Response to interpellation 2024/25:336 on the economic situation of families with children

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Madam Speaker! I have been asked what measures I and the government intend to take to ensure that families with children do not have to live in economic vulnerability during 2025.

The previous high inflation has hit Swedish households hard, not least households with children. The government has acted to support households in general and the weakest households in particular. We are working on this issue on a broad front. In the budget bill for 2025, an analysis is presented of the effects on households' economic standard as a result of the government's policy during the mandate period. The analysis clearly shows that the economic standard has increased most in percentage terms in the tenth of the population that has the lowest economic standard, and least in the two top income groups.

The expansive budget that the Riksdag approved last year is aimed at getting more people into work and increasing growth and productivity. This is achieved, among other things, through extensive investments in infrastructure, research and education, but also in the area of social insurance. Among other things, 100 million kronor to finance a number of measures to strengthen the return to work. This involves, among other things, increased coordination of rehabilitation efforts, work-oriented rehabilitation support, and a review of the possibility of partial sickness and activity allowance during studies.

The economic family policy shall contribute to a good economic standard of living for all families with children. The welfare state is important for families who are struggling. The temporary supplementary grant in the housing allowance has been an important measure to support households in a time of increased living costs. To strengthen the economic situation for those who have had it the hardest, the government has, on five occasions, extended the temporary supplementary grant to families with children within the housing allowance. We have also increased the supplementary grant when the needs were assessed as greatest.

During the high inflation years 2023 and 2024, the price base amount was adjusted upwards by a historical 8.7 and 9.1 percent, just to compensate for the high inflation and the higher prices. In kronor and öre, this means that the price base amount has been increased by 10,500 kronor, from 48,300 to 58,800. For example, for a person with maximum income-related sickness compensation, this means 4,246 kronor more per month, and the person who has guarantee compensation receives 2,432 kronor more per month compared to 2022.

But the best tool for breaking economic vulnerability and counteracting low economic standards is one's own income from work. The Government is therefore working to increase both the incentives and the drivers to move from benefits to work. We are lowering taxes on work and pensions primarily for low- and middle-income earners and removing the highest marginal taxes to increase the drivers for work, education, and effort at work. It is only a growing economy that can sustain the welfare of the future and higher wages.

In this speech, Caroline Högström (M) agreed.

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

Sanne Lennström (S)

Madam Speaker! From our ministers, we often hear in this chamber that the fight against inflation is won and that Sweden is heading towards brighter times. That may be the feeling at Rosenbad, but not around many of the kitchen tables across our country. The month of poverty, January, may be behind us, but many still have large holes in their bank accounts after Christmas and New Year.

Families with children have it extra tough in economic crises, because there are many changing needs. The children will soon need spring shoes. The T-shirts might be too small for the summer, and a new swimsuit might be needed for swimming lessons.

Inflation may have backed off, but rents have not, and neither have food prices, as is known. Food prices increased by 2.8 percent last year, and according to Matpriskollen, we have probably not seen the end yet. Food prices have increased by a full 25 percent in three years, and the Consumer Agency says that the average family in Sweden spends 11,600 kronor on food per month.

The government's ministers can talk and give tips about sale prices, about being unfaithful to their grocery store and about working and getting promoted - these and many other small tips I have heard in this chamber. But let me be clear: This is already what many families with children do. It is not possible to say that the work principle applies, for it is a mockery of the hard-working nursing assistant who is a single parent with three children to say that she should be promoted or work more.

The government must face reality, and the reality is that families with children are already on their knees because of the cost crisis. They still are; it hasn't become any brighter. And they are, despite working. Majblomman, for example, can testify that more families are seeking help now, even though one or two parents are working. Juice, cocoa, dairy products, vegetables, diapers, and coffee are just some of the products that have increased more in price. Cooking fat is another. These are the types of goods that families with children need.

Madam Speaker! This is not the first time I have had this debate about the finances of families with children here in the chamber, and it certainly won't be the last either. What worries me is that it does not feel like the Minister and the government want to understand exactly how serious the situation is. I have tried to use statistics. I refer to Majblomman, Bris, Rädda Barnen and various reports. But there is no increased child allowance. Instead, the supplement to the housing allowance was lowered, which means less money in the pockets of the country's most vulnerable families with children. There is no bank tax, because then it would be a pity for the banks. But high-income earners received many thousands in tax cuts.

The priorities and reality do not add up for me. Kristersson has said that families with children are having a tough time, but where do we see the measures?

Madam Speaker! We try again with a story from reality, so we shall see if the Minister agrees that something needs to be done. According to an article in Aftonbladet on January 20, a 39-year-old mother of three was forced to skip meals to make the finances work. She could not afford winter boots for her children. This mother has a job, but she is single. The finances are meager to say the least, and she is ashamed. When pizza is to be ordered, she tells the other adults that her family is not that hungry and can manage to share a small pizza.

My question to the Minister is simple. Is it to be the case in Sweden in 2025 that a mother cannot eat three meals a day? What does the Minister want to say to her?

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

Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)

Madam Speaker! My colleague Sanne Lennström has asked the Minister what measures the Minister and the government intend to take to ensure that families with children do not have to live in economic vulnerability in 2025. It is a very important issue and something that I have previously debated with several in the government.

The Minister says that the government is acting to support households in general and the weakest households in particular. But this is not true. Unfortunately, the reality in Sweden is such that there is an A-team and a B-team. And the government prioritizes the A-team. This is done through large tax cuts for the richest and deteriorations for the weakest groups in our society.

We know that the government chose to lower the tax by 3,000-4,000 kronor per month for those with the highest income - at the same time as more families with children are being evicted, there are record numbers of families with children at the Enforcement Authority and ordinary families with children are struggling to make ends meet. This is, for me, a completely unreasonable prioritization that definitely does not make things easier for the most vulnerable families with children, regardless of what the Minister and the government claim. Sweden will not be strengthened by those who already have the most getting even more, at the expense of ordinary people.

The Minister also mentions the government's work to get more people into work. But the reality is that unemployment has increased under this government. Since the SD government took office, unemployment has increased to the highest level in ten years, apart from the pandemic years. Housing construction has crashed. Large companies plan to lay off thousands of employees. The number of bankruptcies continues to rise sharply in Sweden. And the number of layoffs within health and social care is the highest in over a decade.

Such a challenging situation needs to be met with an active labor market policy and concrete measures to save jobs instead of tax cuts for the very richest, cuts of billions of kronor on labor market policy, and hints that the unemployed could probably get a job if they only exerted themselves a little more.

Madam Speaker! It has now been just over two years since the government took office, and I wonder exactly what the Minister means has become better since then for the families with children with the smallest margins.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the Minister for the answer to this interpellation. I also want to emphasize that it is an important issue that the interpellator raises; it has been tough years for the families.

But 2025 looks set to be a better year economically for Swedish households than they have experienced in a long time. Swedish families with children's expenses are expected to decrease by an average of 2,100 kronor per month this year compared to the previous year. Contributing factors are lower mortgage interest rates and falling electricity prices. Furthermore, Sverigedemokraterna and the government have prioritized tax cuts on fuels, which has benefited families with children in the countryside, where one is often dependent on the car.

In addition to households having lower expenses, their incomes will also increase. The government's tax cuts for 2025 will provide an average of 750 kronor more per month for a household with two adults. Furthermore, real wage increases of 3 percent are expected, which will add an additional 1,750 kronor.

Madam Speaker! The family policy supports shall contribute to ensuring that households with children reach a good economic standard of living. The supports that exist in expenditure area 12, Economic security for families and children, make a difference. During 2023, the proportion of households with children with a low economic standard was 15 percent. Without the supports, that figure would have been 24 percent. But of course, we need to bring that figure down further.

Looking back historically, one can see that the proportion of child households with a low economic standard has decreased. The proportion was 17 percent in 2020, 16 percent in 2021, 15.3 percent in 2022 and, as I mentioned, 15 percent in 2023. I can state that the proportion of child households with a low economic standard continues to decrease, despite the fact that we have had tough years with the pandemic and high inflation.

Madam Speaker! Family policy alone cannot contribute to a good economic standard of living for all families. There are large differences between different child-rearing households that are almost permanent over time when it comes to levels and economic development. One must be aware that households that have a weaker connection to the labor market tend to have a poorer economy. Work is always a basis for a secure economy. Parents in employment are of great importance for the family to have a secure economy.

Madam Speaker! The Government and the Sweden Democrats argue that it must be profitable to work. In order to facilitate parents' ability to go to their work, a parental insurance is needed that is flexible for the families' needs, so that one can put the family puzzle together.

We can look at the legislative proposals that became reality during the past year. It has now become possible to transfer parental leave in a broader circle. It is a step to facilitate combining family life and work life. We have also increased the number of double days from 30 to 60. They can be taken until the child is 15 months old, which has also increased the flexibility and freedom of choice in the parental insurance.

The double days have proven to have several positive effects besides increased flexibility. Parents get a joint opportunity to form closer bonds with their children at an early stage when the child has come into the world. It also lays the foundation for shared responsibility, which can result in a more equal uptake of parental days.

Now my speaking time is starting to run out, but I want to emphasize that we have a parental insurance that is supposed to be flexible for today's family life, so that one can combine work life with the family puzzle.

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

Arber Gashi (S)

Madam Speaker! I want to take you to a reality that all too many families with children in Sweden live in right now. It is a reality that is felt in the stomach and in the heart in every choice that must be made in the grocery store or when the children ask for new winter shoes.

I am thinking of Emma, who is a single mother of two children. She works full-time in healthcare but still cannot make the money stretch. She turns over every krona, hunts for extra prices, and has stopped buying meat because the food budget doesn't hold. Still, it is not enough. When winter came and the children needed new outdoor clothes, she was forced to borrow money, which she knows she will have difficulty paying back.

I am thinking of Ali and Sara, who both work. Their rent has increased so much that they are forced to choose between paying the electricity bill or giving the children money for extracurricular activities. Football practice, horse riding - things that give children community, joy, and a meaningful leisure time - have had to be cut. They feel ashamed when their son has to decline an invitation to a party because they cannot afford a gift.

These are not unusual stories. This is the reality for many families with children in Sweden today. It is parents who struggle but still cannot make ends meet. It is children who have to get used to having to forgo and always having to choose what to leave out.

At the same time, we see how child poverty is increasing. Majblomman reports that more children than ever are living in economic vulnerability. Bris warns about children who call and say that they do not get enough to eat at home. They tell of children who call and say that they are afraid of "inflammation" when they have heard their parents worry about inflation.

And it just becomes harder and harder, because while the prices of food and housing are still high, inflation has started to rise again. Unemployment has increased significantly since the government took office, which means even more families are now losing their economic security.

Those who watched Nyhetsdagen - what was previously called Nyhetsmorgon - this morning could learn that the number of evictions has almost doubled in a couple of years. But what is the government doing? Well, they stand passive. The government closes its eyes to this crisis and says that it has done enough. They talk time and again about the work line, but how does that help the children here and now when parents lose their jobs and food prices continue to pressure household finances?

How can it ever be enough when children in Sweden go hungry, when parents lie awake at night wondering how they will pay the bills, and when more and more children grow up in poverty in one of the world's richest countries? Madam Speaker! This is not worthy of Sweden.

I therefore wonder if the Minister for Social Insurance is satisfied with all the measures that have been taken, or does she intend to take more to alleviate the financial situation of families with children?

(Applause)

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

Louise Thunström (S)

Madam Speaker! Work shall mean security. The person who goes to work every day shall be able to pay their bills, put food on the table, and give their children a good start in life.

The importance of work for people's freedom and independence cannot be overstated. I believe we all agree on that completely in this chamber.

But the reality looks different. Today, there are families where parents work but still cannot make the finances work. There are children who see their parents struggling but are still forced to forgo things that should be a given.

During the pandemic, a temporary supplement to the housing allowance was introduced to support families with children. It has been extended several times, both by the previous Social Democratic government and by the current government. Now the government chooses to extend it again, but with a reduction. The justification is that an improvement in the economic situation is expected. But the government's claim that the need for the support has decreased does not hold - it is simply wrong. Not everyone is getting better off.

Madam Speaker! The government's and the Sweden Democrats' picture of a brighter economic situation does not apply to the households struggling to manage everyday life. Rent increases hit them hard. Food prices continue to rise. Interest rate cuts primarily benefit those who own their homes - not single parents in rental apartments.

Four out of ten single-person households are forced to borrow to cover rent, electricity, and food. Almost half cannot afford nutritious food every day. It is parents who worry about the next electricity bill. It is children who learn not to ask for new shoes, because they know there is no money. It is single mothers who take extra weekend shifts while the children look after their younger siblings.

More than half of low-income parents have had to say no to their children's extracurricular activities. The Swedish Sports Confederation writes in a report that parents pay an average of 9,400 kronor per year for a child to be able to play football.

It is children and young people who have to bear the cost crisis. The government's response to this is a leisure card - a grant that is incredibly expensive to administer, which does not hit the mark and furthermore is not even in place. Increased child allowance and housing allowance, on the other hand, would have helped here and now. I mean that it is crucial for these families.

Majblomman and other organizations are warning of a sharp increase in families seeking support for basic necessities, such as food and diapers. Single parents testify that they have to prioritize being at home when the children are sick, because they cannot afford to be at home when they themselves are sick. The care deduction, in fact, hits those who have the least.

Madam Speaker! There is always money for tax cuts for the richest, but not for powerful measures for the most vulnerable. Sweden is plummeting in the equality index and is now the worst in the Nordic countries. Welfare is in crisis, and costs are being shifted onto the individual. Single parents with children are one of the most economically vulnerable groups in Sweden. Yet, the government chooses to reduce their support. What is the reason that just those families should bear the burden? Is it reasonable that the children who already live in the greatest vulnerability should receive even less?

(Applause)

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! I thought I would start with what the Minister read out in his response at the beginning of the debate: But the best tool to break economic vulnerability and counteract low economic standard is own income from work.

Yes, I completely agree. But today we are actually no longer talking about low economic standard. We are talking about pure and utter poverty. This is already completely obvious in this debate, with so many examples from my colleagues. They show that it does not pay to work with this government.

Today, the newspaper Kommunalarbetaren published its review. There are thousands of care assistants who do an incredibly important job, 24/7, and who exert themselves to the highest degree - I hope the Minister also agrees with that. They cannot live on their salary. They are in the red by almost 1,500 kronor every month. This was calculated based on an average salary and that the care assistant works 100 percent and is single with an eight-year-old. One goes back 1,500 kronor every month.

Then I actually wonder in what way it pays to work, when it doesn't. When you don't have any money left in your wallet, when the money is gone, and there are still days left until payday, it cannot be this that is the point.

Perhaps I recoil particularly when one talks about the effort at work. Should one tell the thousands of healthcare assistants that they should exert more effort and that it would pay off? They lie awake at night when it comes to being able to put food on the table or making the finances work. We have stood here many times, over several years. A year ago, we stood here in the chamber and accounted for what is the reality out there every day for many, especially single mothers, who do everything in their power to make it work.

They take out loans. They sell on Blocket. If they had any kronor saved, they used them a long time ago. And so we have to listen to the Minister today who says, Madam Speaker, that enough has been done and that it is easing up. The rents are still very high, and we get reports every month about food prices. We see organization after organization speaking about how bad the situation is, and we do not get any more answers from the Minister.

I hope, Madam Speaker, that the Minister will take the opportunity to present some more solutions that would make it easier so that one at least does not go 1,500 kronor minus every month.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Madam Speaker! Member Lennström describes in her speech the situation of a hard-working single woman with several children. She has a tough economic situation. I have a very great respect for the fact that it is tough and that it is difficult to support one's family alone. There is no doubt about the matter.

If I remember correctly, Madam Speaker, this woman lived in Stockholm and had been hit hard by the Social Democrats' increased taxes both in the municipality and in the region. In addition, there was a rather substantial increase in the prices of SL cards. And, Madam Speaker, the bus she took every day to and from work was not withdrawn but did not run as often, which made it more difficult to take certain shifts.

It is expensive to be poor, someone has said. That is true. But it is particularly devastating when one lives in a municipality governed by Social Democrats with high taxes.

Just as the member previously pointed out, it must pay more to work. I am pleased that we agree on that matter, because it pays too little to work. One must be able to keep more of the wage that one has worked for. And it must pay more, Madam Speaker, to move from benefits to work. It cannot be ignored that the best tool—if one is not working—to break the economic vulnerability is income from work. Gainful employment plays a decisive role for the economic standard. It also plays a decisive role if one can move from part-time to full-time.

We are in a recession, as several have mentioned, with a relatively high unemployment rate. The Government has taken several measures to address the challenges with unemployment and economic vulnerability.

The expansive budget that the Riksdag approved last year is aimed at getting more people into work and increasing precisely growth and productivity. This is achieved, among other things, through extensive investments in infrastructure, research and education, but also in the area of social insurance, which we are talking about.

The government is working to increase both the incentives and the drivers when it comes to moving from benefits to work. We are lowering taxes on work for those who work and for pensioners, and in doing so, we primarily target low- and middle-income earners. We are also removing the highest marginal taxes to increase the drivers for work, education, and effort at work, and to perhaps move from part-time to full-time.

It is only in a growing economy that we can sustain future welfare and higher wages.

One of the most important measures, Madam Speaker, when it comes to establishing oneself long-term on the labor market or, for that matter, seeking further employment, is education. In the budget bill for 2025, the Government has provided an additional 900 million kronor, including student grants, for approximately 11,000 new places in regional vocational adult education in komvux. Furthermore, the grant for mentors in lärlingsvux is being doubled. In this way, we hope that more people will educate themselves and take the important jobs, not least the jobs we have talked about here. It is about healthcare assistants, nursing assistants or, for that matter, bus drivers. These are professions with large shortages in our society. With this, we can also manage the competence supply.

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

Sanne Lennström (S)

Madam Speaker! Member Persson says that he expects improvements in the future for the country's families with children. But the country's families with children cannot eat expected improvements. The situation that we members describe here and now exists. Therefore, the measures must also be implemented here and now.

Families with children are having a very tough time. I hope this has come across from all the stories in this chamber tonight. In February, food prices increased avalanche-like, by record amounts. Families with children are having a tough time not only in Stockholm, Minister Tenje. Families with children are having a tough time everywhere. We members who are participating in the debate here tonight are from different parts of the country. I am completely convinced that it is possible to find families with children who are having a tough time in northernmost Norrland and all the way down to Ystad.

Everywhere in our country, families with children are having a tough time. There are very many who can testify to this on social media, in newspaper articles, or if you just ask them. I was at a meeting with Kommunal last week. Everyone nodded in agreement when we talked about the tough economic situation of families with children.

Some others who know how tough parents can have it right now are Makalösa Föräldrar. They have recently released a report showing that their members, i.e., single parents – those who have it absolutely toughest right now – generally lack 3,029 kronor every month. Makalösa Föräldrar are asking for political changes, not for a life of luxury, but just to have a bearable everyday life where the finances can balance.

One points out that the government's latest budget, with a reduced supplement to the housing allowance, provided less in the wallet for single parents. They received less money, while expenses such as food prices and rent continue to increase. The equation simply does not add up. Left behind are the single parents who suffer, and not least, their children take the hit for the cost crisis we have seen.

As several have mentioned in this chamber tonight, it becomes a constant pressure and stress for these parents to manage everyday life. Many feel anxiety and have difficulty sleeping. Several eventually go on sick leave due to exhaustion as well. I hope that the Minister can agree with me that more sick leaves are truly not what this country needs. It is not good for either the individual or society. It is something that we all lose out on.

The mother in Aftonbladet was asked how it would feel to actually have enough money for the household budget to balance. She answered that it probably would have made her stand straighter and that it would also have reduced the stress and worry she has inside her. Maybe she would have been able to sleep better at night without lying there thinking about how she would manage, she said.

The truth is that this stress does not only lie with the parents. As several have mentioned, the children also take on a role by not asking for those shoes or that new winter jacket. One might say oneself that one is no longer so interested in that football thing, even though one actually just knows that the parents actually cannot afford it. It can also be smaller things, such as getting sick on an outdoor day and thus missing school activities that one's peers can participate in. This is very serious and a situation that is not worthy of Sweden 2025.

My question to the Minister is therefore: How does the government intend to help Caroline and all other families with children across the whole of Sweden who are struggling to make ends meet? The truth is that it is not about SL cards. It is about the fact that families with children across our entire country are having an extremely tough time, and the government has a responsibility because there is a goal in the economic policy that we should have an equitable economy among the families with children in our country.

(Applause)

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

Ida Ekeroth Clausson (S)

Madam Speaker! Does the government believe in its own policy? The Minister mentions the increase of the housing allowance which they have now chosen not to extend. For many families with children, the housing cost is the largest cost. The increase of the housing allowance was introduced to support those families with children who have it toughest financially. Now the government chooses to completely withdraw the support starting from July 2025.

This gives an impression that rents are falling and that it will become cheaper to live. But that is not the case. Once again, the government's rhetoric does not match reality. The dramatic price increase that has occurred in recent years due to the inflation that hit the entire world still remains.

We Social Democrats stand on the side of families with children. We therefore proposed a permanent increase of the housing allowance to the original level. This would have given a family with maximum housing allowance 2,100 kronor more per month from July onwards.

The Minister also addressed tax cuts for those with the lowest incomes in his response. The difference is that for a person who – like the Minister – earns around 150,000 kronor a month, a tax cut of 3,000 kronor a month awaits, while a person who has Sweden's most common job, assistant nurse, instead receives a tax cut of 150 kronor a month.

Madam Speaker! The Minister and I agree that work is the best way to achieve self-sufficiency. But making deteriorations in the security system when unemployment is increasing sounds to me like a very moderate way to protect children from a low economic standard.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Since this is my final contribution to the debate, I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Minister for this interpellation debate!

The interpellator claims in their interpellation that the country's most vulnerable families with children have actually received less money in their wallets after the government's latest budget. They are referring more or less exclusively to the fact that the temporary supplement to the housing allowance is going from a level of 40 percent to a level of 25 percent. Historically, however, the temporary support has been at 25 percent, that is from the year 2020 until the end of June 2023. From July 1, 2023, and during the previous year, the level was 40 percent, with reference to that high inflation pressured households - in particular households with children.

Madam Speaker! 25 percent was therefore a level that prevailed under the Social Democratic-led government and the level that will now apply. As I explained in my previous contribution, however, other factors such as lower fuel prices, tax cuts, lower interest rates, lower electricity prices and real wage increases will affect household finances positively. This will also hit broadly.

I also assume that the Minister will follow the economic development for families with children during this year. But as said, much indicates that there is a brightening in the economy.

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

Arber Gashi (S)

Madam Speaker! This is not a Stockholm problem. This is a much larger problem than that. Both I, as a resident of Halländ, and the Minister, as a resident of Småland, know that there is a larger world out there beyond Stockholm.

Child poverty is increasing at the same time as the government has spent billions on giving even more to those who already have the most. While families with children struggle with electricity bills and food prices, the government has lowered taxes for high-income earners and wealthy entrepreneurs. It is a policy that makes Sweden colder, the gaps wider, and the future harder for far too many children.

We Social Democrats would have chosen a different path. We would also have lowered the tax for ordinary, working people. But at the same time, we would have increased the child allowance, a benefit that reaches all children but which makes the biggest difference for those who are struggling the most here and now. We would have increased the student grant so that young people from working-class families get a more reasonable financial situation during high school. We would have continued to have the increased housing allowance that the government has now chosen not to extend, even though families need it more than ever.

These are concrete proposals that make a difference. They help families get by, reduce child poverty, and give more children a more secure upbringing. But the government says no and argues that an increase in the child allowance would be inefficient and would not hit the mark. Instead, they have chosen to lower the tax on high incomes through an extra tax cut for the few percent who earn the very most. So acts a government and a party that never manages to see those who stand furthest back in the queue.

We Social Democrats will never accept such a development. We will continue to fight for a policy where families with children are prioritized and not left behind, where no children should have to grow up in poverty and where Sweden's prosperity comes to everyone – not just those who already have the most.

(Applause)

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

Louise Thunström (S)

Madam Speaker! It is possible to do several things at once. Working for increased growth, letting people enter the workforce, and expanding the education system are all necessary things – there is no doubt about that – but it is not enough here and now. An increased child allowance and an increased housing allowance make a difference. That children grow up in poverty in Sweden in 2025 is not worthy. There is only one word to describe it: injustice.

Madam Speaker! I actually recoiled when I listened to a previous interpellation debate between Member Lennström and the Minister. The Minister said in that debate that it should be more profitable to educate oneself, work, and be industrious, and that people should be encouraged to take that extra evening shift - as if people are not already making an effort. That statement reflects a view of the labor market where it is the individual's effort that is the decisive factor.

What is missing in that type of reasoning is an understanding that people are already exerting themselves today - often to the breaking point. Many professions, not least within healthcare, care, and service, are characterized by long and grueling work shifts. To encourage that extra evening shift in that situation sounds almost provocative for those who are already on their knees.

The question should rather be: How do we ensure that people can manage to work for an entire professional life? How do we create secure working conditions and reasonable wages so that more can support themselves through their work without having to take extra shifts? How do we ensure that education and skills development are accessible to more? And how do we strengthen the conditions for families – especially for single parents?

(Applause)

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for your contributions and answers so far in the debate!

I want to conclude by saying that it is once again completely obvious to everyone listening that with a right-conservative government, we will get tax cuts for those who earn the most. Just as the Minister himself says, it is an incredibly expansive budget and an incredibly large reform space – and half of this large reform space is used to lower taxes.

This is what one chooses to do after all the examples from reality, from north to south, which show how families with children are doing - and especially how single mothers have fared during the recent years. I consider it a direct mockery to then choose such large tax cuts and not to increase the child allowance and the housing supplement. You give several thousand kronor to those who actually do not need tax cuts - those who already have money left in their wallets and do not go 1,500 kronor minus every month and have to take out a loan when they go to the pharmacy, get a bill from the dentist, or need new glasses.

This is incredibly unworthy. I am afraid that, and would not be surprised if, the SD government continues to turn a blind eye to reality and look away. One chooses to look where it is comfortable and bright, because that is what one wants to see - not how reality actually looks every day for so incredibly many around in this country. Probably, they will continue to lower taxes for those who already have.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin by correcting Member Clausson regarding what she stated from the rostrum about that we would abolish the temporary, extended supplementary grant.

The government has, therefore, extended the temporary additional grant to families with children within the housing allowance on five occasions. Now that we have seen that the difficult economic situation has eased somewhat – that is to say, it is not over in any way, but it has at least eased somewhat – the government has extended but scaled down the additional grant. We assess that this is a well-considered measure to still continue supporting economically vulnerable households. But we have, therefore, continued to extend the temporary additional grant. Even though it has gone from 40 to 25 percent, we have not abolished it.

As I began by saying, there have been significant increases for the weakest households during the recent years. That the sickness benefit has increased by over 4,000 SEK per month and the guarantee benefit by nearly 2,500 SEK per month compared to 2022 is precisely about compensating for the high inflation. These and many more supports remain at a significantly higher level, Madam Speaker, and in addition, we have – just as has been discussed several times before – the temporary supplementary grant to the housing allowance, which has been an important measure to specifically support households in a time of increased living costs.

To strengthen the economic situation for those who have had it the hardest, the government has, as I said earlier, extended the temporary supplementary grant to families with children within the housing allowance on five occasions. Taken together, the government's policy means that households' economic standard during the mandate period has increased by the highest percentage in the tenth of the population that has the lowest economic standard and by the least in the top income groups, quite regardless of what the members state from the rostrum, Madam Speaker.

Furthermore, reduced taxes on labor and fuels, as well as electricity subsidies, have constituted important additions to household finances. Just as the member stated earlier, we have a perspective regarding city and country, and where many are dependent on the car in particular, this has had a major impact on household finances. The Government has proven in both words and actions that it protects households in a difficult time.

Benefits are sometimes necessary to support households in a difficult time, Madam Speaker, but they only treat the symptoms of poverty and not the cause of it. We want to improve the economic situation of families with children in the long term, and there is only one solution: that more parents get a job to go to and that they also receive an income they can support their family on. Then it must become more profitable to work, and it must become more profitable to move from benefits to work.

Lowering taxes on work is a very important part of this, and therefore one cannot raise taxes for low- and middle-income earners - not in the municipality, not in the region, and not even at the state level, which the Social Democrats are otherwise very strong supporters of. It is only through work that a long-term dependency on benefits can be broken and people can feel hope and joy over being able to improve not only their own lives but also society as a whole.

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

Sanne Lennström (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for the debate here tonight. However, I still have a feeling of missing answers, and that does not only concern how we are to help the families with children.

It is quite common in the chamber that we might agree on the goal, that is, where we want to go, but not on the means. But during this debate, I have actually become unsure whether we even agree on the goal, that is to say that we do not want families with children living in the type of poverty that has been described this evening.

I know that these interpellation debates very rarely contain any real answers from the ministers, but I would like to challenge the minister to nevertheless answer my question regarding exactly the reality. Is it the case that families with children in Sweden currently have a very tough economic situation? Answer yes or no, Minister Tenje!

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

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Madam Speaker! Many thanks to all members, not least to the interpellator, for the debate tonight!

I think it is very clear that we have different views on what it is that leads to breaking out of exclusion and moving away from a tough economic situation. I emphasize the importance of being able to live on one's salary, that one gets to keep more of one's salary, and that one gets the opportunity to support one's family. It must become more profitable to work, Madam Speaker, but it must also become more profitable for those who do not work today to move from benefits to work.

For that matter, we have a large apparatus from the government's side. We are tackling this issue and this exclusion in many different parts. Today, I have stated that we are continuing with the temporary supplementary grant when it comes to the housing allowance for those families with children who are having it particularly tough right now. For them, it is particularly tough, and precisely because of that, we are continuing with that measure.

We see at the same time that things look better ahead. In that case, it is a matter of building a policy and a budget to invest in economic growth and productivity, so that there are more jobs and so that we can jointly build a strong welfare. It is only through work and by more people working that the welfare can become stronger.

In this speech, Caroline Högström (M) agreed.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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