Response to interpellation 2025/26:357 on Sweden's EU contribution in the negotiations for the next long-term budget

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! Matilda Ernkrans has asked me how I intend to work to ensure that Sweden's EU fee does not increase to the extent that is now proposed, what concrete measures I and the government take in the negotiations to ensure that the Swedish discount is maintained or strengthened, whether I and the government are prepared to oppose a multi-annual budget framework that implies such a substantial cost increase for Sweden, and how I intend to act to reduce the total scope of the budget and thereby limit the member states' fees.

Let me begin by stating that the government's budget-restrictive line in the negotiations is well-anchored in the Riksdag and well-known among other member states. The Commission's proposal is far too expansive. It amounts to approximately 2,000 billion euro for the period 2028–2034, which is a sharp increase compared to today's levels. According to the government's calculations, Sweden's EU fee could increase significantly as a result of the proposal. This is naturally not acceptable, and our starting point in the negotiations is that the total volume must decrease.

The Swedish EU fee must be kept down. This is achieved by limiting the volume of expenditure and by renewing our discount arrangements. Cuts and reprioritizations are necessary to ensure this.

The message that the government has consistently put forward in the negotiations on the EU's multiannual budget framework is that the budget shall continue to amount to around 1 percent of the EU's gross national income. It is important that the EU's future budget is compatible with sound public finances in the member states and the preservation of national fiscal maneuver room. Sustainable public finances in the member states are a prerequisite for being able to meet today's and tomorrow's challenges.

The government is acting actively and together with a group of like-minded member states to keep the budget volume down and renew the discount arrangements. An indication that Sweden's message regarding discounts is getting through is that there is now a wording that opens for continued discounts in the latest negotiation box.

The Government continues to convey the message that the EU budget should focus on areas where the EU has a clear added value, especially where the measures have a clear cross-border EU benefit and where economies of scale can be achieved. In accordance with this, the Government wants to see a policy and a budget that better reflect the EU's current challenges and the Government's four priorities: the war, competitiveness, the climate, and crime.

I myself have had meetings with commissioners and colleagues from many other member states. In connection with the general advice on March 17, I have invited a working breakfast to discuss this issue with colleagues from eight other countries.

The multiannual budget framework is on the agenda for the meeting of heads of state and government in the European Council on March 19–20 and June 18–19. The stated ambition is to reach a negotiated agreement at the end of this year. Whether that is possible remains to be seen.

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

Matilda Ernkrans (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by thanking the Minister for the EU for the answer, even though I must say that it leaves a fair amount to be desired.

We – Sweden, I and the minister – find ourselves in a time when uncertainty is increasing and when the international unrest demands decisions and statements from us on how we should act on the international arena almost every hour and every day. I must say that the concern is great when we have a government that, in this situation, has placed itself in a vice with a party that does not even like the international, or European, arena and which actually does not even think that Sweden should be there.

In this situation, one of many negotiations awaits, namely the one regarding the EU's next long-term budget, the so-called multiannual financial framework. It is often described as "the mother of all negotiations," and that is not without reason. It concerns the EU's budget for the coming seven years and how large fees a country like Sweden shall pay. It is, therefore, about very large sums of money. The negotiation is held as a whole during the general council, where Sweden is represented by EU Minister Jessica Rosencrantz.

The proposal from the EU Commission points towards a budget of around 2,000 billion euros, which is historically extensive. For Sweden's part, this could mean that the Swedish EU fee increases by 60 percent. It would mean a dramatic cost increase, and it is money that in the end shall be paid by Swedish taxpayers, Swedish households and Swedish companies.

When Rosencrantz negotiates for Sweden, she does so with an extra responsibility. The government's own Finance Minister has been clear that the money for the coming years is practically exhausted in the Swedish wallet. In other words: The barns are emptied. In this situation, Sweden's EU fee therefore risks increasing significantly. This is, of course, unacceptable.

When the EU's current long-term budget was negotiated, the government at the time succeeded in securing a historically large discount on the Swedish EU fee. That discount was crucial – it allowed Sweden to continue being a constructive member of the EU while simultaneously safeguarding the interests of the taxpayers.

Now new negotiations await. How will this government act in the General Council, where EU Minister Jessica Rosencrantz represents Sweden?

The responsibility lies with the government. We here in Sweden have the right to know how the government intends to prevent Sweden's EU fee from increasing so sharply, how the government ensures that the Swedish discount is maintained or strengthened, whether the government is prepared to oppose a long-term budget that implies a dramatic cost increase for Sweden, and how the government intends to work to reduce the budget's total scope.

That is where the core of the issue lies. This is one of Europe's toughest negotiations. It is the toughest budget negotiation – the mother of all negotiations. It requires a government that is prepared to fight for all of Sweden. It requires more than political slogans. If I may say it straight out: It requires more than inviting eight ministers to breakfast.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Ernkrans for the question.

A listener might possibly think that there are great differences in this chamber when it comes to the view on the EU budget. I am very pleased that all eight parties in the Swedish Riksdag, on the contrary, have a broad consensus. I believe that it is a great strength for Sweden in this negotiation; just as the member was touching upon, it is a very tough negotiation. I cherish this unity and think that it is important.

If it is conflict that the member is seeking in this debate, I can remind her of one thing: The last time the Social Democrats were responsible for negotiating an EU budget, the result was a corona fund totaling 750 billion euro, of which 390 billion euro were pure grant money to countries in Europe with poorly managed economies. We are facing the costs of this now, and we will be doing so for a long time to come. In what way was that protecting Swedish taxpayers?

I can guarantee the members that in these negotiations we are working to ensure that we clearly achieve success for Swedish interests and priorities. It is important to do this together with other countries that share our view that the EU budget cannot be allowed to expand in any way. In that regard, for example, our cooperation with eight other member states is very important.

But we also do our job here at home to protect the taxpayers and the citizens. We do what is required, namely large investments in the safety and security of the Swedish people. We do not waste money, as the member suggests, but we do what is necessary with investments in the justice system, defense, roads and railways.

I hardly dare to think about what would have happened if Sweden had had a left-wing government with parties that have constantly wanted to see more immigration, higher fuel prices and larger loans that have driven up inflation, and which had neither the strength nor the measures against the criminal gangs.

We have cleaned up after the situation the Social Democrats left behind, with 10 percent inflation, growth in 22nd place in the EU, high unemployment due to large-scale migration and poor integration, widespread serious crime, and a large maintenance debt in infrastructure and defense.

I am surprised by the Social Democrats' tone, given that they say they stand behind many of the investments. What is it that they want to deviate from? Do they not want to make investments in defense? Do they not want to burden the citizens and the taxpayers? Do they not want to raise taxes for hard-working people?

We take responsibility here at home, and we take responsibility for the EU's budget. I believe that most people by this point are well aware of the Swedish position, because I raise it at every meeting I have with commissioners and other member states. We want to see priorities when it comes to the EU's major challenges: the war in Ukraine, crime, the climate, and competitiveness. We are clear that reprioritizations are needed, meaning that the EU needs to spend a little less on things that have traditionally been a large part of the EU's budget, for example cohesion policy, and put more focus on today's truly major issues.

I appreciate that we have a consensus, and I do not believe we need to create fabricated conflicts. But if there is something specific where the member believes Sweden should pursue a different line, she is, of course, welcome to put that forward. We will, however, with emphasis, continue to push for our positions in this. The fact that we got in a mention of the discount in the negotiation box that we received from the Danish presidency was a great success and something that made quite a few countries quite irritated. We and the other countries that have discount arrangements today stand quite alone there, but we will push so that we have a fair burden-sharing and thus also a discount for Sweden and Swedish taxpayers.

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

Matilda Ernkrans (S)

Mr. Speaker! This is not just any EU negotiation; this is the negotiation that determines what Sweden's fee to the EU will look like for the next seven years. Sweden must be a constructive, tough, hard, and working negotiator, and there is a strong mandate for the government to keep the EU fee down and to secure and perhaps strengthen the discount. The only ones who can deliver on this are the minister and the government, because it is you who are responsible for the negotiations. The negotiations on the EU's budget are not decided on the last night but at the beginning of the negotiations when one decides to do the work, and the only one who can do the work and who has the responsibility is the government. Therefore, it needs to be scrutinized what the government and the minister do.

This is a negotiation, the mother of all negotiations, which is so much more than political slogans. This is about delivery. Today, a proposal lies on the table that risks increasing Sweden's EU fee by up to 60 percent. Negotiations are built on hard work and credibility.

Here at home, unemployment has increased sharply. 100,000 more are unemployed, we have a record number of bankruptcies. The government itself has said that the money is practically exhausted for the coming years. The barns are empty. With Kristersson and Åkesson, Sweden has gone backward 363 billion kronor, and money is now being borrowed for tax cuts for those with the very highest incomes, while letting ordinary people foot the bill for the very important defense expansion. Many companies and families experience that it has become increasingly difficult to make ends meet. This is the reality for many Swedes, and in that situation, the Swedish EU fee risks increasing dramatically.

It is true that the EU budget also grew during the previous long-term budget. But the government at that time did something decisive, namely negotiated a historically large Swedish discount. Therefore, Sweden could accept a larger budget without Swedish taxpayers being hit as hard.

If Rosencrantz and the government's response to a potential fee increase of 60 percent is to treat some colleagues to breakfast, the level of ambition is far too low. A breakfast does not solve a budget conflict of thousands of billions. Something more is required to deliver the same result as last time, for example, a historically large discount.

There are problems, not only with the credibility of the economic policy at home but also regarding the lack of hard work and the fact that the government has tied itself so closely to a party that is fundamentally critical of the EU and skeptical of European and international cooperation. Sweden cannot enter Europe's toughest negotiation weakly.

The government has the responsibility for these negotiations here and now, so how are Rosencrantz and the government doing the job? It is a job that needs to be done every day and every hour for Swedish interests. The government has a poor economic policy in its baggage and has tied itself to a party that actually does not want Sweden to be in this arena. How do you do the job and deliver results here and now? It is crucial.

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am somewhat surprised by the picture being painted of there being a lot of different opinions in here. As said, there are eight parties that clearly stand behind the government's position in this.

I am also surprised by the Social Democrats' tone here at home because they are, after all, behind the investments that are now being made. We have agreed on the funding of the defense, but now the Social Democrats seem to be more in shock. Either the Social Democrats want to break the agreement on funding the defense and continue to borrow, or they had planned to hide their tax increases from the Swedish people. What is it that you do not want to do? Do you not want to upgrade the defense, do you not want to invest in the justice system, or do you not want to ensure that ordinary, hard-working Swedes get more money in their pockets? What exactly are you against?

The Social Democrats stand for what is almost an inverted economic policy. When inflation was high, the opposition wanted to spend more, which would have worsened the inflation. Now that we have won over inflation, the Social Democrats say that we should hold back, even though it is a recession and it is the government that most of all needs to do its part to give Sweden's economy a push forward. When we expect the economy to improve, the Social Democrats think it is time to spend a little more.

The Social Democrats also lack an additional 50 billion in funding for everything you promise by 2028, which corresponds to tax increases of 2,200 kronor per month for an average family. The Social Democrats' intended coalition partners, Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet, have constantly called for more loans, even when inflation was at its highest.

No, I become quite concerned when I hear the Social Democrats' tone regarding the economic situation here at home.

When it comes to the budget negotiations in the EU, it was, as said, good that Sweden received a large discount. But in the latest negotiation, the EU also received a corona fund of 750 billion euros, of which 390 billion euros were pure grant money. This the social democratic government also succeeded in negotiating.

As I said, the government and I are now working intensively to achieve traction for the Swedish positions. Together with Denmark, Finland, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium and France, we are part of a like-minded group where we regularly meet and discuss the negotiations, both at the civil servant level and at the political level. Before the first negotiation box was to be presented by the Danish presidency, the group, for example, met at the political level on the initiative of myself and my Austrian colleague. And I probably did not have a single bilateral meeting with any of my colleagues during the whole of last year without bringing up the EU budget. I myself, the Finance Minister and not least the Prime Minister are very clear in our respective contexts.

I would like to assert that the Swedish budget-restrictive position is so well-known that my ministerial colleagues can repeat it in their sleep. It is not loved by everyone, far from it, but we hold onto it firmly because it is in Sweden's interest.

The previously mentioned countries do not agree on everything, but we agree on keeping the volume down and safeguarding the modern structure in the Commission's proposal, with an increased focus on competitiveness, security, and defense. We stand particularly close to Austria, to mention a country that also pushes that the budget volume should not amount to more than 1 percent of the EU's total GDP. The Netherlands also stand very close to us. We also work closely in the circle that today has discounts or so-called correction mechanisms for their fee.

Standing together, not just over breakfast but in many meetings, matters. Every day we work and join forces with other countries that share our positions. That we got in a wording about the discounts already in the negotiation room from the Danish presidency was, as said, very important. I can say that there was a rather agitated atmosphere at the meeting because many countries directly oppose the existence of discount arrangements, but Sweden will continue to fight for it.

I safeguard, as I have said, that we have a broad and strong consensus in Sweden's Riksdag. I believe that is a strength for Sweden.

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

Matilda Ernkrans (S)

Mr. Speaker! This is fundamentally a question of credibility, hard work and responsibility. The EU's next long-term budget determines how large the fees Sweden will have to pay for many years to come. Here, the government actually cannot blame the Social Democrats, because just as Rosencrantz says, there is strong support from Sweden and from the Social Democrats for the Swedish priorities.

This question is decided by how well Rosencrantz and the government do the job. So far, the work that Rosencrantz and the government have done in the negotiations currently underway has resulted in that Sweden's fee risks increasing by up to 60 percent. That is a very large cost in a situation where Swedish households and companies are already struggling financially and where the government has already emptied the barns.

Sweden needs to do the work. The government needs to do the work: build strong alliances, drive the demand for a restrained budget, and ensure that the Swedish discount remains. It needs to be done every day, all the time, perhaps with new innovations, but so far the result has been meager.

Let us be honest. Sweden cannot weaken its own economic credibility here at home and at the same time hope to win the toughest budget negotiations in the EU. It requires more than that. It requires a government that does the work and that prioritizes the interests of the whole of Sweden. In Europe's toughest budget negotiations, it is not enough to hope for a good result, but one must be prepared to do the work, especially when one has personally run the Swedish economy into the ground and is sitting in the lap of a party that would preferably not have Sweden participate in the international negotiations.

This time the government cannot blame the Social Democrats. This is the government's responsibility. It is the government that must do the work. It is the government that must deliver. The budget negotiations are decided here and now, at an early stage, not on the last night. Do the work!

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

EU-ministern Jessica Rosencrantz (M)

Mr. Speaker! Since the Social Democrats are sitting in the lap of the Left Party and the Green Party, I, as a Swedish voter, am quite concerned. When our time's great challenges are about strengthening the Swedish and European economy, building military capability, and building up our security, the Left Party and the Green Party are not very good parties to hold hands with, as the Social Democrats do. In addition, we have the entire great challenge of reforming the EU's migration policy. Nor are the Left Party and the Green Party good forces to hold hands with there if one wants order and tidiness.

When it comes to the budget proposal itself, which is what we are actually supposed to talk about – even though I understand that it is an election year and Matilda Ernkrans would like to involve many other things – we have received a proposal from the commission that implies a sharp increase in the Swedish fee. The member describes that Sweden has since conducted poor negotiation work, but we have thus not received any new budget figures. What we have, however, managed to get is a very clear wording that we shall include the question of discounts in the ongoing negotiations. I see this as a success from the Swedish side.

It will be a long negotiation ahead where it is important that we continue to hold fast to our Swedish, clear positions, which we naturally do. It is indeed the mother of all negotiations, as the member has said several times now.

We stand against 26 other countries that sometimes have similar interests, sometimes completely different interests, so it is going to be a very tough negotiation. In this, I maintain that we have a strong and broad consensus in Sweden's Riksdag, and I also often point out to other countries that we are eight parties that have the same position.

I am happy to engage in a debate on the merits, if there is something the member wants us to do differently, but to invent conflicts just because it is an election year, I think is perhaps a bit silly and also a bit destructive now that we are entering the major negotiations.

I do not believe there is a single country that has missed the Swedish, very clear, position that we should have a better, not larger, budget where the focus lies on security and competitiveness. This will be my priority in the continued negotiations as well moving forward.

The interpellation debate was hereby concluded.

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