The Prime Minister's Question Time

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! An extensive disinformation campaign is being conducted against Sweden right now. The so-called LVU campaign spreads serious and dangerous lies about Swedish social services. At the same time, we see a deteriorated security situation and an elevated level of terror threat in the country. The situation in Sweden is uncertain and serious.

We need to reduce the tensions in our country. We must act for what is best for Sweden. Here, the Prime Minister himself has a great responsibility. It is about uniting the country instead of trying to exploit crises for own party-political gain.

The Prime Minister has on several occasions repeated that the disinformation campaign about LVU is a threat to our country and pointed out that it is everyone's responsibility to counter it. He is right in that. But fine words are not enough. The question is how the Prime Minister himself acts to counter disinformation, hate, and threats - yes, actually everything that is dividing our country right now.

The Prime Minister's Question Time

It has also emerged that two prominent Moderate politicians in Gällivare have actively supported the campaign. They have spread messages that the social services take children into care on loose grounds. It is a mantra that has been repeated in the media but also at meetings in the municipal council, in the municipal executive board, at an LVU-critical demonstration, and in social media. Their actions have had serious consequences for individuals and for our country.

Madam Speaker! My question to the Prime Minister is therefore: How will the Prime Minister and his government act to stop participation in and dissemination of the LVU campaign in society and in our democratic institutions?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I believe those who are interested in social services issues and this campaign have for quite a long time followed how I and the government have acted in the matter.

I wrote a rather long article the other day in DN Debatt where I pointed out that I have actually been following the issue since the early 2000s. It was then that I, as the person responsible for social policy in Stockholm, first came into contact with something close to this, namely meetings with families where social secretaries meet families who, as it is put, do not trust the social services. It was probably the first time I seriously saw that there is a fundamental problem in that the exercise of authority in Sweden – which is absolutely necessary to protect socially vulnerable children from abuse – meets perceptions that the social services do not have the right to intervene at all.

It was quite a big deal, I must say. We have been used to for a long time in Sweden that in individual cases, people can have very different opinions. It is not uncommon that families who, let's say, are affected by the social services' care do not share the social services' view. For that, we have legally secure systems where one can appeal that kind of decision. It also happens that the decisions are appealed; that is known to all of us who have dealt with social policy.

This was the basis, and even then I thought it was quite remarkable that people did not trust the social services. That cannot be a legitimate reason in Sweden for not following the law. One does not have to trust the police to refrain from committing crimes. One does not have to trust the Skatteverket to still pay one's taxes. And the same applies here. This was a rather important clash.

The campaign is something else. It is actively driven by people who want to cause division and create splitting between people in Sweden. It concerns people who perhaps do not understand Swedish legislation and people who have had their children taken into care and who do not like this. Furthermore, the campaign is conducted for foreign purposes. I have condemned it in very, very strong words.

(Applause)

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

Lena Hallengren (S)

Madam Speaker! Very well, but it is not just about condemnation. Säpos head of counter-espionage told in this very chamber a couple of weeks ago that the raised terror threat level in the country is partly due to the fact that Sweden is portrayed as Islamophobic.

The Prime Minister's own party friends, as I previously mentioned, have furthermore, through their actions, supported the disinformation campaign against Sweden and Swedish social services. This has contributed to an increased threat against our country and a weakened security for the Swedish people.

Therefore, I ask the Prime Minister again: In what way has the Prime Minister personally done what is required to stop the LVU campaign, which harms our country and actually undermines the safety of the Swedish people? It is, therefore, more specifically about stopping the LVU campaign than about social services in general.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! Now I understand where the shoe pinches. Lena Hallengren wants to talk about a moderate and an individual case in Gällivare. That is certainly what she wants, but I will not do that.

Individual cases where social services take children into care, where it is questioned and where legal reviews are taking place - I believe there is some review ongoing in Gällivare - I do not intend to go into those in any case, and I believe that applies to previous ministers as well. Furthermore, this concerns a person who, as far as I know, has taken a break from her assignments because we perceive that she has acted inappropriately in another way.

The big question here is not about an individual case. On those, one can always have different opinions, and ultimately it is the courts that determine whether an individual case has been handled correctly or incorrectly.

This is about countries, organizations and individuals who want to question Sweden's ability to protect children and who want to cause division and create split between Sweden and other countries or perhaps even worse: cause division and create split between population groups in Sweden and exploit the fact that there are people who do not understand Swedish legislation.

(Applause)

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

Linda Lindberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! A little more than a year of the mandate period has passed, and the government is maintaining a high pace in the realization of the Tidö Agreement. These are necessary measures to get Sweden back on the right track. After decades of mismanagement and an inability to see the consequences of the implemented policies, we now find ourselves in a situation where we need to pull all the emergency brakes at once.

Sweden is scarred. Today we see system-threatening crime, infiltration, corruption, segregation, shootings, campaigns against authorities, growing parallel societies, increased insecurity, honor culture, growing crime, terror threats and so on - the list can be long. These are terrible things, which previously were practically non-existent in our society.

Previous majorities in this chamber have enabled this through a series of bad decisions. Blinded by the idea of a so-called multiculturalism, they have subjected Sweden to an experiment for decades. The result we see today, every day. This became really bad, Madam Speaker.

That we now have a government in place that, together with us, is ready to make real changes is obviously positive. We also know that no one is sitting on their hands today; I want to have that said. But regardless of this, all these problems that we are now forced to handle and devote enormous resources to, resources that instead could have gone to stronger welfare, stronger infrastructure and so on, is a fact.

My question to the Prime Minister is: Would it not be reasonable and appropriate for Sweden to summarize the costs for this project? What has the multicultural experiment and the mass immigration actually cost Sweden? Should we not investigate the society's total costs, but also look at who bears the responsibility for the fact that we are now left with all these enormous problems?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I completely share the description that there are very many inherited problems and very many years of neglect that we are now working with. There is no doubt about that. It is enough to summarize the large areas. An irresponsible migration policy together with a very poor integration has led to very many of the problems we see. Soon there is not a single area of society to highlight where we do not see the consequences of integration. I heard on the news yesterday about children and dental health, a problem that we have worked with for a very long time in Sweden but which is now coming back. We see it in area after area. It also concerns the criminal legislation. The serious criminals in Sweden have in practice all the time had a head start because Swedish legislation has not dealt with the crime we see today. It also concerns the energy policy, to take a completely obvious example.

All of this must be taken into account. Inherited problems from governments that for ten years have not had a majority to make decisions and which, furthermore, have been in disagreement with each other, have consequences.

But now one must accept the situation. We are where we are. To solve the problems, look forward, and do the best one can must be the attitude. I believe much more in that than in brooding over everything that has been. One must know what the problem was in order to be able to solve it, and one must speak plainly about it. Above all, one must not go back to it. I dare not even think the thought of having a government today that thought so differently about migration policy that one increased immigration again. It would have had devastating consequences.

Look forward, make decisions, gather majorities and solve the problems! That is my focus right now. I share the historical description but believe that we must constantly be solution-oriented and focused on the problems that are currently at the center.

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

Linda Lindberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the answer.

The Tidö Agreement aims precisely at all the measures we need to take to get Sweden on the right track. We are working very intensively on that. When we have implemented those parts of the Tidö Agreement, I believe we will have come a good way.

It is, however, a fact that we have historically in this chamber created fast tracks to work and to housing. We have enacted temporary laws, shaped the country and adapted to various special rules to accommodate others. We have deficient statistics to hide the effects of the pursued policy. The majorities of politics have cost the country dearly. This is a sad chapter in Swedish history and Swedish politics, Madam Speaker.

The project's mantra has been all along that this is to be a win for Sweden and that we need to do this to manage the welfare. My question to the Prime Minister is: Does the Prime Minister believe those who say that this will be a win a bit further ahead? Will the gains, in that case, outweigh the losses that we see in society today?

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! That is probably impossible to answer. Right now we can say that the cost side is very large. Look at the crime statistics! Look at the many social problems! Look at the unemployment statistics! It is quite obvious.

But when one says that, one must also say that it is quite obviously many industries in Sweden today that function because hardworking people have come to Sweden and work hard. That must also be seen. One must see all the skill shortages we have in Sweden, where people from other countries fill important roles. One must be able to see both things in this.

A sign of the times is when we now at the European Council discuss with countries like Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands and see that they have such large problems with new large migrant flows that even they, who previously belonged to the very liberal countries in that sense that they wanted to open Europe, say that we must tighten immigration to Europe.

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Madam Speaker! The situation in healthcare is very serious. I am surprised that the Prime Minister has not commented on what Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner presented in October, namely that the deficits and the economic problems for the regions, that is to say for healthcare, will be much larger than the forecasts said before the government's presentation of the state budget. We now have very large deficits in the regions - 24 billion kronor, despite the 10 billion that the government provided, which was far too little even then.

Last year, the government presented a budget where there was also a lack of money for healthcare. That is why we have such big problems already this year in Swedish healthcare. Almost one in ten people is being laid off now in Södermanland. 600 million is to be cut in Region Örebro. In Västra Götaland alone, we have a deficit of 1.5 billion kronor. This means that they would need to close two hospitals to achieve the legal requirement for balance in the region. The question is whether the Prime Minister thinks they should close two hospitals in the Västra Götaland region.

All the profit reserves that existed in the regions previously are now essentially exhausted because they were needed this year to prevent a major catastrophe already this year following the government's budget from last year.

I know that the Prime Minister usually follows this closely. Now, however, the Prime Minister and the government have followed this closely for over a year and have done nothing at all. Is it the case that the Prime Minister is to continue to follow this closely and let the catastrophe become even larger next year?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! We presented a budget with a majority in the Swedish Riksdag. It was more than what the Left Party could do.

Yesterday I met SKR in Helsingborg and discussed these things, of course. They described their situation to me; I described the economic situation in Sweden to them. My impression is that there is, overall, a very great respect among both local and regional politicians and the Swedish people because it is a very tough economic situation. It is almost only Vänsterpartiet that has endless resources. Everyone else has limited resources.

We put 16 billion kronor, not 10 billion, into the state budget this year, just a few months ago. It was the single largest budget commitment we made. We did it well aware that it does not solve all problems, but large and important problems. We did it well aware that the state also has limited resources and that households do too – otherwise, one could simply raise the tax, as some parties usually advocate. We also did it well aware that inflation right now is the really big problem that we must solve to return to a more normal order in the economy.

All of this is complex and difficult. If one cannot see that, one has no economic policy at all. This government has an economic policy. We intend to fight and defeat inflation. We intend to support municipalities and regions. But we cannot do the entire job for them, and they know that too. They do not expect that either.

There are also a number of reasons to be able to use previous surpluses at this time. There are also a number of reasons to be able to run with a deficit temporarily during special situations. All of this has also been very well described by the Finance Minister.

Then I understand that everyone is still dissatisfied. That is usually the case in economically tough times. Resources are scarce and the needs are great, and in that case, it is a government's task to ensure that the pluses and minuses balance out and that the Swedish economy is protected and managed well.

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

Nooshi Dadgostar (V)

Madam Speaker! I cannot interpret Ulf Kristersson's answer in any other way than that the Västra Götalandsregionen is therefore going to close two hospitals. Is it the Prime Minister's view that all these large deficits should be taken from the operations because the reserves are exhausted and we have a common fiscal framework which implies that balance must be achieved in the regions?

If it is the case that the Prime Minister wants to undo it or thinks that the regions should commit crimes, then he is truly on thin ice. If he wants that, he will probably have to stand by the fact that he does not want a fiscal framework in Sweden or any legitimacy for it.

SKR, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, does not have the view that the Prime Minister implies. They are furious, because the government has a great financial strength. The state has enormous funds, while the regions are on their knees. Why can't it be leveled out, Ulf Kristersson? Why must we close hospitals and health centers in Sweden when there is money?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! Nooshi Dadgostar does not need to interpret me at all. She can simply listen to exactly what I say. I described the government's economic policy, no more and no less.

We cannot perform magic tricks with our knees. No serious politicians who have a serious economic policy can. Serious municipal and regional councilors also know and understand this. I met them, as I said, yesterday at a congress. They were not raging people. They were people who had serious views and conducted serious conversations. One knows that the state, just like municipalities and regions, has economic limitations. One knows that we live in a time where we face difficult challenges that one can only partially control oneself, just like the state. It is serious men and women who conduct a serious conversation about the economy and about other things.

Again: It is only those who believe that one has unlimited economic resources, that one can run large deficits for as long as one wants and that one can ignore the inflation that can promise everything to everyone. All of us others follow the laws of economics and respect that Sweden should not return to the mire in the economy.

(Applause)

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! In gang war Sweden, children and young people wake up every day with fear for their own lives. They fear that they themselves or someone they are close to will die and that they themselves will have to murder, because the gang leaders have simply decided it. Just as most of us order pizza on Friday night, the gang leaders order murders. One call or an SMS is all that is required for hell to begin for a 13-year-old.

The children who become the gang leaders' child soldiers must be lifted out of the gangs' claws. The last time the Prime Minister and I met here, this summer, I asked if the Prime Minister could consider looking at an exit program for children. The answer I received then was that the government was prepared to look at everything that can be done to stop the gang warfare.

Since then, I can state that nothing has happened regarding that question. On the contrary, the Sweden Democrats and the government have voted no to additional resources that would be needed to strengthen social services and specifically the withdrawal activities. The Centre Party presented a committee initiative for an extra 1 billion to Sweden's municipalities here and now, already this year. Those resources were needed to stop cuts and instead strengthen social services. But you voted no to that.

Now it is time to let go of the prestige. Proposals cannot automatically be set aside just because they come from the opposition. I would therefore like to repeat my question to the Prime Minister. Are you prepared not only to look at but also to introduce a national dropout program for children?

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I completely agree with the description of the appalling situation where grossly reckless gang criminals recruit children who are not of legal age in their appalling handling. The root cause is that we have had so many gang criminals who are prepared to do anything. That is the root cause. It is not the fault of society in general.

It is thus people who do not shy away from any means, who completely lack empathy for other people and who involve children in murder activities. Therefore, I say time and again that there is no more preventive task than to lock up those who commit such crimes and are Swedish citizens or to kick out those who commit such crimes and are not Swedish citizens. It is the most preventive thing we can do.

Then that is not enough. No one has said that either. Repression, meaning tough measures against those who commit serious crimes, must go hand in hand with prevention, preventive measures, so that children see better role models than those who commit crimes. That is exactly what we are doing.

I believe I am giving the same answer today as before: We are looking into this. Analyses are ongoing regarding deradicalization programs in general. These are quite difficult matters. I recommend a long conversation with the Ministry of Social Affairs regarding this. It is difficult to get deradicalization programs to work in reality. Still, it must be done. We have seen it with defectors from terrorist activity and from substance abuse, even among adults. We are looking into this.

Work is also ongoing to see if it can be lowered in the ages. Must there be special methods when it concerns children and young people? That is what we are looking at.

It does not change the fact that our main focus is on breaking the confidentiality, ensuring that social services, the police, and the school know the same things early on. No preventive measure is likely as important as breaking the confidentiality so that the police reach the families where children are drawn into criminal activity early.

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Prime Minister! But merely looking at proposals does not mean that one solves the task. Both the Prime Minister and I know that.

We do not solve our greatest societal challenge either by withdrawing the funding for what is a self-evident part of the solution. I must unfortunately state that the government's inability to have two thoughts in its head at the same time – both the preventive and the repressive – means that the municipalities are currently going to their knees. The social workers are not getting any more colleagues. And the expensive placements, which perhaps are needed most absolutely now, are not being carried out.

The Prime Minister has said they want to get Sweden in order. But I cannot see that words are followed by action. We are not getting the result we would need. I can only regret that. In order for us to stop the next generation of gang criminals, we need to be able to do both: prosecute but also invest in the front-line defense, that is, social workers, school staff and the like.

I am convinced that the Swedish people now deserve an answer to this. What are we prepared to do in terms of prevention to put a stop to the gangs?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I have worked hands-on in social services with preventive measures. I know both how important they are and how difficult they are. I also know that general talk about preventive measures does not help at all. Much of what pretends to be preventive is not. A poorly functioning youth center is not preventive. A good evidence-based parenting support program, which places demands on parents, is preventive. Breaking confidentiality early is preventive. Those are real preventive measures.

Sometimes I get the slightly strange suspicion that those who most want to talk about preventive measures do so to avoid talking about what we should do with those who commit serious crimes and who must be stopped and locked up. Getting a stop to the violence is my biggest focus right now. At the same time, we must save those children from the violence.

When it comes to placements, the big problem is not that they cost too much. The big problem is that many placements are too poor and that they arrive too late, because confidentiality has stood in the way.

(Applause)

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Madam Speaker! The Prime Minister has appointed a Minister for Climate and Environment who not only conducts a policy that increases Sweden's climate emissions. She is also lying about it. At a press conference recently, she claimed that emissions are decreasing now, that they are decreasing all the time. The truth is that this government's policy actively increases emissions. And that can be read in the government's own budget bill.

Is it the Prime Minister's view that his ministers have the task of misleading the Swedish people when they do not follow Sweden's climate laws, when they do not conduct a policy that ensures Sweden meets its climate goals and the commitments that Sweden has made together with other countries?

The UN warns that we will miss the 1.5-degree goal. The situation is urgent.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! Romina Pourmokhtari is an excellent Minister for Climate and Environment. She understands the importance of the long term. She understands the global dimension of the climate problems. She understands something that is fundamentally important right now, namely that energy policy and climate policy go together. If one has no energy policy for fossil-free electricity – twice as much – then one has no policy for electrification and then one has no climate policy. It is that simple. That is what she usually says, and I know that not everyone appreciates hearing it – especially not those who have dismantled the Swedish energy system. I know that. But she is right, and you others are wrong.

I believe that Romina Pourmokhtari wanted to point out that our emissions have decreased over a very long period in combination with increased growth and that it is a prerequisite for meeting the goals. We are, together with Portugal, at the EU's lowest level in emissions per capita. That is the path we are to take. We are closer to reaching the 2045 goals together with other EU countries. That is important.

(Applause)

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Madam Speaker! If one is to have a focus on the global dimensions, one must be a leader. One must be a leader in the climate negotiations, globally and in the EU. One must also be a good role model. It is not sufficient to one day pursue a policy that, in one's own budget, is stated to increase Sweden's climate emissions, and the next day claim that they are constantly decreasing. It is dishonest, and it is irresponsible.

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I believe that the member and I have very different views on what constitutes global leadership. I believe that global leadership is to do things in Sweden that are so well-functioning and efficient that they inspire international emulation. That is what I believe.

It is about energy policy, for example. Global leadership is not vacuuming up the world's biofuels to reach a self-invented goal regarding the reduction obligation. That is not global leadership. No other country in the world would be able to afford to do that. No one even tries once. We have stopped doing such things.

(Applause)

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

Viktor Wärnick (M)

Madam Speaker! Criminal gangs are infiltrating many areas of society, for example the labor market and the public sector. Both municipal administrations and state agencies are targets for various types of intrusions by criminal networks.

Södertälje is a municipality that has therefore introduced thorough background checks of employees and final candidates in recruitment processes. The purpose is that municipal employees who, for example, may have to handle sensitive exercise of authority against individuals should not have criminal connections.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman has now established that there is a lack of legal basis for such background checks. They are therefore being paused by the municipality. My question to the Prime Minister is whether he and the government intend to act to enable register checks of employees in the public sector.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! The answer is yes. I have followed this for quite a long time now. Södertälje has often been discussed in terms of gang crime, but they were early on other risks with infiltration in companies, authorities, parties and the like. It is incredibly important.

I saw Södertälje's municipal councilor Boel Godner on TV this evening. She described this and the criticism they have received very well, I think. I do not, of course, interfere and do not review the JO's work, but I note that the legislation must obviously support municipalities that want to ensure that they do not employ people who conduct criminal activities through their work. It is fundamentally important and concerns a basic trust in the rule of law, the authorities, and a lot of administrative decisions that follow from this.

We will therefore appoint an inquiry to review the legislation so that municipalities can take sufficient measures to ensure that they do not employ people who have a criminal past or criminal intentions.

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

Mikael Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! The war between Hamas and Israel has created a wave of antisemitism around the world - so also in our country. Yesterday, one of the main news items in SVT's Rapport was about how antisemitism creates conflicts in schools in Gothenburg. As an example, they showed third-graders who said that everyone in Israel deserves to die. When this was discussed, a fight broke out.

We had a visit here yesterday from Israel's ambassador, and he received a question about antisemitism. He then stated that one has not experienced a corresponding wave in Sweden since World War II. There are Swedish Jews whose families have lived here for 150 years who are now considering whether they must leave the country. They are worried about displaying Jewish symbols.

My specific question is whether the government plans to make specific efforts to reach out to the schools and combat this despicable antisemitism, and if so, which ones.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! Yesterday, I described how concerned I am that the entirely legitimate disagreement that can exist in a democracy regarding what is happening in other countries – it is a discussion that always deserves to be conducted, not least regarding old conflicts such as those in the Middle East – is now degenerating into mockery, anti-Semitic hatred, and near-tumult on Swedish streets. So, we cannot have that. We cannot have all the world's conflicts on Swedish streets. We have other forms for resolving disagreements in political issues. It is incredibly important.

Antisemitism is a stain, and now it is coming back again. It unites right-wing and left-wing extremists, Islamists, and people who mostly seem to have been raised to hate Jews and/or the state of Israel. Now many things are being done about this. It is about security but also about more information efforts and supporting Jewish life. We are conducting a survey to investigate exactly how large the problems are, where they are, and in which schools greater efforts should be made to reach the right children and young people.

(Applause)

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

Joar Forssell (L)

Madam Speaker! Since Hamas's barbaric attack against innocent Jews in Israel on October 7, antisemitism has also escalated in Sweden. Grotesque scenes have unfolded in Swedish cities, and antisemitic messages such as "from the river to the sea" have been chanted openly. Now, Jews here in Sweden are forced to take off the Star of David. Parents are keeping their children home from school. Jewish congregations are cancelling activities.

I want to thank the Prime Minister, who leads a government that takes this seriously and is making major investments against antisemitism, but the situation is extremely serious. The Liberals and I already motioned during the previous parliamentary term to change the protection act in order to be able to classify, for example, synagogues, Bajit, the Jewish nursing home, and Jewish schools as protected objects so that one can have armed security guards or, in the worst case, the military protecting them.

I wonder if the Prime Minister and the government are working on this issue to ensure that security for the Jewish minority in Sweden is strengthened in a very concrete way.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! We are strengthening security with economic resources. That is important in itself. Then a question is raised that has been raised before, but right now there are legal obstacles in this. Protected objects can be civilian objects of significance for the total defense. One can discuss whether it is wise legislation or whether one would need to change it. But that does not solve the acute problems here and now. We must be able to ensure that regardless of whether an object is formally classified as protected or not, we must, of course, be able to protect the people and activities carried out inside.

I believe that this reveals a much more long-term problem that quite a few European capitals and other cities have with increasing polarization and sudden acceptance of hatred against Jews here, which is built on disagreement over conflicts there. We must address this plague in Sweden.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! Before the election, Ulf Kristersson promised that the Sweden Democrats would be kept out of all influence regarding foreign policy due to their extreme views. It was one of all the election promises that Ulf Kristersson broke immediately after the election, when he negotiated away a number of heavy posts in foreign policy. They went to just the Sweden Democrats.

One of them was the position as chairman of the Riksdag's OSCE delegation. It is a heavy responsibility where one represents Sweden in many foreign policy and international contexts. That position was given by the Moderaterna to Björn Söder, who has made himself known, among other things, for having said that Jews cannot be real Swedes. It is an offensive statement. It is an extreme statement. It is a harmful statement. Such things divide Sweden.

Then my question to Ulf Kristersson, as we now see how antisemitism is growing in the world: Does he intend to take any initiatives whatsoever to have Björn Söder replaced in that position?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I note that the Social Democrats are as eager to talk about the views of other parties' members in foreign policy as they are reluctant to talk about their own members' views in foreign policy. It is not impressive.

(Applause)

I want to remember that before the election I said that one should cooperate in issues where one agrees and stand firm where one disagrees. I also believe I said that in quite many international issues I see differences between our two parties. This concerns the view on international cooperation in general. It does not prevent at all that we cooperate where we can agree, most recently now on how we should solve global climate problems with the EU. So, I think that one should handle political similarities and differences.

I do not intend to interfere with which members the Riksdag chooses for various bodies within the Riksdag. That is something the Riksdag must resolve itself.

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Madam Speaker! Since the turn of the millennium, Sweden has granted more than 1.1 million citizenships. It is the largest demographic change in our country's history. We have done this without any requirements whatsoever regarding language skills, self-sufficiency, or cultural adaptation, and even often to persons who have been convicted of crimes in Sweden.

Sweden now has an innumerable number of citizens who need an interpreter to manage the most basic contacts with authorities and who live in a long-term dependency on benefits and in a type of self-chosen cultural segregation where they both distance themselves from and not infrequently spread hatred and suspicion towards Sweden and Swedes.

Does the Prime Minister consider that all of this has been a mistake? If so, should not Sweden work to reclaim citizenship from those persons who obviously should not have received them from the very beginning?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! When someone is granted citizenship, it is an incredibly important act, both from the country that grants the citizenship and from the person who becomes a citizen. It is not a travel document we are talking about, but an act of loyalty towards a country. It is about wanting to become a part of that country.

Sweden has been unreasonably lenient in granting citizenship, much more lenient than many other countries. We must stop being that. Of course, it should be based on being able to speak the country's language, that one works and supports oneself, and that one shares the basic values that our laws rest on. That is how we have not viewed it previously. This will be the change within the framework of the paradigm shift that is now being implemented. I believe that this is important, because it is a matter of reciprocity. To ultimately fight for a country's independence and values with a weapon in hand is not something one does easily.

The answer is that we will significantly tighten the requirements for Swedish citizenship.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! I noted that the Prime Minister did not answer Nooshi Dadgostars questions properly earlier. But that all his party comrades in here applauded cuts has not escaped the people who are standing in healthcare queues all over the country.

What is prioritized in the government's budget is primarily tax cuts, while at the same time we now hear that healthcare is running with such large deficits that hospitals are threatened with closure. The consequences for ordinary people will be fatal if the government does not act.

In the preparatory works for the Local Government Act, it is clear that inflation is not a reason to present a budget in imbalance. In this situation, the Prime Minister is therefore urging municipalities and regions to commit a crime, while at the same time having the nerve to stand here in the Swedish Parliament and mock them. Does the Prime Minister not understand the seriousness of the situation?

(Applause)

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! One alternative is to set aside the high-flown rhetoric and state that we disagree. You in Vänsterpartiet have endless resources, because you can always raise taxes as much as you want. Then it is quite simple for everyone – except for those who have their taxes raised. Ask the Swedish people if they think they are short of money right now and if they are turning over every krona! Ask the Swedish people if they believe the last krona they have does the most good with them or with the state, municipalities, and regions! It is not obvious that the Swedish people think that a tax-increase policy right now would have solved our economic problems. That is my answer.

I am, of course, not asking any municipal politician or regional politician to break the law. I am asking them to do what I know they do: take responsibility in a difficult time, do their part, and expect us from the state side to do our part, so that we jointly solve the problems. It was also that spirit I encountered yesterday, even though we differ between parties, even locally.

(Applause)

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Madam Speaker! Today I am merely a messenger. Up in the gallery sit Elisa and Filippa. They are praoelever from grade 8 and have a question for the Prime Minister.

The Sweden Democrats are very clear that one should be able to imprison children - 13-year-olds. Now the question of lowering the criminal age is being investigated, something that both research and experience show does not always help the underlying problem, namely that today we have a frighteningly large number of children who go astray and get stuck in exclusion.

What does the Prime Minister think about putting 13-year-olds in prison, and how will it lead to fewer children getting into trouble and committing serious crimes?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I now turn both to the speaker and to the people in the gallery.

I believe that lowering the age of criminal responsibility is both necessary and natural. One can discuss exactly what age it should be. There are many countries that have lower than 15 years. It is quite obvious that we today have problems with serious crime committed by those under the age of 15.

I do not think, however, that it is the main solution. The main solution is to ensure much earlier that those who are being raised into criminality leave those environments, in the worst case with a certain degree of coercion. Families should not have the right to raise their children straight into criminality. That is important to say. Therefore, I believe that the issues regarding breaking confidentiality are incredibly important. Sweden must rethink, from privacy, which in practice has meant that one can, under the protection of legislation, raise children in criminality, to stripping this bare and making it visible.

I believe both things will be needed: both a lowered age of criminal responsibility and many more preventive measures.

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! We are all aware of the Prime Minister's interest in sport and health. Football also certainly holds a special place in the Prime Minister's heart, as it does in the lives of many of us Swedes. There is joy and community in the entire chain, from youth training to the feeling of a packed stadium at a high-level elite final match. It is fantastic and indescribable.

But unfortunately, we have also seen quite a few examples of violence and insecurity in connection with these types of gatherings in the recent past. I wonder: How can the government work to counter this unpleasant development, so that we will also be able to take the whole family to these types of sporting events in the future?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I am a former gymnast and not a former football player. I have sometimes been fascinated by how things that would be completely unthinkable at a gymnastics competition are perceived as completely self-evident at a football match. There is very little of hooliganism and spectator violence at gymnastics competitions, I must admit. It is strange, that.

Seriously speaking - there are many of us who rejoice as much over the joy in football, not least in Swedish women's football right now, as we are horrified by the brutal violence and by the fact that people sometimes allow themselves to be kidnapped by people who are only there for the sake of violence.

I believe that a mixture of legislation, police interventions, and naturally football's own actions is needed. We need in every way to show that this is not acceptable and that there is zero tolerance for it. The fact that it is unfortunately an old tradition does not make the matter any better. But I perceive that today there is more focus on those issues and that there is a growing anger over people who kidnap the will of ordinary football-interested people by exercising violence.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Welfare crime is a growing problem that damages trust in our society. People who behave correctly and pay taxes do so because they want more children to grow up in safety, that those who are ill should receive care in time, and that the elderly should be treated with respect. But instead, we see how heavy organized crime breaks into the welfare system. Personal assistance, HVB, and foster homes are being operated, and entire health centers have been started up for the purpose of committing crimes and profiting from our support for society's most vulnerable.

This crime must naturally be stopped, and it is urgent. People must be able to trust the welfare system. My question is: What is the government doing to stop welfare crime?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! This is an extremely important issue. We raised this issue at an extra national security council where we also invited all parties in the Swedish Riksdag to be present to get a detailed description of how serious crime is now spreading across all possible areas and in places that one could hardly have imagined ten years ago. Welfare crime is one part. Another is corporate crime, where they find their way into real estate companies, restaurants - which is unfortunately well known - and other seemingly legal businesses. They also find their way into authorities of various kinds, as well as into municipalities. There is a breadth to this.

The new thing is not that Sweden is vulnerable, for an open society has always been vulnerable. But the new thing is that there are organized criminal gangs that exploit every opening that exists. This we must stop, and we must close the openings. It is completely obvious. We must make it more complicated, quite simply. This will unfortunately sometimes affect people who are completely law-abiding. It will become a bit harder to do things precisely because we must not be trusting towards those who exploit everything that Sweden stands for.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! During the past year, we have seen ten years of real wage increases go up in smoke. Unemployment is predicted to increase, interest rates are hollowing out people's wallets, and already a third of households are struggling to make ends meet. Many families feel great anxiety about their finances.

At the same time, Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson paints a rather gloomy picture of the future, with several scenarios that risk worsening the situation even further. We see no proposals from the government to ease the burden for households that are struggling financially. My question to the Prime Minister is therefore: What proposals does the government have regarding helping households through this cost crisis?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! With all due respect, I do not share that view at all. Read our budget! There are large differences.

Inflation began to rise long before this government took office, as everyone knows. I have never blamed the previous government for creating inflation. Much is international and affects Sweden regardless of the government. But one very important difference is: If you cannot even get a budget through Sweden's Riksdag, you cannot conduct economic policy. That is an important difference. In roughly the same way, one can say: If you have no energy policy, you also have no climate policy.

If you cannot get your economic policy through the Swedish Riksdag, you cannot conduct economic policy at all. Doing it in that way, one can indulge in a boom, where most things go smoothly. But that is not something you can do in a recession and tough economic times.

We must not return to the situation of the 1990s crisis. Therefore, the government is pursuing a tight policy with the aim of combating inflation.

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

Erik Ottoson (M)

Madam Speaker! Sweden is a hundred years old in terms of democracy, freedom of speech, and strong, clear, and constructive political debate. All around the world, we see how polarization is spreading and the democratic world appears to be partially torn apart by destructive debates that only play into the hands of democracy's enemies. The Swedish Security Service signals that this is something that weakens Sweden's resilience against external influence operations.

Against this background, I would like to ask the Prime Minister if he shares my view that all established parties bear a collective responsibility to now, for the remainder of the mandate period and the next election campaign, including the election to the European Parliament, together take a new starting point, turn the page, and reduce the polarization in the established Swedish political debate, which the Swedish Security Service warned about?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! The short answer is yes. I am seriously concerned about the polarization that is taking place not only in Sweden but also in many other countries. I believe it is truly dangerous when one cannot have a serious conversation where one disagrees, where one can agree to disagree and even sometimes have the famous beer together afterwards. It is also dangerous because it can be exploited by foreign powers that want to create polarization. It is about countries that want to create polarization and want democracies to be torn apart. Do not underestimate that risk.

In my speech yesterday, I said that we also must learn that one can have different opinions about geopolitical conflicts far from Sweden and still manage our own country in a different way. One should not come to Sweden to burn Qurans. One should not come to Sweden to carry out riots concerning different perceptions of the Eritrean regime. One should also not come to Sweden to wave flags for Hamas. That is not how we resolve conflicts in Sweden.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! By adding more predictable electricity production, we are building a secure and reliable electricity market. The electricity price support was a way to meet the acute electricity crisis and the cost crisis for households, but not a sustainable way forward. A reduction of the energy tax is something that the Christian Democrats have considered should be weighed to meet the energy costs that exist. A reduced energy tax would benefit both companies and private individuals in the long run and also counteract the uncertainty regarding costs that exists for companies. While waiting for us to produce predictable energy, we also remain vulnerable, for example, during a very cold winter. My question to the Prime Minister is whether he sees that the energy tax must be lowered.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! It is hardly surprising that I hold no other opinion than exactly the opinion that the government has on that issue right now, and that is where it will stop. I share the view that dispatchable power is the important and long-term solution. In the short term, one can introduce support measures, but that cannot be done in the long run; instead, the solution concerns things such as dispatchable power and distribution networks. If I am not misinformed, Ebba Busch and Elisabeth Svantesson were just now in the speaker's chair at a press conference and described the next steps in the expansion of Swedish nuclear power.

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

Markus Kallifatides (S)

Madam Speaker! Healing a country that has split into different parallel societies is the coming decade's most important political task. So said Ulf Kristersson during Järvaveckan. Tensta, Rinkeby and Husby have long been neglected areas in my hometown. Low incomes, high unemployment, weak school results and a breeding ground for serious organized crime have repercussions for our entire country.

In the City of Stockholm, Fokus Järva has therefore been launched. It concerns investments in safety work, school breakfast, strengthened student health, housing, social services, local jobs, and entrepreneurship. But without state interventions, more police, active labor market policy, and not least a dismantling of the destructive market school, we Social Democrats in Stockholm will not be able to succeed fully. How does the Prime Minister follow up on this nationally significant investment in our capital municipality?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! As we just said, these are the consequences of an irresponsible immigration policy over a very long period. It is not possible to get around that point. It does not help to say this now, but had we not had such large-scale immigration over such a long period and built up segregated societies with poor integration policy, these problems would not have existed today. It is obvious, and one must admit that.

Therefore, one must start with the very first thing. Do not return to a policy of increased immigration to Sweden. Then we worsen the problems. A stricter immigration policy is a necessary prerequisite to manage the integration of those who have arrived.

Then we are back to the fundamentals. It is a school with order and discipline and with knowledge requirements and not a "flumskola" (vague/loose school). The Swedish language should be introduced early. If one does not speak Swedish at home, one should attend a language preschool and learn Swedish very early in different ways.

There must be requirements for work and self-sufficiency. People shall move to where the jobs are. We have 300,000 unemployed in Sweden and a shortage when it comes to many jobs in many places. That is where the solutions are.

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

Elsa Widding (-)

Madam Speaker! A revision of the international health regulations is currently underway, which the Prime Minister surely is aware of. On 27 May 2022, the World Health Assembly adopted decisions on five revisions of the health regulations. They are called IHR. This was not preceded by any discussion here in the chamber or anywhere else. It is otherwise practice that the member countries should be given access to the changes four months before they are decided.

It is about the ratification period being ten months instead of 18 months. Only two months later it shall become law. Now the ratification period expires. It has been 18 months on December 1st. It is very important that it does not go through. They are now negotiating 307 amendments that they are to make decisions on.

My question to the Prime Minister is whether he will submit a reservation before December 1.

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! I acknowledge my imperfection on this issue. I do not have the answer to that question. I am usually quite well-informed and well-read on questions that I believe a Prime Minister must be able to answer. That does not mean at all that it is an unimportant question, but I do not have the answer. I am happy to refer it to the Minister for Finance, Jakob Forssmed.

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

Aylin Nouri (S)

Madam Speaker! On Monday, I visited a fifth-grade class in Hjällbo in Gothenburg. The children described how they are afraid to go out when it is dark, how the reckless gang violence affects them daily. They have experienced explosions in their area. Students have lost innocent family members. They pleaded desperately for help.

The children feel that they are being punished twice. Gang violence does not disappear from their streets. At the same time, extracurricular activities in schools and community life are being shut down as the government's resources have decreased. The children have also sent letters about this to the Prime Minister.

My question to Ulf Kristersson is: What is the message to the students at Eriksboskolan? Will the children have to pay the price for the government's paralysis?

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

Statsministern Ulf Kristersson (M)

Madam Speaker! It was a bit unclear what it was that constituted paralysis. The Government is not closing any preschools anywhere, least of all in Gothenburg. Absolutely not. Those questions must, in that case, be posed to those who decide in Gothenburg.

However, the answer is that we stand on the children's side. We fight the criminals who make children afraid to go out. We ensure that all the law-abiding people in those areas, all these children's parents who go to work during the day, shall dare to be there.

We are introducing visitation zones. It would be good if more were on board with that journey. It is about anonymous witnesses so that people dare to testify and secret coercive measures so that the police can find those who commit the serious crimes. We stand on those children's side to combat serious crime. More should do so.

The Prime Minister's question time is hereby concluded.

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