Election issues

Ulrik Nilsson (M)

Madam Speaker! When political scientists try to describe democracy, they say that one of democracy's basic criteria is that one must have elections that are free, fair and effective.

"Effective" should here be interpreted as that the elections should be about choosing people for the body or the role that actually matters. We here can possibly agree that this can be effective.

"Free" means that elections shall be open for everyone to participate in on equal terms. There shall be no restrictions on who can or may vote or who can or may participate in an election, but the elections shall be open to everyone.

"Justice" is what we actually have to deal with to a very high degree in this report. Different proposals on how one can improve or change the electoral system are usually about making it more just.

Madam Speaker! One can also look at efficiency in another way. For an electoral system to be efficient in the construction of society, it must be respected by as many as possible. We must agree on which rules of the game apply when we choose how Sweden shall be governed. Therefore, the electoral system and the electoral functions are important to take into account.

The voter shall recognize themselves and know what he or she is doing. The voter shall feel security and be able to trust the election result and that no one is trying to influence it by dishonest means. One must be able to trust that the elections are secret so that one can vote for what one de facto wants to support. It is also, as said, about having confidence in the result.

Based on the criteria "free, fair and efficient," we shall deal with a number of motions from the general motion period. It concerns 42 different requests, Madam Speaker. I will absolutely not go through all of them, but I intended to comment on some of them.

There are two motions that I find very clear, and they are both those dealing with threshold rules. Members propose there that there should be 2 percent instead of 4 percent as a threshold to make it easier for new parties to enter. But members from the same party also propose that there should be 5 percent instead of 4 percent to prevent a fragmentation of the political system.

I do not mention this to be ironic, but because it very clearly highlights the trade-off we must make between making the political system as accessible as possible and enabling a system that ensures we get sensible government formations and sensible cooperation conditions.

I believe it is this exact discussion that one has everywhere. Is 4 percent correct? Should it be higher? Should it be lower? That type of consideration is something we must constantly take into account; then perhaps we should not do it via a motion here today but consider it in other contexts.

There are proposals regarding separate election days. There are proposals that we should be able to have by-elections if someone resigns, especially if one ends up in a situation where one has an empty list.

There are some proposals that I find a bit half-funny, namely proposals to change the names of constituencies. No one in the song sings that we are musicians all from Västra Götalands läns östra constituency. Therefore, there are those who think that one should go back and call it Skaraborgs läns constituency, even though Skaraborgs län no longer exists. At the same time, it is proposed that my own constituency should change its name to Sjuhärad. It has never been called that, for it was called Södra Älvsborg before it became Västra Götalands läns södra.

So, not everything is conservative. But here lie a lot of identity issues, and one can wonder how to proceed and take this into account.

There are also proposals regarding the voting age. There is a proposal to link the right to vote and the right to stand for election to the registered residence.

We are some members here who have sat in on the investigation regarding ballot papers. The investigation received an additional assignment to specifically look at this matter of residency registration and then showed quite clearly that it would become very problematic. Another way to achieve the same solution is to say that one only has the right to stand as a candidate in one municipality and in one region, and naturally to the Riksdag, and instead of linking this to the residency registration, link it to the person.

Just this shows the importance of us seeing the problems, getting to the bottom of them and finding a solution that perhaps is not always the one that spontaneously comes up when one writes a motion.

Madam Speaker! Caution is probably a good rule for achieving, in the long term, precisely these free, fair and effective elections.

In that spirit, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in KU's report 27 Election Issues, which means the rejection of the motions that exist.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Almost seven years ago, on graduation day in Kramfors, year group 3 from the child and leisure program summarized what they had learned after two years of social studies lessons with the undersigned as the teacher. The summary was made in three points on a worn sheet hanging on their graduation float. The first was: På spåret is broadcast at 20:00 on Fridays. The second point was a sarcastic reference to my carbon footprint from all the papers I had insisted on printing during the years. The third point they listed was: Vote early – you could be dead tomorrow!

I actually don't remember if I was ever so dramatic when I emphasized the importance of voting and preferably doing so in good time. But I must admit that I was very pleased that such an important message as participation in the election actually got space on student day 2019.

However, there is no one, Madam Speaker, who can be satisfied with the development regarding voter turnout in Sweden. In the 2022 parliamentary election, participation fell by just over 3 percentage points. Two years later, in 2024, there was also a decrease in voter turnout in the election to the European Parliament. It is a very worrying trend. A high voter turnout is a prerequisite for the legitimacy of the entire democratic system.

We Social Democrats also point out in this motion report this year that the government should produce an action plan to increase voter turnout. Against this background, I move for approval of reservation 2.

Madam Speaker! In the previous debate, I referred to the Riksdag's research day. I think it is important that we make use of what we learn during that day and similar days.

When the Committee on the Constitution held an internal seminar, one of the researchers presented the concept of AI swarms. Briefly, it concerns goal-oriented influence operations where AI-generated messages can be both designed and tested in real-time, automated, and where the message can thus be adapted to cast suspicion on, for example, authorities or electoral processes.

This is a frightening development and naturally nothing that we in Sweden are alone in or can handle ourselves. It will be a decisive future issue within the EU cooperation.

Mr. Speaker, Sweden fundamentally has a robust electoral system that enjoys high confidence. We must truly safeguard that. There is room for improvements and reforms, but I mean that we must proceed slowly and really consider what larger changes to the electoral system could entail, not least considering the world we now live in and the digital threats I just mentioned.

It may possibly appear as a strange order that I, as a Social Democrat, express a conservative line regarding changes. Last year, Hans Ekström from my party had the same task, and I am doing so again this year. In the electoral system, it is indeed necessary that changes are made incrementally, and when such changes occur, they must also gather a broad parliamentary majority.

Madam Speaker! The ballot paper inquiry will present its final report at the end of the summer, and it will address both questions regarding the type of ballot papers and accessibility issues. Since I, just like Ulrik Nilsson, sit on that inquiry, I naturally do not intend to anticipate that work and reason in detail about this in this debate. However, I want to emphasize the importance of being able to implement significant improvements as soon as possible regarding the accessibility issues linked to the electoral system and the voting procedure. This is something we are now focusing on in the inquiry. I think it is important to say that from this rostrum because I know it is something that engages very many disability rights groups in society.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! It was actually not so long ago that it was considered unnecessary or even dangerous to let women, 23-year-olds, and convicted persons vote. Today, one becomes eligible to vote in elections when one turns 18, regardless of gender, but as has been said, that has not always been the case.

Just over 100 years ago, women's suffrage and female members of parliament were entirely new phenomena. They came after a long and determined struggle against tough opposition, and Sweden was actually last in the Nordic countries to introduce suffrage for women. But even after this breakthrough for women's suffrage, there were many restrictions. For example, those who received grants from the poor relief, i.e., today's social assistance, were not allowed to vote. It was not until 1989 that all different suffrage restrictions were removed.

In short, it can be said that the right to vote and our electoral system have changed, developed, and improved over time, and so it must, of course, continue to do so.

In hindsight, it may feel strange that not everyone has always wanted a larger democracy with more participants, but the fact is that every change to the electoral system and expansion of our democracy and suffrage has been met with resistance.

Vänsterpartiet has in recent years presented several proposals linked to the right to vote. We believe that the right to vote should apply from the year one turns 18. We also want to see a lowered voting age to 16 years on a trial basis in the municipal elections, in accordance with the previous Democracy Investigation's proposal.

Madam Speaker! We know from research that the habit of voting is established in young years. We also know that voter turnout among young people in the 2022 election to the Riksdag decreased from 86 percent to 83 percent. The decrease was significantly larger among young people with a foreign background, where the turnout decreased by as much as 10 percentage points. Today's young people are engaged and interested in society and have a high level of social engagement, but fewer and fewer are members of a political party.

The age for the right to vote coincides, according to the current regulations, with the age of majority. This means that everyone belonging to the same birth year does not always get to vote in the same election. The person who turns 18 after election day does not have the right to vote until four years later.

Vänsterpartiet argues that this order is unfortunate and wants to change it. The political information provided to upper secondary school students during an election year from teachers, the election authority, and political organizations hopefully awakens a first-time voter's interest and increases knowledge of how elections are conducted. But the mobilizing effect of all this information during upper secondary education is weakened when a large part of the students sitting there in the classroom feel: This does not concern me. I will have to wait another four years to be able to vote.

In order for us to be able to create a good society for young people, their experiences and voices must be heard. Young people between 18 and 24 years of age are today the most underrepresented group at all political levels. To address this, we need new legislation, renewed democratic processes, and investments in the organization of children and young people.

It is very unfortunate that the government and the Sweden Democrats this year have removed 50 million from organizations that work specifically with issues regarding the organizing of children and young people. It is the Agency for Youth and Civil Society, MUCF, that distributes this grant. I saw that some of you raised your eyebrows, but you should look at the budget item they have to handle this year.

MUCF also measures young people's views on democracy. The answers from 2025 show that seven out of ten young people are satisfied with how democracy works in Sweden and that nine out of ten think it is important to live in a country that is democratic. It feels very reassuring that the interest in politics and social issues in Sweden is high. Unfortunately, however, only one in five believe that they have great opportunities to convey opinions to those who decide. Increasing that figure is a responsibility we all must take.

We believe that specifically lowering the voting age in municipal elections could be a way to vitalize democracy, give more people the opportunity to be active in their local community and take advantage of young people's engagement and opinions. Vänsterpartiet wants young people to be able to trust that politics also stems from their reality and therefore argues that we should have a pilot project with a lowered voting age.

The main purpose of a lowered voting age is to take advantage of the youth's interest. But we actually also believe that politics would become better if we opened up for them.

Sweden has national goals for youth policy that we all, regardless of committee, are responsible for. I otherwise sit in the Culture Committee, which has the overall responsibility for youth policy, but here in the Committee on the Constitution, we can work on the electoral issues.

Madam Speaker! For democracy to have legitimacy, a high voter turnout is required. Sweden has traditionally had a high voter turnout in elections to the Riksdag, up to 90 percent back in history. Therefore, it is worrying that the voter turnout has fallen in the most recent elections. I truly hope that we can see it turn upwards in the autumn election.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I can state that a lowered voting age is hardly a utopia. Today, the EU actually recommends that its member states lower the voting age. This has been adopted by, for example, Belgium, Malta, Germany, and Austria, where 16-year-olds were allowed to vote in the latest EU election in 2024. In total, 32 countries have lowered the voting age to 16 in national or local elections, and 20 of these are in Europe.

There are good examples and experiences to learn from. I therefore wish to move for the approval of our reservation 3, which concerns these issues. I hope that we can get support for that reservation at today's vote.

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! Most of us probably have a rather similar image of what election day looks like. One walks down to the local school or library. Perhaps one meets a neighbor in the queue, and then one picks up those small colorful slips: yellow, white, and blue. Generally speaking, it is a day that breathes calm and security. It is, so to speak, "democracy in Swedish." It is just right.

But even if the framing itself looks the same for all of us, the experience is very different depending on who you are. For the vast majority, it is a simple matter. We take our ballots, we go into the booth, we make our choice, and we lick the envelope. No one sees, no one knows. But for hundreds of thousands of Swedes with visual impairments or other functional disabilities, this reality looks completely different.

Madam Speaker! Today, far too many are forced to seek the help of a companion or a voting assistant in order to be able to vote. They must tell someone else what they want to vote for. They must trust that someone else takes the correct ballot and puts it in the envelope. It is difficult to empathize with that reality: not being completely sure that your vote remains your secret and not being able to go behind that green screen and feel the total freedom that no one else has anything to do with your decision.

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of the Center Party's reservation 6.

For us in Centerpartiet, this is a matter of principle. The secrecy of the ballot must apply to everyone, not just those with full vision. I know that an investigation is underway where this issue is being addressed, and it has also been said from the rostrum that the issue is prioritized. I know that the issue is prioritized for many, but the work needs to go faster. We know that the problem can be solved. There are tactile templates, there are technical aids, and there are ways to design ballots so that one can feel the difference between them. But it is going too slowly.

We have talked about this campaign after campaign, but we have not reached all the way. The Centre Party wants the government to now take a collective grip. We need a clear plan for how we are to ensure that every person, regardless of disability, shall be able to vote. It is also fundamentally about information. It is not enough that the system exists if one does not know how it works or if the staff in the polling station are not trained to help in the right way.

A democracy is not measured only by how many people vote, but also by how well it protects the rights that belong to every single citizen. Being able to vote independently is about dignity. It is about being a full member of society.

Madam Speaker! We in the Center Party want the next election to be the most accessible election in Sweden's history. We want that feeling of pride when one leaves the polling station to be shared by everyone, regardless of whether one sees the ballots with their eyes or with their fingers.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! The first sentence of our Swedish constitution, the Instrument of Government, reads as is well known: "Swedish democracy is based on free opinion formation and on universal and equal suffrage."

From this follows a certain interest in how the general and equal suffrage is actually to be expressed in practical terms. The electoral system is sometimes debated. Motions for changes are submitted at regular intervals, and we who sit in the Election Review Board know that the current system does not always function fully. At every election, there are some who must leave the polling stations with unfinished business because their names were already marked in the electoral roll. It has also been about queues, difficulties for people with disabilities, and efforts to preserve the secrecy of the vote.

This is naturally deeply unfortunate. The error rate is admittedly microscopically small, but it should be able to be reduced or, preferably, eliminated entirely.

We in Miljöpartiet are, just like members Ulrik Nilsson and Peter Hedberg, involved in the Ballot Committee – not I, but one of my party colleagues – who reviews and evaluates various conceivable improvements. We are surprisingly taken by the somewhat cautious approach here; to proceed slowly is our starting point in all of this, and we find it absolutely reasonable that we await the final report expected later this year. Then the members who take over in the autumn can continue the important work.

Mr. Speaker, there are other pressing reforms to address. That broadening and deepening of democracy by allowing more young people to participate is generally considered beneficial for the democratic development in a society. It has been proposed on several occasions during recent years to investigate the possibility of lowering the voting age to 16 even in Sweden. This is something that several countries, states, regions, or municipalities have implemented, including in Austria and the USA.

This summer, the British parliament also decided to lower the voting age to 16, thereby following the examples from Scotland and Wales.

We in Miljöpartiet have on several occasions highlighted a lowered voting age as an essential part of the work to get more people to engage in issues of democracy, justice, and sustainable development. Civil society organizations with youth issues on the agenda have raised the question. In Sweden, it is primarily youth organizations such as Youth 2030 that stand behind and push for it, but also, for example, Unicef.

We have heard that the Democracy Inquiry ten years ago proposed a pilot project with voting rights for 16-year-olds in municipal elections – naturally with a subsequent evaluation. We believe that the conditions for a pilot project in municipalities and regions exist, and we propose that the issue be investigated with the aim that a pilot project is in place for the municipal and regional elections in 2030.

Madam Speaker! There is research that points to an increased engagement in social issues among young people who are given the right to vote earlier. It is not the act of voting itself that is important, but it is the right to vote.

Sweden ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1990, and it has been Swedish law since 2020, partly because the knowledge of children and young people is to be truly taken into account. One opinion put forward against lowering the voting age concerns precisely the knowledge and motivation of children and young people to participate in elections and that it could have negative consequences for democracy. A survey of 16-year-olds in Austria – where national elections have been held with a 16-year age limit – showed that the proportion of those voting in the group has been somewhat lower, but that the votes the young people cast largely resemble those of adult voters. The young people vote in a way that favors their interests and reflects a desire to participate on equal terms.

The concept of agency is often interpreted as the ability to achieve effects or results within a given context through conscious actions. The agency of children and young people is discussed by researchers and professionals within both childcare, social services, and education. A simple summary is that the agency of children and young people tends to be underestimated; there is no doubt that children and young people also have the ability to express what is good for them.

Madam Speaker! The Green Party has, as I mentioned earlier, proposed that the possibilities of carrying out a pilot project with voting rights for 16-year-olds on a voluntary basis in some municipalities and regions should be investigated. When it comes to elections to the Riksdag, a constitutional amendment is required.

Two years ago, the government received the final report *Förändring genom försök* from the inquiry on pilot projects in the municipal sector. There, a number of possible pilot projects are discussed, but not specifically the right to vote for 16-year-olds, other than as a reference to a corresponding inquiry in Norway. Regarding Norway, the experiences from Austria were also reflected there, but it was added that it also resulted in more young people being elected into the local and regional parliaments.

I still think that the investigation should be regarded as an opening regarding municipal and regional pilot activities in several areas over time.

Madam Speaker! With that said, I would like to move for the approval of reservation 4, which concerns precisely the right to vote for 16-year-olds.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 21.)

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