Response to interpellations 2024/25:353 and 375 on bankruptcies
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that companies have had it tough due to the pandemic, recession, inflation, and high interest rates 1. KD argues that the government is driving an offensive simplification agenda to reduce the regulatory burden 1, eases the burden for households by removing the aviation tax 2, has lowered inflation 3 and is implementing the largest infrastructure investment ever 3. KD emphasizes that they deliver through increased power production and income tax cuts 2, that they have an energy policy and that regulatory simplifications are a top priority for competitiveness. S argues that the bankruptcies show that the government has made mistakes and done too little 4, is failing in industrial policy 5 and that their response is thin 6. S claims that the government is not investing in the Stockholm region 7, that the Minister for Enterprise's efforts have led to record bankruptcies 8 and that the budget policy is creating more bankruptcies 8.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I have been asked how I view the negative development of growth and employment in Stockholm County in recent years, as well as what measures I intend to take to stop the ongoing wave of bankruptcies in Stockholm County. Patrick Björck has asked me what the government and I intend to take for measures to reduce the number of bankruptcies and reverse the development.
Many companies have had it tough in recent years. The pandemic and the recession have hit many Swedish companies hard, which has also affected business owners and employees. Inflation, the energy crisis, high interest rates, and a war in our part of the world have resulted in many companies having to fight for their survival. For many companies, these challenges have also coincided with the repayment of debts from tax deferrals during the pandemic.
For the economy as a whole, it is good if productive companies expand. At the same time, certain closures and bankruptcies are inevitable. That is how it has been at all times. The government, of course, follows the development of bankruptcies both in Stockholm and in other parts of the country. Sweden needs an industrial policy for the whole country, and the government is therefore pursuing an active and long-term policy to improve the business climate and the conditions for companies.
The regulatory burden and the administrative costs need to be reduced so that companies and entrepreneurs can focus on their core activities. Swedish companies, not least the many small companies, need better designed and simpler rules as well as reduced reporting requirements. This strengthens the companies' competitiveness and creates more jobs in more and growing companies.
It should be easy to start, run and develop your company in Sweden. The Government is therefore pursuing an offensive simplification agenda. We have, among other things, established a simplification council and an implementation council aimed at reducing companies' regulatory burden and administrative costs.
The Government has also produced several specific government assignments regarding simplification for a number of agencies. The Government has also given about thirty agencies assignments or reporting requirements in the regulatory letters for 2024 and 2025 to strengthen and accelerate the simplification work.
Ingela Nylund Watz (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister for Enterprise!
When bankruptcies increase and remain at a high level over time, it is a sign that something is wrong in a country. Therefore, it is a bit unfortunate to have to state that the responsible minister, in his response, has nothing to say regarding the specific conditions for growth and employment in the capital region.
Why do I think that then? Yes, because in Nordea's latest regional outlook, one can read that the Stockholm region as a growth engine in Sweden has lost momentum. The region was hit hard by the pandemic, and then came the high inflation with the large interest rate hikes. It hit the growth in the Stockholm region hard.
Many companies have problems with the tax deferral. But above all, it means that during the last few years, the significantly worsened purchasing power of households has caused growth to slacken and not get started. We are at the bottom of the ranking for growth in Europe.
Overall, it has led to a decrease in the GDP contribution from the Stockholm region. Stockholm County will, despite a slight brightening during 2025, have a weaker growth trend during the 2020s than during the 2010s. This should concern the Minister for Enterprise. During 2024, almost 3,900 companies went bankrupt. It affected 13,000 employees. The industries hit hardest are the construction industry, finance, real estate and business services, as well as restaurant and catering.
At the same time, new business formation has decreased in Stockholm County just as in the rest of the country. The intensity of layoffs was at its highest level ever during the 2000s. It was almost 34,000 who were laid off in Stockholm County during last year.
That the bankruptcies are increasing dramatically and continue to remain at a high level in the beginning of 2025, and that the growth in Sweden is performing poorly compared to the rest of the EU's member countries, should reasonably concern the Minister for Enterprise.
That the growth of the Stockholm region is faltering should be a clear signal that something must be done. But the government has so far done both wrong and too little. The investment support for housing was reduced. The construction industry crashed. The government prioritized tax cuts for those with the highest incomes instead of investing in those with the lowest, which caused purchasing power to collapse.
While the government recently presented a transport project that is to receive the green light and get started by 2030, the long-planned cross-connection Södertörnsleden has been postponed into the future and now has a highly uncertain future.
The export industry's request for a new road connection across Södertälje Canal has been met with a cold shoulder by the government. Instead of investing in Arlanda for domestic flights and enabling an exciting development of Bromma as a district for business and housing, the government has laid a dead hand over the development, and Sweden now risks losing investments. The CEO of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce expressed it this way on SVT on January 12: "There is no law of nature that says companies will continue to make their establishments in the Stockholm region or Sweden if we do not get our aviation in order."
I hope now that the Minister in this debate will be a bit clearer in his view on the negative development of growth and employment in the Stockholm region because it means so incredibly much for our entire country's growth.
Patrik Björck (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Madam Minister for Trade, for the answer!
Bankruptcies is the heading of the interpellation I have submitted to the Minister for Enterprise. It concerns the fact that during 2024, 10,141 limited companies went bankrupt. It could have been any figure, but it is a figure that represents a new record and an increase of 23 percent compared to the previous year.
The bankruptcies have hit large and small companies and have resulted in over 33,000 lost jobs. One contributing cause is the government's policy or lack of policy. The previous interpellants here today were up and talking about how the government is doing too little and the wrong things. One can discuss which is worst, but overall, it naturally becomes a mess.
The number of construction bankruptcies exceeded 2,000 companies during 2024, according to statistics from Tillväxtanalys. It is the highest number of construction bankruptcies since the 90s crisis.
This is in itself a huge concern. To this record of bankruptcies, Madam Speaker, one can add that the number of newly started companies is down to historically low levels. The government fails to conduct a policy that can retain the companies that exist, and it fails to conduct a policy for a climate where new companies are created. This collectively means that we have major problems in Sweden.
Today we have two interpellations that have been merged – my interpellation on bankruptcies and Ingela Nylund Watz's interpellation on bankruptcies in the Stockholm region. The fact is, Madam Speaker, that more interpellation debates could have been merged. This applies to the interpellation on offshore wind power and the interpellation on the tourism industry by Isak From, for in all the debates we have heard here in the chamber this afternoon, it has emerged that the government is failing in its policy.
If you have a government that has no energy policy, no labor market policy, and no industrial policy, you get, for example, a large number of bankruptcies. Then growth will be low, and then unemployment will be high.
All these debates have actually reflected the same thing, that is, a passive and clueless government that actually does not know what it should do. And when the government does something, it is on the sidelines; it is minor details that are being corrected. But the government does nothing about the major concerns and the major problems with creating new entrepreneurship and an environment where companies can survive and a society where unemployment falls and where purchasing power grows.
It is exactly as Ingela Nylund Watz pointed out: Companies are dependent on very much. They are naturally dependent on politics and on laws and rules and that they function in a company-productive way.
But companies are also extremely dependent on purchasing power. They are dependent on us having people who can afford to spend their holidays in Norrland. Now Isak From left the chamber, but perhaps it was the tourism industry in Norrland he was talking about. But companies are also dependent on people consuming everyday services and goods. It is when people cannot afford to buy a new sofa that the timber companies in Småland have problems. It is when people cannot afford to replace the 30-year-old kitchen that the kitchen companies in Västergötland have problems. That is when the bankruptcies are created.
We have a government whose policy fails in many areas. There is a lack of industrial policy, a lack of energy policy, a lack of labor market policy, and a lack of policy altogether, and this leads, among other things, to a record increase in the number of bankruptcies.
Annika Strandhäll (S)
Madam Speaker! We have heard Isak From, one of today's debaters. When we now also listen to Patrik Björck, we hear that he summarizes the whole thing very well. It is about the lack of ability of politics and, above all, the government to deliver activity and policy in a number of different areas.
Sweden is now in a situation where we have approximately 600,000 unemployed. The bankruptcies are hitting the ceiling. In 2024, we had the highest number of bankruptcies since 1996.
Before I entered the chamber today, I amused myself by listening to an interpellation debate between Ebba Busch and Ida Ekeroth Clausson from March 12 last year on the theme of the number of bankruptcies in Sweden. What strikes me when I listen to the Minister for Energy and Industry is that your answer today is exactly the same as it was a year ago.
It is frightening. One wonders if it is your staff that lacks imagination or if the reality is that you de facto are unable to deliver a policy that reduces the number of unemployed and the number of bankruptcies, which increases people's consumption space and which ensures the delivery of new electricity into our energy system. As Patrik Björck said, it is in very many different areas that the government is not delivering.
I think, Ebba Busch, that it is like this: It is very easy when you sit as an opposition politician for many years to be a pitbull and hunt the government. But when you yourself have put on the hats of a government position, when you are Vice Prime Minister, when you are Minister for Energy and when you are Minister for Enterprise, rhetoric from the rostrum is no longer enough. Then actions are required that lower unemployment, that deliver terawatt-hours in the energy system, that respond to the rhetoric that has been used in the election campaign and that ensure that the number of bankruptcies is reduced.
But in none of these areas, which you are responsible for, Ebba Busch, do you deliver. That is what we can state. The Minister for Enterprise does not deliver as she has promised.
In the autumn, the EU Commission's forecast for growth in the European countries was released. It was quite funny to read it – or rather, it was absolutely not funny, because they described the Swedish economic growth over the last two and a half years, when Ebba Busch has been responsible for important areas, as "lackluster". I believe there are many of us in the opposition who can agree.
But, Ebba Busch, in addition to the fact that one must deliver a policy that de facto has an effect, one must understand that the people who are affected are real people. There are tens of thousands of people in Sweden right now who are unemployed. There are tens of thousands of entrepreneurs who have seen their life's work collapse. And what I hear from the Minister for Enterprise in the rostrum of the Swedish Riksdag are exactly the same talking points that she delivered on March 12 last year. It is not okay.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I know what it is like to grow up in a family where every hundred kronor makes a difference.
I know what it is like to grow up in a family where one trusted the welfare system and it failed.
I know what it is like to grow up in a family that was hit hard by the 90s crisis when one was taxed out as a self-employed person, interest rates hit the ceiling and one was forced to sell their apartment, regardless of whether one broke even or took a heavy loss.
I know what it is like to grow up in a home where one stood with an offer of early retirement at over 40 years of age under a red government and where one stood without any compensation at all under a blue government.
When we talk about it being people of flesh and blood who are affected by the bankruptcies, I can do nothing other than truly agree with Annika Strandhäll. I grew up in a family of sole traders where I learned the word personal bankruptcy even when I was nine years old. It is also my continued motivation – to know that we will not be able to build a perfect system, but that the system, the state, exists for people, not the other way around.
That is why it is so incredibly important to keep track of what effect one's policy has. During the time I have had the honor and responsibility of being energy minister in Sweden, 6,100 megawatts of new power production have been added. That corresponds to approximately the power from five new nuclear reactors. It is just that it has not been predictable power production, but intermittent power production.
Oh, Annika Strandhäll, this is not, in fact, compensation for the six nuclear reactors that we have in Sweden today – speaking of keeping track of the facts – or the four additional ones that we would otherwise have had if we had not had the past parliamentary terms with the red-greens.
If we look further at the facts, we also see that with us in power and with the budget that now applies in Sweden, an ordinary family with a police salary and a nurse's salary will have 11,000 kronor more to move with this year. Calculated only on income tax cuts, it is 9,000 kronor more – speaking of purchasing power.
This is what we deliver from the government's side.
Then one can look at Stockholm. What is Stockholm delivering to meet this tough situation? Well, the region and the city are delivering tax increases of 30 öre and 24 öre respectively. And who is most affected by tax increases in municipalities and regions? Well, it is families like the one I come from, with many times low incomes and in periods also dependent on the welfare safety net, which in some cases totally failed. That is the situation in Stockholm.
The government eases the burden for an ordinary household by 9,000 or up to 11,000 kronor if one adds other things, while Stockholm, on the contrary, goes in the other direction and systematically raises the tax for those who have the lowest incomes – speaking of keeping track of the facts.
The aviation tax is disappearing now. It took for the Social Democrats to end up in opposition and get rid of the Green Party before it was also done, which should have been done a long time ago, to increase our competitiveness.
If we look at the bankruptcies in January, we see a decrease of 14 percent. The majority of the dreadful bankruptcies we have seen in recent years are bankruptcies related to the pandemic. Now we are working to get Sweden moving again.
Ingela Nylund Watz (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the supplementary additions.
My interpellation concerned the increasing wave of bankruptcies and the weak growth in the Stockholm region. Regarding the questions I asked on this, the Minister's answers are quite thin. In sweeping language, it is said – exactly as last year, as Annika Strandhäll pointed out – that the government is pursuing an active and long-term policy to improve the business climate and the conditions for companies. But concretely, this boils down only to the work on regulatory simplification.
When the growth of the Stockholm region and Sweden falters, when bankruptcies are at an elevated level, when new entrepreneurship decreases – as Patrik Björck pointed out – and when unemployment increases dramatically, it is not enough to point to the work on simplifying regulations and otherwise sit in the stands and watch.
Madam Speaker! The government's focus on regulatory simplification is certainly commendable, but I hope the government realizes that there are pitfalls that must be avoided so that growth does not suffer even further.
I therefore want to highlight the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce's investigation Status Stockholm, an investigation they conduct regularly, from October last year. There, over 1,500 companies from the Stockholm and Uppsala regions answered questions linked to the business climate and the ongoing crime development. The answers provide a very gloomy picture. Eight out of ten companies in this so-called capital region are convinced that economic crime will increase in the coming five years. As many as nine out of ten companies experience that the criminal economy is a threat to the business's development and a significant threat to Swedish growth. Two out of three companies also consider Sweden to be poor or very poor at detecting and prosecuting economic crime.
Against this background, it would be interesting to hear how the government intends to manage its regulatory simplification work so that we do not end up in a situation where entrepreneurs in Sweden and in the Stockholm region feel that new loopholes and opportunities to commit economic crime are being opened and that serious competition in the market is being undermined.
Madam Speaker! We live in a restless world with many global challenges. The threat of trade wars hangs over us, and as a small, export-dependent country, we are extra vulnerable. Most evidence now suggests that the recession will last longer than the forecasters previously assessed and that unemployment will continue to increase. Unfortunately, the bankruptcy level is also still significantly elevated.
I hope that the Minister for Enterprise agrees with me that Sweden needs an attractive capital region that can attract investments. I also hope, therefore, that the Minister for Enterprise can demonstrate in what way the government can contribute to this.
It may indeed be fun to engage in a war of words about a tax increase here and a subsidy there when it comes to which is the most effective policy for a region. But for Sweden as a country, the Minister for Enterprise must surely have some thought on how the capital region can be developed in competition with other capital regions. We can only look at the aviation issue and how Denmark handles the operations around Kastrup and how Sweden's government in its clumsy way handles the operations at Arlanda. Here, I believe the Minister for Enterprise is answerable. What does the Minister for Enterprise want for Sweden's capital region?
Patrik Björck (S)
Madam Speaker! I thought I would try to go through the answer a bit more concretely. In the answer, the Minister for Enterprise says that many companies have had it tough in recent years. There has been inflation, an energy crisis, high interest rates, and a war in our part of the world which has caused many companies to have to fight for their survival. That is a correct description of reality. But what we are asking is: What is the government doing then to support the companies in this very difficult environment? Then the answer is: Next to nothing.
If the government had had an effective education policy, an effective energy policy, an effective labor market policy, and an effective industrial policy, we would not have had the worst growth in all of Europe. Even the Minister for Enterprise cannot believe it. If we had had a functioning policy, we would not have had record bankruptcies and the lowest new business creation since the 90s.
What is the answer to the fact that it is so tough? The Minister for Enterprise describes that it is tough, Madam Speaker, but she has no policy to handle it.
The Minister for Enterprise says that it is good for the economy as a whole if productive companies expand. Yes, we agree on that, but today they are going bankrupt because of the difficult global situation, which the Minister for Enterprise totally ignores.
I think the Minister for Enterprise is a bit nonchalant: Oh, some closures and bankruptcies are inevitable. Yes, some perhaps, but it is not inevitable that we have the lowest growth in Europe. It is not inevitable that records are being broken in the number of bankruptcies. This is nonchalance from the Minister for Enterprise, Madam Speaker.
She also says that Sweden needs a business policy in the entire country and that the government should pursue an active and long-term policy to improve the business climate and the conditions for companies. There was a debate here earlier on the occasion of an interpellation by Isak From. At that time, we could state that the government has no business policy, and definitely not for the entire country. This was made clearly in the debate between the Minister for Enterprise and the interpellor Isak From. So even this claim echoes completely empty.
Then the minister pointed out that the regulatory burden and the administrative costs shall decrease for the companies so that they can focus on the core business. Yes, that is right and good. I agree with that. This is very good. But it is very difficult, Madam Speaker, to focus on one's core business when one has gone bankrupt. Once again, it is empty.
Monica Haider, who participated in a debate earlier today, asked with some despair: What does the government want? I agree with the question. I am sure that the government wants well.
I had a debate with the Minister for Employment last week, and then he accused me of believing that he wants to do harm. I replied: No, I do not believe that the Minister for Employment wants to do harm. But by not governing, the Minister for Employment does harm when unemployment grows.
By not governing, the Minister for Enterprise is causing harm by letting corporate bankruptcies hit record highs, new business startups fall to bottom levels, and Swedish growth sink to the bottom of the European League. It is time for the government to start pursuing an active policy. This is not good.
Annika Strandhäll (S)
Madam Speaker! It was an extremely well-received conclusion to Patrik Björck's speech: It is time for the government to start governing.
The fact is that before Ebba Busch took office as Minister for Energy and Industry and Deputy Prime Minister, we had a different government, and it took the country through the pandemic and did so with active policy, which led to us avoiding bankruptcies. Only the short-term support ensured that approximately 40,000 Swedes avoided becoming unemployed. We had extensive support for the business sector in the form of temporarily lowered employer contributions and temporarily lowered sickness benefit contributions.
What is this government, which claims that crisis after crisis needs to be managed, doing? It is sitting and waiting for some investigation on regulatory simplifications. This is not okay, Ebba Busch.
I note that on several occasions she brings up her background. I myself grew up with a single, retired sick mother in Bergsjön. My father was a self-employed businessman throughout his entire life. He was one of those who suffered when the Bildt government and the Kristdemokraterna ruled Sweden in the early 90s and the interest rate was 500 percent.
We sanitized the Swedish economy. Where were the Christian Democrats then?
Ebba Busch! You cannot conduct a policy where you lower the tax for those who earn over 66,000 kronor a month, that is to say you yourself, Jimmie Åkesson and your friends, while ordinary Swedes pay 70 spänn for a pack of Bregott or 100 spänn for a pack of coffee and Sweden is hitting the ceiling when it comes to the number of bankruptcies and people in unemployment. Furthermore, we are the worst in the EU in terms of growth.
Being in government is not like being in opposition. Get into the game!
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! No, to sit in government is to have the responsibility to make a difference for those citizens for whom one has the opportunity to make a difference.
I want to return to the facts once again. When we entered government, inflation was at 10 percent. The reason why inflation is an incredibly dangerous enemy for a country is that it hits the companies, which are Sweden's job creators, very hard. It also hits Sweden's competitiveness and the ability to hold its own in an incredibly tough international competition and globalized world very hard. It is such a dangerous enemy because it hits all wage earners very hard. Everything becomes more expensive, and the value of the wage one has at the end of the month effectively decreases.
Madam Speaker! I rarely talk about my upbringing and where I come from in political contexts such as this. But on the few occasions it happens, I do so in order to emphasize that I understand and that many of us share such experiences. Obviously, there are also several of us in today's interpellation debate who do so. It is therefore the driving force that we must move from words to action.
Let me go back to the facts. When we took over, inflation was at 10 percent. Now it is 2 percent. We have done this for Sweden's best, for business, for competitiveness, so that it pays to work, and so that it will slowly but surely become a bit cheaper to be Swedish.
If one wants to paint police officers and nurses as high-income earners and mock it, then the choice lies with the person doing so. I note that many families with a corresponding police salary and a nurse's salary receive a relief of 11,000 this year.
In the capital region, one chooses to systematically raise the tax for those who have it the toughest and who do not pay state income tax. In this area, one simultaneously shuts down anorexia care, cuts back on the urgent care at Hötorget, and shuts down 13 care choices. Here, the queues to BUP have also spiraled out of control, and 1,000 employees at private healthcare providers have been forced to leave their jobs for ideological reasons.
When the question is asked correctly regarding what vision the government and I have for the capital region and for Sweden, I answer: From a growth perspective, it is that every city, municipality, and region shall be allowed to build on its strengths. We have the producing parts of Sweden, not least in the north, which have certain strengths. There, the infrastructure is absolutely crucial – that we have ports, railways, and roads that are navigable.
In that area, this government – not the red-green government – has delivered the largest infrastructure investment ever in Swedish history: 200 billion more. We have a zero road maintenance debt, something the red-greens did not manage to do.
We know that it is hard work and curiosity that have built Swedish prosperity and that have made it possible for us to move past tough times in the past. Therefore, there is a historically large research and innovation initiative in our budget.
Yes, all of Europe stands at a crossroads – more regulatory burden or reduced regulatory burden – to achieve increased competitiveness. Yes, that is why it is right to prioritize regulatory simplifications as heavily as the government does.
Ingela Nylund Watz (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the supplementary information and arguments! I am glad that the government did not fail to bring down inflation because it has gone down across all of Europe. All governments have worked hard on it, and it would have been terrible if the Swedish government had not succeeded in that context. It is fortunate that it went as it did.
But let us return to the fact that the Minister sees that investments are needed for us to achieve a flourishing development in different parts of the country, based on the prevailing conditions. I must state that it is very sorrowful that when the government has now presented the projects it is releasing for construction start until 2030, none of them are in the Stockholm region. There is nothing concerning the Södertörn Cross-connection, which was a prerequisite for expanding Norvik's harbor, nothing about a new passage over Södertälje Canal, which the productive export industry in the Stockholm region so strongly demands, and nothing concerning how one views the development of Arlanda as an international and domestic airport. Among the twelve projects that the government has pointed out, none in the Stockholm region have received a green light.
I think this is a clear message from the government to the Stockholm region: We see you, but you do not need any investments. That is approximately how I believe most politicians in the Stockholm region, regardless of party affiliation, assess the government.
The investment support for housing crashed. The projects that received the green light to start from Trafikverket and the government will not benefit the Stockholm region. And the government has laid a dead hand over Arlanda. I, the Minister for Enterprise, am afraid that Sweden's government will have problems with a slowing down Stockholm region becoming a hindrance to the growth of the whole of Sweden. The government is doing too little – it is not enough.
Patrik Björck (S)
Madam Speaker! First, I just want to correct one thing. None of us who have participated in the interpellation debate from the Social Democratic side have claimed that police officers and nurses are generally high-income earners. If I remember correctly, Madam Speaker, my colleague Annika Strandhäll spoke about people with incomes over 66,000. It is possible that there is some police officer or nurse who has an income over 66,000; I cannot deny that. There is surely some police chief somewhere. But the ordinary police officer or nurse does not recognize themselves in this. I am married to a nurse – I know that they normally do not earn 66,000. So we have cleared that up; it is a bit of silly rhetoric.
But to summarize the debate: According to Ebba Busch herself, Madam Speaker, she is satisfied with her contribution as Minister for Enterprise and Minister for Energy. She is satisfied with her and the government's budget and distribution policy. We can state that Ebba Busch's contribution as Minister for Enterprise has led to records in bankruptcies. New business creation has decreased to bottom levels. Industry is very hesitant to dare to invest because it is not receiving any long-term decisions in energy matters and no expanded energy.
When it comes to the government's budget and distribution policy, which was intended to create consumption space, it was judged by the Fiscal Policy Council. The government's budget presented this autumn will not create more jobs; instead, it will create greater unemployment and thus poorer purchasing power and more bankruptcies. This is simply a fact.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank Ingela Nylund Watz and Patrik Björck for the interpellations. We have, Madam Speaker, entirely the same view of what Annika Strandhäll has said – I have not claimed anything else.
Madam Speaker! I do not appreciate that Patrik Björck has repeatedly said that we have no energy policy or industrial policy. I welcome a straight, tough debate. To speak plainly, I truly believe that Ingela Nylund Watz has stood for such a debate. One may think that it is wrong, bad, insufficient, or wrongly directed policy. The Government and the Social Democrats have obviously given, for example, the road maintenance issue different weight. I have no problem with this. But "no policy" is certainly not correct.
The pace of reform is enormously high, among other things in the energy sector, which, for example, has resulted in SSAB now receiving notice regarding the power allocation that one could not get clear notice about during the red-green government. This means that traditional production of steel in Sweden can be closed in 2029. It is 10 percent of Sweden's carbon dioxide emissions that disappear thanks to the high pace and the great skill in the political decision-making. It is, for example, about getting rid of air bookings in the connection queues.
When all of Europe received a slap on the wrist in the form of the Draghirapporten because we do not safeguard competitiveness through regulatory easing, this is a top priority for the Swedish government. It will have an effect for Sweden's capital.
We now see that a majority of those who went bankrupt had a tax deferral. Now we can hopefully reach a new starting point for the work ahead.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.