristdemokraterna agree to Vänsterpartiets proposal?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is not the telemarketing itself that is the problem. The problem is the Social Democrats' way of using it. I am pleased that Samuel Gonzalez Westling is clear that one is critical of the Social Democrats' sales methods.

The Christian Democrats have presented a number of proposals regarding how we should stop fraud against the elderly. This includes, among other things, stopping search services' possibilities for publishing personal data. We believe that information about the last four digits of the personal identity number, car ownership, and property ownership should be given extra protection. We see, in fact, that criminals do not only sell Social Democratic lotteries but also defraud the elderly in various ways when they have access to this information. We have many proposals to increase the elderly's security.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Is Christian Carlsson a goose who lets the criticism against the telemarketing companies slide off him? It is a fact that precisely this company, and also many others, use these types of methods when it comes to the elderly and others vulnerable in society to foist a multitude of different services and goods upon them.

Should I interpret it as that, just as it is for the Sweden Democrats' part, it is okay for gang criminals and other unserious actors to target the elderly as long as it does not involve the Social Democrats? Is that how we are to interpret Christian Carlsson? Or can Christian Carlsson be somewhat in agreement with the Left Party that we perhaps should do something about the telemarketing market? Can he agree to the Left Party's proposal, which concerns that we must investigate how we are to deal with this?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Of course, all aggressive methods involving deceiving consumers must be condemned. If other companies behave like the Social Democrats' activities, we must, of course, put a stop to that. We are happy to contribute to that work.

But the question is also what the Left Party can do more. The Left Party has, after all, intended to conduct a campaign for a change of power in this country, and Sweden's largest opposition party is now withdrawing large sums of money by using companies with criminal contacts that deceive the elderly into signing up for Social Democratic lottery subscriptions. Is the Left Party to be involved in winning the election with that type of means? Or is one prepared to place demands on the Social Democrats – that they should shut down their dirty lottery operations? It is a question that I would like to get an answer to.

(Applause)

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! I am a little bit disappointed with today's debate. There is a whole series of contributions that obscure the view. We were supposed to speak about trust-damaging party financing, but for a very large part of the time we have been fed information about various newspaper headlines. It can possibly suggest that the government parties and the Sverigedemokraterna have not coordinated on what they would say, or else this is the only thing that exists on this theme.

We have received assurances that that which has primarily been talked about, the Social Democrats' lotteries, shall be addressed and organized. We have clarified – or I have at least tried to assert – that the elderly are not necessarily a group consisting of confused and demented people. There are actually also very many others. It may happen that the group that Member Andersson refers to does not even exist.

But we should talk about party financing – both money in and money out. It is reasonable that our voters and others have the opportunity to find out that the money is being used in a decent way. We need, above all, to be vigilant about how support occurs and is used.

I am thinking a bit about how we often get American role models. It might be the wrong word, but what happens in the USA happens here a few years later. It is not a development we want to see. It is a development where money is used also via other stakeholders than those it affects.

In conclusion, I want to say that we stand by the requirements for transparency, clarity, sender - naturally - and openness in all forms of party funding.

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! I often come to completely different conclusions than the Green Party when it comes to the content of politics. But I will say that my assessment of the Green Party is that it often consists of people who both want very well and have a strong sense of justice. I think that was also reflected in Jan Riise's post.

No one is perfect - that is not what this discussion is about. It is about how we are to build a solid, robust and resilient democracy.

Now, however, Madam Speaker, irregularities surrounding the Social Democrats have been uncovered that are unparalleled. I have previously expressed two things. One is that Magdalena Andersson needs to step forward and appoint an independent review of her activities, which examines how this has functioned and how it has been handled. The other is that Magdalena Andersson needs to account for how she intends to use these funds.

My question to Jan Riise and Miljöpartiet is very simple: Can one imagine standing behind this?

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! I cannot answer for Magdalena Andersson. That is perhaps the concise answer to that question. We have spoken about this on several occasions during this debate. It is not we who are the Social Democratic Workers' Party. Neither the Left Party nor the Green Party have any possibility whatsoever of taking a stand on that question. Lena Hallengren has in an excellent way presented what is intended to be done and not done. I have no further comments on that.

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! My question to Miljöpartiet and Jan Riise is very simple. I have put forward two expectations for the Socialdemokraterna. One is that Magdalena Andersson appoints an independent review of her activities, and the other is that the Socialdemokraterna report how they intend to use the money that they have come across with the methods that have been reported in the media.

I am not entirely sure that the Swedish people are satisfied that one cannot have any opinions on this. Is it really the case that the Social Democrats do not need to appoint an independent review that reports on how this has gone and what information one has had? Should those cards not be laid on the table in a transparent process? What are the Social Democrats going to do with this money? Are the money that the party has come by in the way that has been described in the media to be used in a Swedish election campaign? Is that reasonable in a democracy? Are you, Jan Riise and Miljöpartiet, completely sure that you do not want to stand behind my appeal to Magdalena Andersson to appoint an independent investigation and report what one will do with the money?

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! I am absolutely certain that I have no possibility of standing behind anything, regardless of who puts it forward, concerning how the Social Democrats are to handle their questions internally regarding economy and regarding payments and disbursements.

I have, so to speak, no background in this or any knowledge of what exists there and in what way it is done, and then I choose, as the Minister pointed out at a previous occasion, to use my great trust in other people and think that they will solve this in the way they find best and in a way that does not put the users – that is, the lottery buyers, whether they are older or younger – in any troublesome situation but that can contribute to restoring confidence in the party financing.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! All the revelations that have emerged regarding the Social Democrats' party lotteries are actually one big scam, however, primarily not for the Social Democrats themselves, who in fact have only themselves to blame for this, but for all those who have been recruited to work in these activities - young people who state that there has been an unscrupulous culture of selling lotteries with half-truths and nagging, often to older people who also did not quite know what they had agreed to. It is also a scam for the elderly who bought the lotteries, who did not understand that they are expensive subscriptions and who in some cases have ended up with the Swedish Enforcement Authority because of this.

It is also a disgrace for this chamber, Madam Speaker. Trust in politics, for all the eight political parties in here, is something that we need to safeguard together. If a party takes a shortcut at the expense of people, the contempt for politicians increases in general, and it affects us all.

Madam Speaker! Turning this loss into a win will be difficult. But it should not be so difficult to at least stop the collapse of confidence. The lotteries should be phased out. The information on who actually approved various sales methods should be made public, and a sincere apology should be directed to those who have been exposed. It would have been a win for Swedish representative democracy.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Niklas Wykman (M)

Madam Speaker! I am glad that we have had this debate today. Democracy needs to be constantly scrutinized and challenged, and its constituent parts in terms of the political parties need to be transparent. Fundamentally, we can strengthen Sweden and society in that way.

High-sounding words about openness and transparency must also be met with decisive action when problems are discovered. I have several times expressed my hope that Magdalena Andersson should step forward and report how she intends to use the money that the Socialdemokraterna have obtained with these methods. I have several times said that when such things happen, we should have an arrangement that involves parties appointing an independent review and looking at themselves.

We all have a great responsibility. It is time for Magdalena Andersson to step forward and take her stand.

The special debate was hereby concluded.

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