Response to interpellation 2024/25:121 on global partnership for decent working conditions and inclusive growth
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M argues that Sweden should let other partners take a more prominent role in Global Deal to support the initiative's development into an independent international project 1. 1 The Government emphasizes the importance of synergies between trade and aid where the private sector plays a key role in creating decent jobs 1. 2 M argues that the concept of fair trade is unclear and that a strict definition risks hindering free trade agreements 2. 3 4 5 S considers that the government should be more active in Global Deal and expresses concern that the government is backing away from the initiative and abandoning the goal of fair trade 3 4 5. M argues that there are reasons to raise violations of human civil and political rights in the workplace in both bilateral dialogues and in other contexts.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! Sofia Amloh has asked me what measures I and the government intend to take to strengthen and develop Global Deals' ambitions to conduct progressive dialogue together with the labor market's partners, within Sweden's international development cooperation.
Global Deal is a global partnership that has been run by the OECD since 2018 in cooperation with the ILO, and whose work constitutes a contribution to the implementation of Agenda 2030.
During 2023, Sweden contributed 6 million kronor to Global Deal and participated in the partnership's work, including as chair of the steering committee. During 2024, Sweden contributes a final support to Global Deal of 3 million kronor.
Sweden was for a long time the sole donor to Global Deal. In recent years, both the number of partners and the external funding for Global Deal have increased, which we welcome. In light of the positive development of Global Deal's activities and as part of supporting the development of Global Deal into an independent international initiative, we make the assessment that the time is ripe for other partners to take a more prominent role, including regarding the chairmanship.
Sweden remains for the time being as both a partner and a steering committee member.
Regarding the dialogue with the parties in the labor market, the government confirms the importance of this in connection with Sweden's international development cooperation and intends to also work for effective social dialogue in the future.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Mr. Speaker! In 2016, Sweden joined the Global Deal initiative. It is an initiative for tripartite cooperation with a focus on social dialogue, inclusive growth, and partnerships between governments, companies, employer organizations, trade unions, civil society, and other organizations.
The goal of the partnership in Global Deal is to take advantage of and contribute to a platform that highlights the value of social dialogue and strengthens existing cooperation structures. Global Deal contributes to promoting social dialogue in consultations and negotiations between representatives of governments, employers, and employer organizations in economic, social, and political issues. It has contributed to equal, competitive societies.
The Social Democrats' hope is that Global Deal can contribute even more in a global perspective to achieving the goals of decent work and sustainable development in the UN's Agenda 2030.
Given the government's increased focus on trade and business regarding international aid, shouldn't Global Deal be able to be included as an important piece of that? It feels a bit strange that the government has such a focus but does not bring in Global Deal, which is an international initiative that works with exactly that.
Mr. Speaker! If the government now remains as a partner and steering committee member - in the response from the Minister, we did indeed hear that one remains for the time being - one does not do that without having any ambitions. The Minister should be able to point to some thoughts and ambitions regarding what one is to do, drive, and act for within the initiative. My question is whether the Minister can specify a bit more how the Minister views it.
Regarding the dialogue with the labor market parties and the focus on social dialogue in Sweden's international development work, Global Deal should, as stated, be able to be a part of it. Or is Global Deal's work seen as something that cannot be linked to aid? I am becoming uncertain about the government's position here.
If one now refers to the fact that the dialogue with the parties in the labor market should take place outside of Global Deal, can the Minister then give some examples of how the social dialogue could take place from another platform in the international development work? I am thinking mostly of what we heard in the answer about streamlining the social dialogue. Does it apply within the initiative or some other platform?
The answer we have received here in the chamber today is the same as the one the previous minister gave almost a year ago and actually not much more. Therefore, my questions remain. Are there more thoughts on in what way this initiative could be driven forward?
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! The private sector has a key role in creating productive employment with decent working conditions. It is therefore important to enable investments in sustainable entrepreneurship in low- and middle-income countries that create decent jobs, lead to economic growth, and enable people to escape poverty. The synergies between trade and aid are therefore a priority for the government.
The business sector has a very important role to play in the work for sustainable development. Swedish companies should continue to be at the forefront in terms of sustainability and social responsibility. The Government has a clear expectation that Swedish companies act sustainably and responsibly by working for human rights, equality, good working conditions, environment and climate, and anti-corruption. Companies' operations shall not cause, contribute to, or be linked to abuses or violations of human rights.
In accordance with the reform agenda, the government now intends to identify sectors where the interests of development cooperation and the business sector coincide and see how we can strengthen that work, where Swedish companies can contribute with knowledge, innovation, sustainable solutions, and financial resources. The government thus shows the way for how trade can contribute to both economic and social development and a sustainable transition, among other things by strengthening the Team Sweden work within sustainable entrepreneurship, through contributions to Swedish companies' opportunities to act sustainably and responsibly, as well as by continuing to promote international policy development.
The Government assesses that the work we are now doing to strengthen the synergies between trade and aid, and our clear focus on human freedoms and rights, democracy, and the principles of the rule of law within aid, will also contribute to creating conditions for stronger rights and decent working conditions for the worker. The work to strengthen the synergies between trade and aid is also carried out in a Team Sweden context in close cooperation with actors in the business sector.
Sweden was for a long time the sole donor to Global Deal, as mentioned earlier. The Government assesses that the time is now ripe for other partners to have a more prominent role in Global Deal. The assessment is made against the background of a positive development of Global Deal's activities and membership base and is a step in supporting the development of Global Deal into an independent international initiative.
Sweden remains, as said, for the time being as both a partner and a steering committee member.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for that answer, Minister! It still broadens the picture of the government's work when it comes to trade and aid. The government's direction for that has been quite well known for some time.
Sweden has a fairly long tradition when it comes to standing up for trade policy to ensure global trade. The benefits of global trade are shared by everyone. Everyone needs to be able to share in that profit, in this cake, so that we also level out differences. Given that we are currently in an incredibly turbulent and restless time, we see increased trade conflicts and geopolitical tensions. Therefore, it is more important than ever that Sweden truly takes initiative and is proactive for a fair international trade.
When the government took office in 2022, the goal of the trade policy was changed so that the goal of fair trade was abandoned. Why is it no longer included when we need to ensure that as many as possible can benefit from the trade policy and the global development? That is, in some way, what this initiative and partnership, the entire Global Deal, is about.
I perhaps need to say quite honestly in this context that Global Deal is very similar to the order we have in the Swedish labor market. In the Swedish model, which we are talking about here, we have an order where the parties, i.e., employees and employers, resolve very many of the issues in the labor market, and the state is a third party. They should ensure that we get a labor market that is as organized and flexible as possible, so that when things arise, it is possible to resolve what is required.
It has served us well for very many years. It is one of the reasons why Sweden has so few strike days and why we have had a good development regarding productive days in the form of GDP and the welfare we have built in our country. All of this relies very much on the Swedish model. Global Deal is an answer in an international context to put the security in decent jobs in relation to what trade can generate and that we get this distribution.
Why has the government not retained the emphasis that trade should be fair? Why was it abandoned in the new goal for trade policy when it might be needed more than ever? In what way will this be done within the Global Deal initiative? Does the government actually intend to slip out of this initiative as a result of trade no longer being fair?
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! Respect for human freedoms and rights is fundamental to Swedish foreign policy and is, of course, a starting point in our trade and aid policy. In multilateral forums, Sweden consistently works for the upholding of human freedoms and rights. This includes freedom of expression, freedom of association, and workers' rights. Support for civil society, human rights defense, freedom of expression, and freedom of organization is intimately linked with the defense of workers' rights. Promoting freedom and combating oppression for all individuals is an important thematic priority within the framework of the government's reform agenda for aid, Aid for a new era - Freedom, empowerment, and sustainable growth.
In the government's global strategy for work on human freedoms and rights, democracy and the principles of the rule of law, the government places a greater focus on the individuals who every day fight for their freedom around the world. Of the Swedish aid channeled via Sida, approximately one quarter went to the area of human freedoms and rights, democracy and the principles of the rule of law in 2023. In addition to this, core support from UD to UN organizations as well as from the Ministry of Employment to ILO is added. To promote freedom and combat oppression of all individuals is also an important thematic priority within the framework of the government's reform agenda for aid as a whole.
Regarding the question linked to fair trade, I specifically know that there is a dividing line between the government's policy and the opposition parties. One can state that strong protectionist winds are blowing all around the world. Fair trade is not a clearly internationally recognized concept. If we are to speak plainly, different parties in the opposition place different weight on what it actually means.
In the most recent free trade agreements that the EU has signed, there are thousands of pages where agreements are made on several different important areas concerning human rights issues. If we are to define fair trade clearly, the government sees a great risk that it would in practice mean less free trade, fewer free trade agreements, and that the free trade negotiations that are ongoing will also take longer.
It is of course easy in theory to say that one is for fair trade, but in practice, what the Social Democrats are saying now risks meaning that we do not get a free trade agreement with India, Mercosur, the Gulf states, or Indonesia. I think that the Social Democrats need to be more honest with the Swedish people in that case, if one has changed position and is no longer a bastion for free trade as the trade union movement and the Social Democrats have been historically.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Mr. Speaker! The former Minister for Foreign Trade has said that Sweden should take a step back and that other parties should take a more prominent role. This is said in a time when we have incredible turbulence. We have trade conflicts around the corner. In such a time, the government thinks that Sweden should take a step back.
It is now that Sweden should put in another gear or perhaps even two gears. We should act within an existing initiative such as Global Deal, which monitors and promotes the cooperation structures that already exist and have been developed over a fairly short period with a Swedish government as the initiator. It is about sitting down with all relevant organizations, governments, and companies that need to handle the issues raised within the framework of this. If one backs off and lets others lead this, it is a very passive role.
My question therefore remains. Does the government have the ambition to glide away from an already existing platform that is about strengthening the social dialogue and leave it to its fate and let others potentially take over? Does the government intend, with small and unspecified measures, thoughts and ambitions, to gradually withdraw from this and no longer be a part of it? Does one intend to back off and be even more passive and let Global Deal go into the grave? Is it the government's ambition?
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! As previously pointed out, the government now makes the assessment that the time is ripe for other partners to take a more prominent role in Global Deal. The assessment is made against the background of the positive development of Global Deal's activities and membership base that we have seen in order to support the development of Global Deal to become a more independent international initiative.
The Government has an ongoing dialogue with representatives from civil society to discuss, among other things, issues concerning human freedoms and rights. UD, for example, conducts regular consultations with civil society and trade union organizations within the MR-council meetings.
UD also has other forms of cooperation that include trade union organizations, for example linked to the work with the OECD's guidelines for multinational enterprises on responsible business conduct. Sweden has committed to promoting the guidelines by establishing a national contact point, NKP, to which various stakeholders can report companies that they believe have violated the OECD's guidelines. Sweden's NKP is a tripartite cooperation between the state, business organizations, and the unions.
There are reasons for this, and I will raise violations of human civil and political rights in the workplace in both bilateral dialogues and in other contexts.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.