Special debate on household finances

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! Last week I met Stadsmissionen and Rädda Barnen. They testified to how hard the economic situation hits ordinary people. They told me that the number of people seeking support for such basic things as food and clothes has doubled. The queues to get a food bag are now long. Stadsmissionen was actually forced to temporarily close one of its operations because the pressure became so great.

Special debate on household finances

But they also testify to how more and new groups are seeking support. It is about single mothers who, despite a completely normal salary, can no longer put nutritious food on the table, about families with children who are desperately seeking help to pay their electricity bill, and about pensioners who have worked a whole professional life but now cannot afford to go and visit their grandchildren.

We often talk about that we must support those who are struggling, but the fact is that that group grows with every passing day. Every additional percent that food prices rise digs deeper holes.

The question is this. Reality looks like this. That is why we have requested this debate. The government is not taking the situation seriously. The government has no plan.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Let me begin by thanking you for the initiative for this debate that we are now going to have regarding the households' economy. It is, to say the least, a very pressing issue. Very many households are hit extremely hard by all the price increases. Many mothers and fathers are struggling right now to make the finances work. So thank you, Mikael Damberg and the Social Democrats, for initiating the debate!

12 percent - that was the inflation in February. It is the highest in 30 years. It means that the person who works sees their earned money decrease in value at a rapid pace. The person who has saved, been frugal through the years, realizes now that those money will not go as far as one had intended.

Not least, inflation is noticeable in all price increases on goods in the grocery store when one is shopping for oneself and for the family. I truly feel, Mr. Speaker, with all the mothers and fathers who are currently turning over every krona to make the food last until the end of the month.

Mr. Speaker! This troublesome economic situation also tests us in this room - not economically, but it tests us who have taken a political responsibility. Navigating a troublesome economic situation where we have very high inflation while simultaneously having a recession requires responsibility. It requires that one does the right things in the right order.

We cannot do what we usually or always do in economic downturns, that is to say, broadly stimulate demand and proceed with planned large deficits. In that case, we would fuel inflation. It is roughly like throwing money on the inflation fire. The fire becomes larger, the money burns up, and prices become much higher. That would come to affect families with children even more.

Mr. Speaker! The Government has a clear plan for how we can navigate the difficult economic situation. It consists of three parts. To begin with, we must fight inflation while simultaneously supporting households and companies. The second part is about tackling the recession in the best way. That, we believe, is through a strong work line – that more people get a job to go to and a salary of their own to live on. Last but not least, Mr. Speaker, it is about structural reforms that in the long run can get Swedish growth moving again.

These are three important parts of our plan to take responsibility and help people through the very tough time we are in now.

Mr. Speaker! I see that many parties and political parties now need to take responsibility. That is why I called the food giants together a few weeks ago to be very clear that they also have a responsibility to take. The fiscal policy and the monetary policy must take responsibility. The parties in the labor market, which are currently negotiating, also appear to be taking a large responsibility. Companies, retailers, and food giants must also do so.

It is good that several of the food giants have now started to lower their prices. It makes things somewhat easier for those who have the smallest margins.

Mr. Speaker! I often say that inflation is the workers' worst enemy, and I mean it. If inflation is not dampened, prices will continue to rise. It will become even tougher for pensioners, for families with children, and for many others. That is why our focus right now, for example supporting families with children with increased and extended housing allowance, is so important.

I will return with more on this in the next round.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by stating that the Minister for Finance and I agree on one thing, namely that inflation must be combated. Inflation is not only harmful to the Swedish economy, it also hits households extremely hard.

However, that the inflation must be combated does not mean that the Minister for Finance can go and sit in the stands and watch while households struggle to make ends meet. The Riksbank's primary task right now is to combat inflation, but the government also has a responsibility. That responsibility is about ensuring that single mothers can put food on the table and that not a single child goes to or from school hungry. It is about ensuring that the economic crisis does not lead to cuts in schools or to longer care queues in an already tough situation.

It is not an easy task. For it to work, it is required that the politics has the strength and the ability to prioritize.

I usually listen when the Minister for Finance describes what she does for households. I assume it will come in the next post. Then she usually says that 40 billion in support has been given to households in various ways. What she usually does not mention is that large parts of those proposals are social democratic reforms that are now being extended or built upon. She also very rarely mentions that in this reform agenda she allocated 13 billion kronor to lowering the tax for the most well-off in our society, in a situation where the food queues at Stadsmissionen are growing.

We have presented a long series of proposals during this winter: a temporarily increased child benefit, an electricity bill emergency, electricity support for the entire country, a revenue cap for electricity producers so that the exceptionally high profits can be returned to households to a greater extent, as well as an extension and strengthening of the supplement to the housing allowance for families with children.

We have demanded that the government should put pressure on the food industry by calling the food giants to talks, through a mandate to the Competition Authority and finally by appointing a price commission for food prices to ensure that it is not the families who are forced to bear an unreasonably large part of the cost crisis and at the same time ensure that food prices decrease as the raw materials are now becoming cheaper.

The situation for households is acute here and now. We see how broad groups, families with children and single mothers, are struggling to put food on the table. Civil society is alerting us that entirely new groups are seeking support for basic things like food and clothes, employed people who simply do not have enough salary to make ends meet. Margins that were previously small are today non-existent. The buffers that were built up during good years are exhausted. The grim truth is that it will take time before the development turns around.

Then an answer is required: Will the government and the Sweden Democrats act so that no child is forced to go hungry or stop with football practice because the parents simply can no longer afford it, or will they continue to watch passively?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We have all noticed how much more expensive everything has become. This applies to the companies, to the municipal operations and not least to the households, which we are talking about here today.

I think one should be quite honest and say that there isn't that much the Committee on Finance can do to quickly resolve the situation with the high inflation. But there are some things that can be done. One example, which the Tidö parties have made a decision on, is that we have in practice removed the tax on agricultural diesel. We have lowered it to the EU's absolute minimum level. The average person may not be sitting and paying tax on agricultural diesel daily. But those who produce our food, the farmers, pay tax on agricultural diesel. If we remove that tax, it becomes cheaper to produce food.

It is the type of measures, to bring down costs in the production chain and of course in combination with targeted measures to help the economically most vulnerable households, which I believe is the reasonable way to navigate in this very tough economic climate.

Mr. Speaker! There are no realistic proposals from the opposition to bring down inflation. I can therefore think it is a bit strange that the Social Democrats have requested this debate, even though it is an important topic. But if the opposition parties' budget motions are to provide guidance, we can observe that what the four parties on that side agree on is to raise the fuel taxes by almost 7 billion kronor. And the reduction obligation shall be doubled. A doubling of the reduction obligation would increase the diesel price by 9 kronor per liter at the pump. On top of that, there would therefore be an even higher tax.

It would have made it more expensive for agriculture, for the food producers. It would also make it more expensive for the farming industry. Everything that we trade in our stores needs to be transported there by trucks, after all. This would obviously have meant that the stores would have had to charge even higher prices for food and groceries from the end customer. It is not a viable path.

Against this stand the Tidö parties, who on the contrary make it cheaper for the farmer through abolished tax on agricultural diesel. It will also become cheaper for the farming industry through abolished or in any case significantly lowered level of the reduction obligation. And if it becomes cheaper in the production chain, it can also become cheaper for the consumer.

It obviously needs to be implemented in combination with measures aimed at the economically most vulnerable households. We saw an example of that last week. Then we presented, four parties in the government base, an extension and an increase of the supplementary grant to the housing allowance. Instead of the temporary increase having expired now at the half-year mark, it will apply for the entire year. And instead of staying at the same level, it will also be increased.

(Applause)

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! This debate will be yet another reminder that the Sweden Democrats and their supporting parties in the government offices are incapable and uninterested in acting forcefully to support ordinary Swedish households. It is the sad truth about the government power today.

The economic crisis that is now sweeping through Sweden is rooted in events of global reach. It concerns Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine and the lingering effects of the covid pandemic. But how the crisis manifests, what effects it has in and for Sweden, and not least how differently it hits different groups in our country, can and should be something that a serious government takes responsibility for. But what we are getting now is shocking passivity.

It is as if large groups in our country are invisible to the SD-M government. It seems to be difficult for them to imagine the difficulties faced by those who, even before the sharp price increases, had difficulty making the everyday economy work. 13 percent are below the relative poverty line. In manual occupations, every fourth person lacks cash margins.

Now we see what it leads to. From school cafeterias, reports are coming in that children cannot really eat enough to get full at home and must eat more at school. The City Mission just alerted the other day that more and more people, now also working with a wage, are seeking out them for emergency aid. And the Financial Supervisory Authority warns of armageddon.

These are not individual failures. They are our collective societal problems, our political responsibility. But the right-wing parties are unable to internalize that reality. Then come the tips about gritting your teeth and checking prices - hello and goodbye. Elisabeth Svantesson, Oscar Sjöstedt and Ulf Kristersson become lifestyle coaches and preachers of worried platitudes.

Mr. Speaker! What has primarily driven inflation is price increases on basic goods and services where the market functions far from as in the beautiful theories. This applies to electricity. There, prices are set based on demand on the continent rather than what we produce and need in Sweden. It applies to food. There, a small number of giants dominate the pricing, and so on.

A government that is more loyal to market ideology than to the Bible and that, above all, is more responsive to strong monetary interests than to distress calls from ordinary households from north to south, turns out to be a very helpless government.

In my second speech, I return to what we in Vänsterpartiet propose and have raised for the household economy here and now. But we can state that from those who hold the responsibility, with the government power, not much is coming, nothing for the households to cheer for.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! As several have pointed out, it is time for the government to actually do something, to have a crisis policy in a crisis.

Just like several who have spoken here, I had the opportunity to visit Stadsmissionen's food mission on Monday and saw the doubling of the number of applicants who need food for the day. They are new groups, young and single parents, who cannot make the food budget stretch. They come to try to get the help they can get in this crisis. Unfortunately, no further help is coming from the government. It comes late. It comes a little. And what does come is without real effect for the households.

In this debate, I believe it is important that we tell Swedish households that are currently in distress that things can be done. The government can do things. The Swedish Competition Authority should have been tasked long ago with monitoring the price increases and price levels in our grocery stores, which are among the absolute highest in Europe. It is not enough to sit and have coffee with the food giants and just talk about the prices. Something must be done about it.

It is the same when it comes to the fees, which are currently skyrocketing. For example, the grid fees are sometimes higher than the part of the electricity bill that is for the cost of the electricity itself. It is a monopoly. Those fees are 30 percent higher than in other countries. They should be falling now instead of skyrocketing.

In a similar way, the government can do something to lower costs and prices. Much has been said about lowering costs for farmers. But far too little is being done. Principally, nothing has been done beyond the measures that we pushed through.

It is also required that the costs of hiring be lowered, especially for the vulnerable. In my second speech, I will return to the fact that the toughest thing for many households right now is that parents do not have a job to go to and that young people who are about to enter life do not get jobs and can build up their finances and manage in this deep crisis. In that situation, one should lower the costs of hiring people, both for the sake of prices and for the jobs and for the sake of the vulnerable people. Instead, this so-called bourgeois liberal government has chosen to shock-increase those costs by billions of kronor, equivalent to tens of thousands of jobs.

We in the Center Party believe that something can be done about the crisis. Prices can be lowered with the help of competition. And prices can be lowered through reduced costs, in order to create more jobs. We appeal to the government: Stop burying yourselves in the Tidö Agreement and strange SD proposals. Focus on what a bourgeois, liberal government should do; it is about growth, jobs, competition, and reduced costs. React! Govern! The households are waiting for you.

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

Yusuf Aydin (KD)

Mr. Speaker! These are gloomy economic times for both Sweden and large parts of our surrounding world. It is pandemic effects, the terrible war in Ukraine, but also certain political decisions here at home that have led to Swedish households finding themselves in a tough economic situation where many families are struggling with high prices.

In my home municipality of Botkyrka, I often encounter retirees and families with children who are struggling to pay their bills. More and more people are turning to Matmissionen to buy cheaper food. It is sad to have to state that certain political decisions by previous S-governments to shut down fully functioning nuclear reactors and demand increased reduction obligations have led to high prices for electricity and diesel. This, in turn, has led to increased costs for farmers, hauliers, food producers, and retailers, and ultimately to today's high food prices. The government is now working full-scale to clean up among those measures and support households and companies with a comprehensive electricity subsidy of approximately 55 billion to alleviate this burden.

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats leave no one behind. In these difficult times, we have also prioritized the most vulnerable groups: families with children living on small economic margins and in particular single mothers. Therefore, we are very pleased that the temporary increase of the child allowance is raised and extended from the current 1,325 to up to 2,100. It is a targeted measure that reaches the most vulnerable families.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Yesterday we could read in the news that a massive majority of the Swedish people think that the government is doing a truly lousy job. I can only agree. The skyrocketing prices are becoming increasingly noticeable for more and more people, and they hit incredibly hard against the families with children and the pensioners who were already previously struggling to make the money last every month.

One can cut back on many things, but not on food – we all have to eat. During the election campaign, there was a lot of swinging between both falukorv and election promises, but now that prices have soared even further – not just on falukorv but also on things like välling, butter, and milk – the government does nothing. They do at least nothing that reaches those who are now hit hardest and nothing to help people put food on the table.

The government has spent months developing a catastrophically poorly designed electricity subsidy, lowered taxes for the very wealthy, and spent 7 billion on discounts on fossil fuels - which gave 14 öre, in one day. Yes, sorry - the Finance Minister has also had coffee with the food giants. It was surely very pleasant. But neither children nor pensioners can eat gasoline. Children need nutritious, good food to get through school and grow up with good health. As recently as yesterday and today, alarm reports have come from the Public Health Agency that a public health catastrophe is being built into the generation that is growing up right now.

The government has an enormous responsibility for the children growing up in Sweden, and it is time to take it. Lower the food VAT on basic goods, and do it now! It is not peppers, milk, and oatmeal that will fuel inflation - on the contrary, it is what children need to feel well. The government holds the power to, in one stroke, lower the prices of nutritious basic goods by 12 percent. It is a subsidy that would make a difference in reality, immediately.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! After the pandemic, Putin's horrific and illegal war of aggression against Ukraine, and years of mismanagement by Sweden with a dismantled electricity system and a growing sense of exclusion, we now face a very difficult situation with rising interest rates, high inflation, and high electricity prices. To combat inflation, which is of the highest priority just as the Finance Minister described, the measures taken to help the most vulnerable must be accurate. That is why it is so good and important that the government implemented an inflation hedge by increasing several important benefits that were adjusted in the budget, for example, the guaranteed pension, the sickness and parental insurance, and CSN. This ensures that those with the smallest margins receive help, while the government has now extended and further increased the supplement to the housing allowance for families with children.

The measures taken must therefore be accurate so as not to further fuel inflation. Lowering the VAT, setting price caps on food, or generally raising the child allowance as the opposition has proposed is nothing other than poster politics that fuels inflation and gives billions to people who do not need that support.

The right and wise thing is to conduct a fiscal policy that curbs inflation in order to bring down food prices and simultaneously help the most vulnerable, as I just described, so that in the next step it can further be possible to lower income taxes. It strengthens the work line and gives people empowerment and the opportunity to manage on their own wages instead of being dependent on benefits.

The Liberals' goal is that every individual should be able to choose the profession they want and that one should have so much left in the wallet when the tax is paid every month that one can manage on their salary. It should be a self-evident matter.

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, everyone participating in the debate! I have listened, and there are many wise points. Then there are perhaps also some that I think are a bit less well-considered, but we can return to those in the exchanges of remarks.

Let there be no doubt that the government is fully focused on the economic situation and takes it seriously. Every day since I received this assignment and the government took office, we have been working to reverse a development that has not functioned in Sweden, to ensure that inflation is dampened and to support both households and companies that need help.

As I said in my first post: The priority here and now is to fight inflation and support those who need it the most. In the budget that we submitted in November and which came into effect on January 1, we lowered the fuel tax by 1 krona. We ensured that the travel deduction was increased. We let the unemployment insurance remain at a higher level. We have an electricity subsidy of 55 billion that now also goes to households and companies. We extended the housing allowance for families with children, and in the spring budget, we will both further extend and increase it. It is, in fact, the most accurate thing one can do for all the single mothers and fathers who are struggling to make the finances work.

We will also continue the fight against inflation, to ensure that we take Sweden through a very tough time. It is an economic winter, and it will be tough for a while longer, but the government is working both in the short and long term to take us through this economic situation.

I now want to say something about the food giants. I am convinced that the pressure I exerted on them when I spoke with them, each individually, is having an effect. It was therefore not primarily some coffee drinking, but straight and honest conversations. But what many here have done to put pressure on the food industry also has an impact. Together we can take responsibility and make an influence. We can take responsibility in economic policy, and we shall do so. Many parties in here do that. But we can also take a responsibility to do everything we can to exert pressure in different parts of the business sector where we suspect that they do not always take the responsibility they need to take.

I will continue this work, keep my eyes on the food giants and have feedback with them. I am glad it had an effect. Applying pressure works.

We shall continue with that. We are also now giving the Competition Authority significant resources to start the work of monitoring price developments and the competition situation right now so that prices can fall further.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I hold firm on the food prices which have increased by 22 percent in a year. I am actually pleased that the Finance Minister finally called the big food giants to a meeting, after parliamentary parties have demanded it for a very long time. It is, however, a bit strange that Sweden basically did it last. Our neighboring countries, France and other large countries, had already done it. Finally, it came to pass here. Now we have done it. That is good. The government has tasked the Competition Authority to monitor this, which we demanded, and that is good.

We have also set a new requirement so that one does not just point at everyone else, such as that workers should stand back and that consumers should shop around. Even the government and the Minister for Finance must take responsibility. We have proposed a price commission. In it, the food producers, the food chain, the consumer organizations, the pensioner organizations, and the student organizations shall be included. Is the Minister for Finance prepared to act and appoint a price commission that shall ensure that prices follow the input goods downwards?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think Mikael Damberg is a bit late to the party. Putting together a crisis commission and putting the food giants in the same room would not be very successful from, for example, a competition perspective and the issue of cartel formation. The important thing is that prices go down, and now they are starting to do so.

I intend to keep my eyes on the food giants and other parts of the food industry as well as other parts of the business sector. I believe that the pressure we put together matters.

Yes, I am well aware that several parties, the week before I called the food giants to me, thought that I would do exactly that. I thought so too, and when the latest inflation figure arrived and when we saw that food prices are driving inflation, there was also a very concrete sign that something is not right. I will therefore continue to not only follow but also have contact and a relationship with the food giants so that the price increase does not increase.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I can state, Elisabeth Svantesson, that the Swedish government was essentially last in Europe in taking these initiatives. One was very late in getting out the electricity support. Large parts of Sweden have still not received any electricity support. One was almost the only country in Europe that has not succeeded in achieving a clawback of the excess profits from the electricity producers during the winter months.

Time and again, the Swedish government shows a lack of decisiveness. It is passive and comes last. That it has not had this pressure from the beginning may have resulted in food prices rising faster in Sweden than in our neighboring countries.

I view it positively that the Minister for Finance, eventually, invited the food giants to a meeting. But is she prepared to act and appoint a price commission so that we can truly ensure that food prices continue to go down when the prices of input goods fall in the future?

(Applause)

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I do not think that anything should be ruled out, but I do not see what such a commission is to do now. Prices must go down now, and they are starting to do so. But we will, as said, continue to keep up the pressure.

We will also continue to keep the pressure on what partially drives food prices and what we can influence. It is about expanding more electricity so that it becomes cheaper for the producers. We have lowered the diesel tax so that the farmers get an easier situation. We will lower the reduction obligation on January 1, which will make a difference for very many Swedish households. The Social Democrats and many other parties here want to raise the reduction obligation. That would hit Swedish households very hard. The Social Democrats also want to finally raise the tax for 1 million Swedes, Mr. Speaker. This also affects the Swedish economy and many households.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance speaks a lot about inflation and does not like it. It is repeated from here that it is a central task to combat it. But above all, she uses references to the very concept of fighting inflation in order to do nothing.

It is somewhat funny, isn't it, that the government lowered taxes by 18-19 billion, mostly for high-income earners. They pump out 55 billion in electricity subsidies in a very peculiar and partly classified manner. But this apparently does not fuel the inflation fire. On the other hand, support for families with children, strengthened social security, cheaper public transport, lower childcare fees, and support for welfare services in the municipalities would fuel inflation.

Is it possibly the case that the Finance Minister simply thinks it is good if Swedes with small margins take the entire inflation hit so that vulnerable groups such as lords of the manor and chief executives can be kept harmless?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! One thing is very clear and obvious: the Left Party seems to love inflation. In the Left Party's budget, one can see that they intend to borrow approximately 200 billion over three years, completely unfunded, to make various investments. One can be certain that this would contribute to inflation.

Mr. Speaker! I think that Ali Esbati underestimates the need of even single mothers and fathers to have a car so that they can drive to work. Single mothers and fathers who receive housing allowance are now getting an increase and an extension. It is very necessary and important. I think we should direct efforts to those who need it the most.

Regarding the electricity support, one should also not underestimate that many pensioners with very small margins are now getting back a portion of the capacity fees that they themselves have paid in. This makes things easier for many with small margins.

We have a broad palette of measures that facilitate and support Swedish households and companies. It makes a difference.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Finance Minister is certainly competent in many areas, but reading the Left Party's budget motion does not seem to be among them. We are using the same amount of money as the government this year to make investments. The government, however, made different choices. That was my point. Billions are used in a way that supports those who, for the most part, already are very well off. We would have used the money in a different way. That is the very core of this. It is what says something about what one wants, which people one sees, and how one analyzes social problems.

It is also necessary to move Sweden forward and out of these crises. This is understood, for example, by a person such as US President Joe Biden who, in his Inflation Reduction Act, just uses a lot of money to invest in the future.

The choices the Finance Minister makes, she must take responsibility for herself. She chooses to support lords of the castle instead of ordinary families with children.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Combating inflation is one of my and the government's most important tasks, because we know what inflation has for an effect on families with children and pensioners with small incomes. It is about the entirety of the fiscal and economic policy that is conducted. We take responsibility in a tough time. I know that we will get through this if we do it in the right way.

Let me remind you once again of the budget that came into effect a short while ago. There were higher levels in the a-kassa. The housing supplement was extended, and now it will also be increased. We invested a third of the reform space in welfare. We are doing many more things, for example, tax deferrals for companies that are having a tough time.

Many things are done to provide support, but I will also always take responsibility for the whole. That is something Ali Esbati will never get or be able to do. In that whole, it is important for me not to fuel inflation so that it becomes more expensive for the mothers and fathers that Ali Esbati talks about.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance and I agree that one of the biggest problems in Sweden, particularly for household finances, is unemployment – that mom and dad do not have a job to go to in the morning. We agree that the work line is important, that we shall do everything so that people have incentives to work and opportunities to work, and that small businesses shall create the jobs that can turn the crisis around. That is at least what the Minister for Finance sometimes says.

But what do you do? Well, tomorrow, April 1st, employer contributions are shock-increased by 12 percentage points for small businesses that employ young people. This will result in many billions in increased costs, equivalent to tens of thousands of jobs. Furthermore, welfare in municipalities and regions will face an increased cost of 1.2 billion SEK due to your tax increases, equivalent to 5,000 jobs for young people. Now my question to the Minister for Finance: Will the Minister for Finance give those money back to welfare and the jobs for young people in welfare that she is taxing away?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thought the beginning of Martin Ådahl's contribution was very good. I will continue from there and, of course, also answer the question.

There are some parties here in the Riksdag that safeguard the work line and want more people to have a job to go to. There are other parties who do not think that 7-8 percent unemployment is even high anymore. We see it as one of our priority tasks to get more people to have a job to go to, have their own salary and be independent of benefits from the common fund. There is much to be done there, and we will continue to do that.

The reduction of the employer contribution for young people was temporary during the pandemic. I believe that seven out of eight parties here in the Riksdag agreed that it should not be extended now. I may be wrong; in that case, you may come back.

I do not believe such a reduction is the most effective way right now to help municipalities and companies. There are other ways, for example, to curb inflation, build electricity, and ensure that fuel prices and other prices become lower for all the small businesses that are struggling now.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! First, I want to state that at least one party sitting in the government, namely the Liberals, promised most solemnly that they would lower the employer contributions and not raise them, as you are doing tomorrow. If you believe that we must turn the crisis around, fix the jobs and lower the costs for companies so that inflation decreases, why do you then want to shock-increase the employer contributions by 12 percentage points and many billions of kronor tomorrow, on April 1, in the middle of the crisis?

I repeat the question I did not receive an answer to. You are now taking 1.2 billion in taxes from municipalities and regions that are under severe pressure, which corresponds to 5,000 young people's jobs, when hands and feet are needed in healthcare, elderly care, and also the school system. What will you do with them?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! Let me begin with that question. 12 billion is what we are investing in regions and municipalities in the budget for this year. I would have liked it to be even more, but it was a third of the reform space in a tough time.

I do not think it is precisely the employer contributions for young people that is the decisive factor here. Had I thought that, I would have extended the reduction. I see fuel costs and energy costs. I see red tape. I see skills supply issues. I see that those who are furthest away from the labor market need support to get in. That is why we reduce the employer contributions so significantly specifically for that group, even for young people who stand far outside. Nystartsjobb is what it is called, Martin Ådahl. It is an effective way to lower the cost for companies that hire a person who stands outside but also to increase the chance of entering the labor market. Many young people enter the labor market without us currently reducing the employer contribution.

But I rule nothing out. I have said that many times. We are following the issue closely.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Finance rambled on in his speech about a long series of tax cuts and subsidies that do not reach those with the lowest incomes. When the government fails, these families are instead forced to rely on charity and turn to civil society.

Lowering the VAT on basic goods would make an immediate difference for those who are currently struggling the most financially, not least for the children who today on Friday will eat their fill at school before the weekend and who then on Monday will be forced to make up for it. A discount on fuel does not help the person who cannot afford a car and does not help the person who cannot afford to put food on the table. And children will not be able to eat gasoline either.

I wonder when the government will begin to act even for those who have it the hardest and when Elisabeth Svantesson will act to lower the VAT on basic goods.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think, as I have said before, that one should not rule out different types of tools. But what I see helping the most vulnerable families the most right now is the targeted housing allowance, which we are not only extending but also increasing from 25 to 40 percent. It is a substantial increase that will make a difference. That said, it will still be tough for very many people.

Choosing to lower the food VAT is something that can absolutely be done, but it is rarely the most accurate. Choosing specific goods, I also do not think, is not the easiest. What we see from experience is that there is a risk that prices will be raised elsewhere. We also know that the underlying inflation is not affected by lowered food VAT. There are still reasons to suspect that it will continue to increase.

I do not babble - I act. I lower the tax on fuels, change the reduction obligation, ensure that families with children have received increased housing allowance and many other things that I do not have time to say now.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! That the government is now standing behind what we demanded already during the election campaign, namely an extension and an increase of the housing allowance, I am very pleased about. I shall take the opportunity to offer a eulogy for that, because it is truly important.

However, it is still the case that children in our country go to school hungry. Children in our country risk lifelong ill health when their parents can no longer buy healthy food for them. Children who grow up in poverty in our country pay the price because adults with high incomes, both CEOs in the food industry and ministers, do not act.

"Let the children come to me" is a biblical verse that I believe both Elisabeth Svantesson and I myself have grown up with. Finance Minister Svantesson has been given a position where she has a completely unique opportunity to help the children who suffer the most in our society.

Mr. Speaker! To Elisabeth Svantesson, I want to say, from one mother to another: Do it! Help the most vulnerable children and do it now, because it is a generation at stake!

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Märta Stenevi for both advice and questions in this discussion.

I completely share the view that we must help those who have it the toughest. Civil society is making fantastic efforts, partly with the help of support from the public at different levels. But we who are in this room and we who sit in the government also have a responsibility to facilitate things for those families with children who have it the toughest. That is why we are now extending and increasing this housing allowance. More may absolutely need to be done, because no children should have to go hungry either to school or from school. All children should receive an education that is good but also, of course, eat until they are full. That is why it is good that many of our supports, social assistance and others, are adjusted with inflation. It eases things somewhat, together with what we do to put pressure on food giants, support with housing allowances and other things. It will be a tough time ahead, but I always have the children and grandchildren before my eyes.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I think this debate so far has shown that it is obvious that the government does not have a plan for how to support households in this difficult situation. You have no new announcements to give to either families with children or single parents. I note that the Finance Minister speaks of supporting families in this situation and that no children should go hungry, but reality speaks a different language. Reality becomes the government's enemy.

If the government were to have a plan, there are five questions I could ask that look a bit forward. I wonder if the government can answer those questions.

What will happen with the electricity support for next year? There are probably many families wondering about that.

Will we have a revenue cap in place for the next wins that brings back the profits in a completely different way than what the government has managed to do this time?

Does the government have any concrete proposals to press down the price of electricity? We have proposed a folkhemmet system where the state auctions off long-term contracts and purchases cheap electricity for households. It is essentially in the same way that large corporations do today. It would have an effect on the price of electricity for ordinary Swedish households. How will it be?

Is there any plan to secure the funding of the welfare system now that schools are sounding the alarm about layoffs?

Is there a plan to meet the recession?

I note with some pleasure the statement made the other day that you are taking back some of the savings on vocational training in the government's budget. But it is only the first example of the Finance Minister acknowledging that you were fundamentally wrong in your budget when you made such drastic cuts on education on the brink of a recession.

What does the plan look like moving forward, Finance Minister?

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! On January 22, 2020, the four opposition parties voted against an extension of the nuclear reactors Ringhals 1 and Ringhals 2 and won by a single vote. The four Tidö parties voted for an extension.

Mr. Speaker! Today we know that if our side had won, electricity prices in electricity price area 3 and 4, the southern and central parts of the country, would have been 30-45 percent lower if the two reactors had continued to be in operation. That we would have had lower inflation with 30, 40 or 45 percent lower electricity prices, we can be virtually certain of. It is thus the opposition's model: Higher electricity prices, higher fuel taxes and higher reduction obligation.

The Tidö parties have pushed through electricity support for households. We have lowered the tax on fuels. We have significantly increased the mileage allowance. We have maintained the temporarily higher levels in the unemployment insurance fund. We have injected resources into welfare for the municipal sector. We have facilitated for companies to receive tax deferrals. We have extended and furthermore strengthened the housing supplement in the housing allowance. We will lower the reduction obligation, and we will build new nuclear power.

A great deal has been destroyed during the Social Democrats' time in power. Sweden had the highest diesel prices in the entire world long before Putin's vile war in Ukraine and the subsequent energy war against the rest of the continent.

For us, it is an absolute top priority to get a handle on inflation. It must go down. We have a major reform agenda that will strengthen households' purchasing power. It will become cheaper to fuel the car. It will become cheaper to pay the electricity bill. It will pay off better to work.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats devoted practically the entire election campaign to promising that everything would become cheaper and that ordinary people would get better off financially. It was one promise after another.

Now we see a reality that goes in a completely opposite direction. In that case, the Sweden Democrats are the party that does not want this parliamentary debate on household finances. What could that be due to?

Could it be because one does not want to be seen? One does not want to bear the responsibility for the budget that now characterizes Sweden and which is the basis for the economic policy in our country.

When Stadsmissionen warns that more and more resources are being allocated to acute interventions, the Sweden Democrats have no new news to give in today's debate to those who have it the toughest in our country. Reality has become the Sweden Democrats' greatest enemy.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I do not know if I followed. It is clear that we want a debate, otherwise we would not be here. Then we would have done something else. I am here. I did not quite understand what was meant, excuse me.

It was said that we have no new announcements. We came with an announcement last week, which I touched upon in my speech. It was an extension and a reinforcement of the temporary increase in the housing allowance.

Mr. Speaker! There is also a great deal on the expenditure side of the state budget that is indexed in parity with inflation. There we find the guaranteed pension for the economically worst-off elderly. There is also the sickness benefit, the sickness compensation, and the parental leave benefit. They are indexed in parity with inflation.

To say that we will not be coming with any new announcements when we have presented new announcements here in the recent past is a bit strange.

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

Mikael Damberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I do not know if Oscar Sjöstedt is up to date. SD opposed this debate when the parties were talking about whether we should have a current debate. It is good that you come when we decide that the debate shall take place.

We have presented a long series of proposals to the Riksdag. These include temporarily increased child allowances, an electricity bill emergency, and a tank discount that primarily benefits rural areas. It would make a real difference to household finances.

The Sweden Democrats have said no to that. You chose instead to lower the tax for the highest earners by 13 billion kronor when we see that reality looks the way it does both for welfare and for the vulnerable households.

I believe the reason why the Sweden Democrats would preferably not have wanted this debate is that it becomes clear that the Swedish people were deceived during the election campaign and now sit with the responsibility for the economic policy.

(Applause)

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! No one wanted the Social Democrats' electricity bill emergency. Perhaps the Social Democrats themselves wanted it, but absolutely no one else and definitely not the industry. It was a rather ill-considered and unrealistic reform. That was what I said in my first speech. We have no realistic proposals from the opposition side that would address inflation.

It is the same thing with the child allowance. We had a discussion in previous exchanges about the food VAT. It is so broad and hits everyone. For my part, I have no need for a higher child allowance. In that case, it is better to target those child families who are economically very vulnerable. The housing allowance, unlike the child allowance, is means-tested. It only goes to child families with very low incomes.

The child allowance goes to everyone. It goes to members of parliament, bank directors, part-time working nursing assistants, the unemployed and the sick. It is a very broad and therefore very inefficient reform.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! Those who listened to the Sweden Democrats' election promises regarding the household economy should be quite surprised today. It has been barely a year. Gasoline was supposed to become 10 kronor cheaper, pensions were to be raised by 2,000 kronor a month, and so on. None of that happened.

The fact is that there is also nothing indicating that the Sweden Democrats have shown any real interest in the economy of ordinary people. Instead, it is the directors of the electricity trading companies, the food giants, and the school corporations who have found a stable friend in Oscar Sjöstedt. There, he has stood on the front line while Swedes in need of society's support have been pressured.

Nothing was done for the pensioners in the budget. It has also not directly sounded like anything is coming in the future. For those who are ill or unemployed, even tougher measures are promised instead.

I have a question, Oscar Sjöstedt. Is the idea that those who need the money should instead be delighted by your personal presence at the press conferences with the Minister for Finance?

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Much of what was said is not correct.

It is interesting that you bring up the pensions. I want to emphasize that the Sweden Democrats still do not sit in the Pensions Group. I believe that Member Esbati knows that decisions on issues regarding the pension system are made in the Pensions Group. We still do not sit there. That is said only to emphasize it.

Sickness benefit is going up. It is being indexed up. Sickness compensation is going up. It is being indexed up. We have ensured that the unemployed get to keep the temporary higher level in the unemployment insurance fund. It has been made permanent. Things have indeed happened. People say that nothing is happening for the sick or the unemployed. Things have indeed happened.

I also spoke about the fuel prices in my speech earlier. The reduction obligation will be lowered by the turn of the year. At that time, the fuel prices will also come down. We deliver.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! It is true that there are some things that the Sweden Democrats have not contributed to the deterioration of; one can certainly be pleased about that in one's chamber.

My point, however, was that there were many things that you in the Sweden Democrats promised would happen, including with the pensions. You were involved in making a budget, and there is not a single hint of support for the pensioners in that way.

In other respects, it is very clear what types of frontlines Oscar Sjöstedt takes a stand on. He wants to support and defend the right of directors and owners of the large companies to continue to live very well, but he does very little for ordinary people's finances. Instead, he stands – it is rarely one gets to say this – literally and fights against windmills. It is wind power that is the great enemy rather than inflation.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I am pleased that Ali Esbati refers to wind turbines as windmills; I have actually done so myself on some occasions.

We have not released the larger ambition regarding the reforming of the pension system concerning the actual contributions into the pension system. I am still completely convinced of that line. Deep down, however, I believe that Ali Esbati understands that such a type of reform cannot be carried out without bringing the Pensions Group along.

I have not let go of that idea. My hope is that in the relatively near future we will be able to get a new start in different ways regarding the Pensionsgruppen, that the Sverigedemokraterna shall be included in the Pensionsgruppen and that we will be able to work on these issues together.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I am sorry, Oscar Sjöstedt: This is going to be tedious.

Before the election, you promised to lower the diesel price by 10 kronor. Many in the Swedish countryside counted on and trusted that you were serious and that it was for real. They organized their finances based on this.

Now we know that reality has been playing tricks, as Oscar Sjöstedt has said, and that it will not be so. So far it has been 14 öre. Now it is promised for the future again – it will come soon!

We have proposed that one should not give reductions to everyone, but give those who do not have access to the subway or tram and who are dependent on the car 3 kronor at the pump - straight and simple and real money.

My question to Oscar Sjöstedt is: How large will the reduction be? The Swedish people are waiting.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! To begin with, we shall state, as I also did in my speech, that what the four parties on that side – in the opposition – agree on is to raise the fuel tax by 1 krona per liter and to increase the reduction obligation, which would have resulted in 9 kronor more per liter regarding diesel at the pump. On top of that, there will be further tax increases. It is the Centerpartiets model.

Our biggest reform in the autumn budget, counted in kronor and öre, was a tax cut on fuel. By the turn of the year, the reduction obligation will be abolished or significantly lowered. This will result in it becoming 4, 5, or in the best case even up to 6 kronor cheaper per liter.

We will, of course, push for further tax cuts. How much they will be, we will negotiate, and we obviously do not do that here in the Riksdag's rostrum but somewhere else entirely.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I note that the bidding is underway now. It was 10 kronor, and now it is 5, 6 or maybe 4 kronor. It was 1 krona, but it became 14 öre. How is anyone supposed to be able to trust this at all?

Lantbrukarnas Riksförbund has furthermore calculated that your proposal would give a price 3 kronor lower for people in the countryside. It is such a thing that we want to give here and now to those who are dependent on the car instead of making things up and turning and twisting.

Furthermore: You have the responsibility now. You decide on our policy. We have said that we want to pause the reduction obligation and lower the tax on the renewable so that it becomes more than 1 krona in tax reduction in addition to these 3 kronor. That is what we have said. You can say whatever you want about us, but now you must take responsibility for what you have promised.

You promised 10 kronor. Now it is 5 kronor, or 4. What will it be? The Swedish people are waiting.

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

Oscar Sjöstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The model that the Center Party has proposed is one hundred percent unrealistic and one hundred percent unfeasible. To have some kind of price differentiation depending on where in a municipality a gas station is located is one hundred percent unrealistic and one hundred percent unfeasible.

This is not a question of being able to trust anyone. It is clear that one must negotiate. Had the Sverigedemokraterna received 51 percent, it would have been very easy – then I could have promised a hell of a lot of things. But no party here in the chamber has 51 percent. All parties must relate to other parties in order to try to seek majorities – otherwise, nothing happens at all. This is nothing new; it is the basis for Swedish parliamentary democracy. Parties sit down together with other parties, talk about things, negotiate, and see if they come to anything. It is not about not being able to trust anyone.

This is a very urgent issue for the Sweden Democrats and for me, but it does not mean that I can know exactly how such a negotiation will unfold. It would be fantastic if I knew that, but I do not know. It is clear that we must negotiate.

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! Something can be done to press down inflation and its effects for households that are struggling. While the government and the Sverigedemokraterna presented a state budget that was a major shrug of the shoulders towards the situation for ordinary households, the Left Party's budget proposal took the real economic situation into account. With the Left Party's budget, ticket prices in public transport could be halved across the entire country. Childcare fees would also be lowered significantly, sickness insurance and the unemployment insurance fund would be strengthened, pensions would receive a proper boost, social assistance would be strengthened, and the period of absence deduction would be abolished. Additionally, there would be a temporary single-parent supplement in the child allowance.

That makes a real difference. For a family with two children on two municipal worker salaries, it would have already, from the beginning of this year, meant approximately 2,500 kronor more per month. It is both crisis policy and a policy for a better and more future-oriented social development.

We could have presented such a proposal because we made other priorities - it was the same money, shuffled around in a different way. The government lowered taxes for high-income earners and left the capital that had been piled up in a few hands untouched. Our proposals are instead adapted to the reality where many households have very small margins while a few hardly notice any crisis. It is about taking responsibility.

What we said about putting pressure on the food giants – which everyone now seems to think is a good proposal that they came up with themselves – was dismissed with chest-thumping by the Finance Minister one day and was literally top-notch the next day. It has already had an effect on this oligopolistic market, but now action is required from the government. The Finance Minister can and should act to secure a sharp agreement with the food giants, so that it does not just become advertising talk from their side.

The proposals are there. Now the government must step up to the plate.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the speech.

Vänsterpartiet has in recent weeks spoken about the solution in these difficult times being a price cap on food. Introducing a price cap and having the state step in to regulate prices is the wrong way to go, say all experts. It would rather take market forces out of play and risk leading to shortages of food products, which we have been able to see examples of around the world previously.

How has Vänsterpartiet intended for a price cap to be introduced without it leading to shortages of, for example, food items and to the emergence of a black market?

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet has not proposed any general price ceiling or that the prices of food items should be set by the Ministry of Finance or anything similar.

We note, however, that unlike the Liberals, we see the market as it actually is and not as it appears in economics textbooks A - as a kind of fantasy creation where perfect information prevails and there are infinitely many actors. There are fewer than infinitely many actors in this market - three, mainly. This means that other types of relationships arise in this market, and in that case, it is not only possible but also necessary and important for the public sector to act to exert pressure so that we get better competition in many respects and a different situation for those who are to trade the food and eat it - a reasonable and sensible market instead of one that does not function particularly well.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! I wonder which textbooks member Ali Esbati has actually read to arrive at the type of politics he prefers.

He has stood here and mocked us, saying that we pursue a policy for castle lords. I have personal experience of growing up with hardly any food on the table and seeing my parents have to move when interest rates broke their finances. It gave them a lifelong problem. Therefore, I am incredibly happy that Vänsterpartiet is not influencing the fiscal policy right now, with a tax shock of over 68 billion for ordinary people and with 200 billion that would fuel the inflation fire during this period.

How does Ali Esbati, based on the textbooks he has read, mean that this would be a good tax policy that would help families with children and ordinary people?

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

Ali Esbati (V)

Mr. Speaker! There are many problems with the way economics is taught at our universities, but I shall not go into that here now.

I can however state that far more people were affected by, for example, the 90s crisis. It left scars on the Swedish body politic that still remain. It is important that we avoid pursuing a policy that causes inequality to increase, welfare systems to be eroded, and people to be squeezed. That is the type of policy that is being pursued today by the government and the Sverigedemokraterna, with the support of the Liberalerna. It is a policy that does not see that the needs of ordinary people must be able to be at the center, but instead shovels money over to those who are very well off and earn very well from the inflation situation we have today.

This policy needs to change. Unfortunately, the Liberals will probably not contribute to that change.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! In this debate, it is unfortunately only to be stated that the households that were waiting for powerful measures from the government will have to wait for a number of more months before it feels compelled to do anything.

But I want to talk about something that has been talked about a bit too little in this debate and which is the most serious problem for very many households in Sweden, namely unemployment and a lack of full-time jobs. We sometimes think that it is like that in the whole world. Inflation exists in the whole world. Germany, however, has an unemployment rate of 3 percent. In the USA and the Netherlands it is 3 ½ percent, in Denmark 4 ½ percent and in Belgium 5 ½ percent. In Sweden it is almost 7 ½ percent and on its way toward 8.

Then one thinks: What should be done about this that does not fuel inflation? There is surely no way to stimulate jobs without us getting inflation?

But the National Institute of Economic Research has just conducted an analysis of precisely the only measure that lowers inflation and simultaneously strengthens the economy. "The only fiscal instrument that has a negative effect on inflation is a reduction of employer contributions." The National Institute of Economic Research continues: "The reason why inflation becomes lower when employer contributions are reduced is that a reduction of employer contributions reduces companies' costs, which means they have the opportunity to lower prices."

What does the government do in that situation, when there is a measure that lowers inflation, raises employment, and turns the economy around? It shock-raises the tax on jobs and the employer contributions, for many billions and tens of thousands of jobs.

I wonder if we are the last party that is truly conservative and not some kind of blueprint of the worst of the Social Democrats. Is it only the Center Party, and the National Institute of Economic Research, who believe that we have a chance to turn the situation around for many families through reduced taxes on work? The government should go in the right direction and not the wrong one.

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

Yusuf Aydin (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It is important that we politicians act responsibly in the serious economic situation in which we find ourselves. The room for political populism or unrealistic reforms that can do more harm than good is not so large.

We must remember that, unlike during previous crises, such as the financial crisis in 2008 or the corona pandemic, we have a situation where we are entering a recession and simultaneously have high inflation. This means that fiscal policy must navigate more responsibly and cannot be too expansive and thus risk driving inflation further.

In this situation, broad fiscal stimuli would do more harm than good and risk counteracting the monetary policy. The result would be devastating for Swedish households.

At the same time, we have a responsibility to support the most vulnerable with targeted funds. The Riksbank has also said that this is necessary and good. Such investments are compatible with both a responsible economic policy and the care for the weakest. Many supports and grants that were previously mentioned, such as pensions, student support, and a good deal of others, have already been accounted for. Even the temporary increase of the housing allowance is an important measure to support households with the smallest margins. It is an important measure that provides relief. It cannot completely erase the effect of the high inflation, but it alleviates it.

This is value-driven politics with care for the weakest groups in society. It is Christian democracy expressed in practical politics.

(Applause)

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Do you know what happens to children who grow up in economic hardship? They are no longer allowed to be children. That is what Ali Reza Yakhdani, operations manager for Majblomman in Malmö, said. He said this when he told about a boy of junior high school age who had stopped coming to school. When the staff asked anxiously why, the boy told them that he had taken a job at a fast-food chain to be able to help his mother with the bills.

Mr. Speaker! It is not the families in economic hardship that drive inflation, but it is they who are hit hardest. Among single parents with incomes up to 35,000 kronor, one in three cannot afford nutritious food for their children. One in three cannot afford warm clothes in the winter, and one in four must borrow the last hundred kronor every month to cover necessary expenses such as rent and food.

This is the reality behind the inflation figures and the rising food prices. The government must take this issue seriously now - because children must go to school, and they must have food in their stomachs when they do.

The government should be commended for finally listening to us regarding extending and increasing the housing allowance. But it is not enough. We need to increase the child allowance. We must serve breakfast in all schools. And we must lower the food VAT on basic goods immediately so that parents can afford good food for their children.

We risk a lost generation. The government must act for the children's best interests now.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the speech! I have a question regarding the food VAT. Miljöpartiet argues that reduced VAT on food would provide relief to families with children and other vulnerable groups. The 1995 reform meant that we lowered the VAT to 12 percent. In 2018, the Swedish National Audit Office estimated that this cost taxpayers 30 billion. When the reform was evaluated, it turned out that in the short term it had an impact on prices, but that the distribution effect in the form of kronor in increased purchasing power for the groups with small economic margins that one wanted to reach was not fulfilled. It was established that the accuracy when it comes to the target group is very low.

My question is why Member Märta Stenevi thinks it is reasonable to spend these large sums on a reform that does not hit the mark instead of on targeted reforms.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the question! This is a very important discussion. Precisely because it has such a broad impact with food VAT, we have chosen to propose that we should limit the VAT reduction to basic goods. It is difficult to see that the price of oat flakes would have a decisive effect on inflation.

However, it is important to ensure that this leads to actually lowered prices. We have heard how the Minister for Finance has very great confidence in coffee breaks with the food giants and that one believes one can keep prices down through pressure. In that case, we must assume that one could also get the industry to use a VAT reduction to specifically lower the prices on basic goods.

But it must be said that we cannot work solely with these broad means. We need targeted interventions, and there we have a complete package against child poverty that we have presented recently, where we, among other things, talk about the combination of housing allowance, child allowance, breakfast in school, lowered food VAT, and also reinforcements for civil society. We will need to work at all ends.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer! I think it is heartening and good that the Green Party wants to do what they can. I do wonder, however, who it is that is going to decide what are basic goods.

The cause - the root of the problem - for this with increased food prices and that families with children are getting squeezed is not only Putin's terrible war against Ukraine but also that we in Sweden have had an incredibly volatile electricity market. The Green Party's policy caused Vattenfall to decide to close Ringhals 1 and 2, in my home municipality Varberg, prematurely. I wonder if the member is really satisfied that the Green Party's policy has fueled the inflation, which hits them with the smallest margins of all. One cannot just pour oil on the waves, but one must also consider what is the root cause and how we solve this in the long term.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! So we also got a little energy policy debate. How wonderful!

The reactors that were decommissioned were shut down because they had old safety systems and the companies did not want to invest in them. Why didn't they want to? Yes, because electricity prices were so low due to all the wind power that had been built. We have talked about this as many times as ever. The members know this very well.

On the other hand, we can talk about what would have happened if one had not stopped all the wind power that could have been built. 78 percent of all applications for wind power are stopped now. The Liberals have entered into a government cooperation where a fiscal policy spokesperson in another party says that he wants to demolish the wind power that gave Sweden the low electricity prices that we had for a long time.

The question should perhaps go back to the Liberal member here. How on earth are you going to be able to keep electricity prices down when you have hitched yourselves to a party that wants to tear up and stop all wind power?

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Even though we are now in a very tough situation with high inflation and rising interest rates, employment has nevertheless held up. Unfortunately, the previous government left behind a difficult situation in the labor market with high unemployment in certain groups, while at the same time we have a large shortage in certain occupations. Note that this was during the prolonged boom when they governed, and this should have eliminated unemployment.

Many households have very small or no margins. The most important thing, besides having accurate support for the most vulnerable, is to do what we can from the political side so that companies can retain their staff and find the skills they need to continue developing and contributing to our growth. Having a job and an income is the very best way to get through these tough times.

Therefore, it is very good that the Swedish people in the autumn election showed that they wanted a different leadership - a leadership that understands the business sector and puts the work line first, and a leadership that knows that there are no shortcuts and that the most important thing for people's life chances is that they succeed in school and enter the labor market or start their own companies.

Yesterday, the Liberals in the government presented a major investment of over 700 million to provide an opportunity for those who are unemployed to, through vocational training, take a job where there is a shortage today. This is important and will make a real difference.

This, together with the fact that the Liberals now finally have responsibility for the school again, means that we can build a better Sweden from the ground up where all children manage in school and can realize their life dreams and do what they want in adulthood. Together with a safety net for those who truly need it, this is the only real recipe for a strong Sweden that manages through recessions without the children having to leave their homes or go hungry at the end of the month.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! I truly appreciate that the Liberals still talk about the work line, about understanding the business sector, and about jobs being the beginning of everything. But now the question is what you are going to do tomorrow.

Tomorrow you will shock-increase the labor fees that you had promised to lower. You will complicate and increase the costs for the companies, something that the companies pleaded in the media that you would not do. You will destroy tens of thousands of jobs for young people and increase costs when inflation is skyrocketing. And you do this knowing better, as it is the only measure that the National Institute of Economic Research, which I just quoted, points out as that which does not raise inflation and can simultaneously counteract the economic downturn. On the contrary, it lowers inflation. My question is simply: Why are you doing this?

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! We Liberals are in a government. The Liberals take responsibility for Sweden. I would be incredibly happy if the Centre Party wanted to do the same and contribute to this together with us.

The Liberals are definitely pursuing a bourgeois policy where the work line is at the center. Right now, inflation needs to be lowered, and that is the type of activity that is needed.

Regarding the changed employer contribution, the Liberals want to extend the growth support to all small businesses. If Martin Ådahl had read up on the facts beforehand, he would have seen that the big problem in our labor market is not youth, but certain shortage occupations where there is no labor to be found and that, above all, certain foreign-born individuals are not entering the labor market. That is where we should place the efforts. That is why the educational initiative that we presented this week is so good.

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! There are many things happening at once here. To begin with, we had a majority together that pushed through this type of tax cuts and investments that members from the Liberals are now driving. There, we took responsibility together.

But here, the question was not answered at all. Why is it being raised when it should be lowered? It has been promised to lower it. Why is it being raised then?

The Speaker mentioned the growth support. That has also been withdrawn. It was one of the first measures. The growth support for the second employee in small businesses was removed in the previous budget. It is yet another of the tax increases that are to finance the Sverigedemokraternas increased unemployment insurance for everyone. Instead of having an unemployment insurance that is strong at the beginning and then sinks - a modern unemployment insurance - which we pushed together, you have given all these billions to Sverigedemokraterna, against the work line and against the companies, to increase costs and reduce jobs. How does this align with taking responsibility?

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Martin Ådahl, for the questions! Yes, credit to the Center Party for taking responsibility together with us during the last parliamentary term. We are doing so this term as well. That is the difference. The Center Party does not want, because of an extreme fear of conflict towards certain parties, to take responsibility for Sweden in a difficult time.

Had we done this together, it probably could have become even more bourgeois liberal politics. We welcome that Martin Ådahl and his party will hopefully be able to talk with all parties eventually to take responsibility for Sweden.

I think I answered the question. It is not primarily young people who are the large unemployment group. It is other things that need to be done here and now to push down inflation and maintain growth, and that was exactly what I set out in my speech.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank everyone who has participated in this discussion and debate. It is fine and good to see a great commitment for those who are having it the toughest right now, parents who turn over every krona to make the food last the month. Even though we have somewhat different starting points and paths forward, the commitment and the goal are very clear.

I can promise that the government intends to continue both fighting inflation and supporting the most vulnerable households.

With this, I wish everyone a pleasant weekend.

(Applause)

The special debate was hereby concluded.

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