Löfven Archives • SwedeInternational

Löfven wins!

sitting pretty good right now
image: socialdemokraterna.se

Löfven has most likely managed to pull together the votes to be reinstated as Prime Minister, and will even likely remain so until the next general election in the fall of 2022.

There have been a lot of hiccups, and perhaps some more will come along. However, Löfven has got to be feeling pretty confident right now. Kakabaveh can be handled, the Green party with whom he shares the government has said they’ll vote green for him, and Center party’s latest demands aren’t something that can’t be massaged into palatability.

Kakabaveh has not yet said she has been placated. Kakabaveh gave Löfven a list of demands to get her vote, and they were all heavily left of center. However, most of them can be fobbed off with promises of putting together a committee to look into the matter. For Kakabaveh, a right-leaning government would be even worse, so she is likely to go along with giving Löfven her tacit support and vote with the yellow card.

In a press conference today, Center said that they will vote with a yellow card as well. In return, the Löfven government, she said, has gone along with three of Center’s, frankly, watered-down demands:

making into law the changes in employment regulations (LAS och omställning – in which, among other things, the last-in first-out rule was relaxed)
less restrictive rules on shorefront building (försvagning av strandskyddet), and
that landowners (we’re talking in particular about forest owners) will have more control over how they manage their own property (förstärkt äganderätt för skogsägare)

The twist here is that the Green party, a party that together with the Social Democrats officially forms the government, has absolutely not gone along with these three conditions that the Center party claims “the government” has gone along with. In an interview after Center party’s press conference, Green party co-leader Marta Stenevi said that the Green party was not at all behind these concessions. In fact, they are supposedly red lines for the Green party. Yet, Stenevi said that the Green party will vote red to a Kristersson (Moderate party) government and will vote green on Stefan Löfven for Prime Minister. They say yes, she continues, to a Green, Center, Left and Social Democrat constellation, but a big no to what the Center party says they have an agreement on with the government.

What does this mean!?! Almost nothing. The Green party has historically twisted itself into so many configurations to match the space allowed for them in a government coalition, that it is unlikely in the extreme they will stop a Löfven-led government from returning to power. The bottom line is that although she says no to these supposedly agreed-upon demands from Center, she won’t vote against reinstating Löfven.

Löfven has therefore 175 votes – if not positively for him (green), then at least not against him (green and yellow together, versus red) and that is all that matters.

But wait, there’s more

However, there is potentially a little, little spanner in the works, and that is the budget that needs to be passed in December. But it likely won’t be important. Here goes:

Center’s position, from the beginning, has been that the Left party may not in any way be a contributing partner in budget negotiations. However, what fikas the Social Democrats have with Left party members at the lower levels where the budget is actually hammered out, is not something that Center is going to police. If the Social Democrats and the Green party present a budget (for which they earlier have gotten the Left party’s acceptance) then Center can most likely go along with it.

And even if one of the Löfven-cooperating parties doesn’t go along with the budget, who cares? Löfven has promised to call for new elections if his budget doesn’t pass. The budget comes up for a vote in December. If the government falls over the budget, an election would have to be held latest March. The next general election is in the fall, about six months later. No one – really, no one – wants to have two elections in a six month period. Ergo, no party that doesn’t vote against Löfven now is going to vote to bring down Löfven then. Löfven wins! He gets his government and he gets his budget.

Who knew that the two extreme parties, the Left and the Sweden Democrats, could work so well together for the Social Democrats? Did Center? Not a chance. But did the Social Democrats? Who knows? It’s brilliant, though.

11 Jan. – Sweden’s leadership responds to the Iranian admission of guilt

Sweden responds to Iran’s admission
pic: se.depositphotos.com

“Horrible and terrible” was Prime Minister Stefan Löfven’s response to Iran’s admission of guilt for shooting down the Ukrainian passenger plane. “That a civilian plane has been shot down, regardless if it was a mistake or not, is an action that must be condemned, and that Iran must take full responsibility for, also in regards to the affected parties.” Löfven again also conveyed his condolences to the victims’ families. “Here in Sweden, and throughout the world, people grieve the victims of the plane crash outside Tehran the 8th of January. I feel strongly for all those who lost someone dear to them.”

“I see that they have now taken their responsibility, now that the proof was, apparently, overwhelming” noted Ann Linde, Minister for Foreign Affairs, on Twitter.

Minister for Defense, Peter Hultqvist, also commented on P1 that it would not be enough that Iran conduct a thorough and transparent investigation – the country also has a responsibility to those who have been affected. “It’s too early to say exactly what that will come to mean […] there will be a reckoning at a later stage.” Hultqvist emphasized that Iran was completely responsible for what happened.

In related news, Hultqvist remained positive to Swedish troops remaining in nearby Iraq as long as they had a mandate from the Iraqi government to do so.

10 Jan. – Sweden asking for full access in plane crash investigation

Sadly, it is now confirmed that 17 Swedes died in the plane crash in Iran earlier this week. UD spokesperson, Anna Lundbladh, told news bureau TT that seven people had Swedish citizenship and that the other ten were nationally registered (folkbokförd) in Sweden.

Speaking to DN, Ann Linde, Sweden’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, said that Sweden had no independent confirmation that an Iranian missile shot down the plane. “We have a crash expert who is available, if wanted or needed (ställt till förfogande).

In her conversation with the Iranian Foreign Minister, Linde stated that Sweden is requesting a full, transparent, independant and thorough inquiry. “We are asking for complete access” she said.

In his conversation with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Löfven said they had agreed that the information that Iran had shot down the plane increased the need for a expeditious, complete and transparent investigation. “We were also agreed that the affected countries need to have the possibility to contribute with national expertise and be given complete access to the investigation. We agreed to keep in close contact with the other affected countries” Löfven said to DN.

Sweden is stopping all flights between Sweden and Iran until further notice, SvD reports. In a press release, the Swedish Transport Agency (transportstyrelsen) said the stop was due to uncertainty over the reasons for the crash. The agency has also issued a strong recommendation to all airlines to avoid crossing the region’s airspace. “We are doing this from an air safety perspective” the transport agency’s director for sea and air Gunnar Ljungberg stated, “and in consideration for our passengers.”

08 Jan. – Swedes killed in Iranian crash

many questions in conjunction with the crash
pic: Ebrahim Noroozi/AP

The escalation in the Iran-USA standoff reached Sweden early this morning when a plane leaving Tehran for Kiev burst into flames and crashed, killing all on board. Swedish casualties are currently at ten, but other sources have the figure at seventeen.

“It’s a terrible and shocking event. Many Swedes have been lost. My thoughts go to the victims and their families” said Minister for Foreign Affairs Anne Linde. UD’s spokesperson Anna Lundbladh told DN that the ministry was working on site through the embassy in Tehran to get better information.

Prime Minister Stefan Löfven echoed his minister’s comments, saying he was thinking of the victims, and called for an investigation into the crash’s causes.

Swede Peter Saffer has already been appointed the Swedish expert liaison for the crash, in accordance with the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation. The plane was in the air only a few minutes before it crashed. According to Iranian authorities there were no distress signals received.

The plane was first announced to have suffered a mechanical failure, but that idea has since been thrown into doubt as the plane was less than four years old and the pilots were experienced. The Swedish Accident Investigation Authority (haverikommissionen) have since said the accident’s causes will have to be determined.

Questions have also been raised as to whether the crash was a tragic accident or if it could somehow be connected to the rapid and recent escalation in tensions between the USA and Iran. The two black boxes from the plane have been recovered, but where their contents will be analysed is unresolved. Hans Kjäll, senior flight safety analyst at Nordic Safety Analysis Group, told SvD that there is uncertainty regarding Iran’s resources at this time. Normally, also the airline’s manufacturer, Boeing, would be involved with recovering the information but at this sensitive political juncture, their efforts could be unwelcome. Even what role and access Ukrainian authorities could be granted is uncertain. If Iran goes along with it, the boxes could also be sent to the French aviation security authority.

Here in Sweden, the names of the casualties will be released only after their relatives and family have been notified.

9 Dec. – political Twister

strange political twists
pic: amazon.com

As expected, the government and its partners, the Center and Liberal parties, agreed today to postpone and rethink the Employment Service’s reform and privatisation. As written about in this post and this post, Jonas Sjöstedt threatened to bring a vote of no confidence to the floor if the government didn’t stop the reform. The Sweden Democrats (SD), as well as the Moderate and Christian Democratic parties, hopped on the Left party’s train. This was an unexpected development for the government, never having imagined these parties to side with each other on anything.

After a weekend of negotiations with the Center and Liberal parties – the Center party being the main instigator of the Service’s privatisation to begin with – the government has proposed a new timetable for the reform. As Göran Eriksson at SvD puts it, the government backed off on all the points that SD and the Moderate, Christian Democratic and Left parties agreed upon and had a majority in parliament to back it up with, but kept the points that those parties didn’t agree on and didn’t therefore have a parliamentary majority on. In other words, the government satisfied the SD, Moderate and Christian Democratic demands, but not all of the Left party’s demands. How the Center, for whom this matter was close to the heart, is going to frame the postponement remains to be seen.

The gist of the new proposal is that “the law of free system choice” (Lagen om valfrihetssystem, or LOV) will not be the only regulation implemented for employment actors ( – so not just private employment companies will be allowed to help job seekers, but also public organizations like the current employment service and even voluntary organisations can be involved). The government has also gone along with instituting a control system so that there is some kind of check on which companies are being paid from public coffers for doing what. Finally, the reform timetable is being put off a year, to 2022 (DN.se/reform).

So the government is saved, and what remains is how the parties are spinning it. Liberal party leader Nyamko Sabuni, one of the government’s supporting parties, is insisting (despite all evidence to the contrary) that the Left party had no influence over the government’s decision (according to the January agreement that allowed Löfven to hold onto power, the Left party is not “allowed” to have any influence over government policy). The Moderate party is calling the Liberal statement “nonsense“. As previously noted in this blog, Löfven is likely delighted over the postponement.

What he is likely not at all delighted about is this newfound spirit of cooperation between opposition parties with completely different political bents. It is hard to see where they might cooperate next (and they’re certainly not saying) but who knows. The Left party didn’t mind using public support from SD to get their way – gasp – which was also somewhat interesting (they didn’t have lunch or anything though). The Moderate party leader has had lunch with the SD leader Jimmie Åkesson just recently, but now has also just backed the Left party.

What bizarre political constellations can possibly follow?

30 Oct. – no to IS families

For many people, Sweden’s inability, or unwillingness, to bring back to Sweden the children of Swedish citizens in refugee camps for IS-sympathizers has been slightly inexplicable. After all, if a determined grandfather can go in there and get out his 7 orphan grandchildren, surely the government of Sweden can rescue the others if they wanted to. They have said it’s complicated, but that they’re really trying (see this post).

In an interview with Dagens Nyheter, published yesterday in connection with the “Speaking memories – the Holocaust’s last witnesses” exhibition at the Swedish History Museum, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven made clear that he wasn’t interested in bringing back families.

To those who traveled to IS country, Löfven had this message – you must lie in the bed you made (stå din kast). “Clearly,” said Löfven, “they were attracted to a community – for some reason I can’t understand – in which they believed. I can’t answer for them, but the rest our society must condemn it. And those that went there, they have to accept the consequences for what they did. Some of them say they would now like to come home. No. They were advised not to travel there already in 2011, but they went anyway, and now they must live with the results of their actions. I can’t feel anything but disgust. Seriously. What IS did there… you can’t believe it’s true when you hear the stories that come from those who have survived. Sweden shall be something quite different.”

It’s not clear if Stefan Löfven was speaking as the leader of the Social Democratic party or for the government, but at least he staked out a clear position. Going forward, it’s still unclear as regards the children. Certainly, it’s hard to say that their staying in the camps is acting in accord with the child’s best interests – an otherwise governing principle in Swedish affairs and in the soon-to-be-Swedish-law Convention on the Rights of the Child. But keeping the child with a parent has been another governing principle, and one that the government has perhaps decided it wants to have come first this time. However clear Löfven might want to be, he’s still ducking this issue.

14 Oct. – Löfven reported – again

the hot seat of a KU committee interview
pic: axisimagingnews.com

Moderate party leader Ulf Kristersson has reported Prime Mininster Stefan Löfven to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (konstitutionsutskottet). When Stefan Löfven said in an interview the other day that Sweden needed to take in fewer refugees, coalition partner the Green Party hit the roof: Taking in fewer refugees is not their party line at all, so how could Löfven have said that? Löfven responded that he was only speaking as party leader of the Social Democrats at that particular moment.

“But who would know that?” is the Moderate party question. As Prime Minister, Löfven speaks for the government. In all that he says, goes the the thought, one “should be able to count on that the statements coming from the Prime Minister are correct” (fplus.se). To Expressen, migration policy spokesperson Maria Malmer Stenergard from the Moderate party said that she would not have reported it if she hadn’t believed that a wrong had been committed (fplus.se).

A report to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs sounds serious, perhaps, and it should be, but it’s not, really. The committee is made up of 17 parliament representatives from all the parties, supported by an small office of civil servants. Their job is to review the performance of government ministries and the handling of government affairs. (They also go through documents from the various government offices to make sure that laws and praxes were followed in all cases.)

When someone is reported, they interview the person. These interviews are public, so they can be awkward. Most of the time, that’s the point. However, if a charge is leveled then it goes directly to the Swedish supreme court. This has happened exactly once since the mid 1800’s. Generally, someone gets mildly slapped on the wrist and told not to do whatever it was again, but in a next-to-worst-case, a committee report can be used as the basis for a non-confidence vote.

According to Expressen, Stefan Löfven was reported to the committee (KU-anmäld) 27 times before he’d even completed a full term of office (Expressen.se/KULöfven). Most of the reporting has been leveled at him from the Moderate party, naturally enough. But every party except the Green Party has reported him at least once. In his ten years of office, ex-Prime Minister Göran Persson was reported “only” 26 times, so we’re talking about a huge increase in reporting especially in the last few years.

This has, of course, watered down the seriousness of being reported significantly, and seems now mostly just a show for public consumption – well, what’s more likely is that it’s a show for privately disgruntled and frustrated opposition party members. The public, at this point, is mostly just rolling their eyes.

1 Oct. – the government reshuffles

Two new ministers were appointed in the Löfven government today: one oldie and one newbie. Ardelan Shekarabi takes over as Minister for Social Security (better known here as socialförsäkringsminister) from his previous post as minister of public administration, and a new name for many of us, Lena Micko, has been given Shekarabi’s old job.

Shekarabi made headlines recently with a facebook post saying that Sweden’s migration policy needed to be sharpened up, by quite a bit (see this post). Many observers wondered if it was a play for the position of party leader in the near future. Maybe it paid off, or, he’s being punished for his attention seeking: The Minister for Social Security is a much (much) more visible post, responsible for, oh, little things like health care, elder care, taking care of disabled people and children, and the general health and welfare of society.

Shekarabi has previously publicly shook his fist at the practices of and advertisements for the gambling industry in Sweden, which fall under the purview of the social security department. Perhaps he was then already preparing for this position. He’s not saying. But his facebook post, his efforts to reign in gambling that garnered a lot of air time, and of course his eye-catching bow ties all lead to visibility. His new position will only increase it.

The other new appointment is Lena Micko who will take over as Minister for Public Administration – a position which is almost as exciting as it sounds. Micko comes lately from the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting, SKL) where she was board member and second vice chair. More importantly, she’s a long term, card carrying social democratic party member.

According to Göran Eriksson at SvD, Micko has long experience of working at the municipal level, and knows how they work and what they want. She is supposed to be of the practical sort, and of the more right-leaning bent – similar to the Liberal and Center parties that were actually once part of the right-leaning alliance but who now are supporting cast members in the Löfven government. Micko and the Center and Liberal parties might get along like a house on fire. There’s going to be an even more unhappy left flank if so, but though they’ve expressed some dismay over a few things, they haven’t caused any real trouble for the rest of the social democratic party.

Micko is sure to fight for more money to the municipalities via the national cost equalisation system (kostnadsutjämningssystemet), discussed in this blog. Another change that might soon come from her appointment is less directed government grants to municipalities. Directed grants more often need to be applied for and are supposed to be used for specific purposes. They also require more administration, read: time and money. If grants are more general they’re easier and can be used how the municipalities see fit. It could be good to remember that directed grants were at one time part of the general grant – they were changed to directed grants for a reason. It might be a good idea to find out why (and fix it) before switching back.

In all, these appointments could be exciting. Or at least interesting. And blog food. There will be plays to the political right and plays to the political left. So far, it must be said that the Social Democratic party has handled the differences without breaking apart in public. It’s impressive, or scary internal control.

1 sep. – Kristersson’s top ten list

In advance of his “summer speech,” Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson has sent 10 suggestions to combat crime that the Moderate Party is willing to support and cooperate on to Prime Minister, and Social Democrat party leader, Stefan Löfven. Although the text isn’t public yet, several points have leaked, including a proposal to allow court witnesses to be anonymous.

Anonymous witnesses has been a recurring debate over the past couple years, as crime has risen and the number of people willing to witness, in particular in connection with gang violence, has decreased to near zero levels. Witnesses have been threatened into staying quiet, have been assaulted, and even murdered. A change of this magnitude in the Swedish court system would be difficult to get through, but already last April the government started an investigation into seeing if it would be possible under Swedish constitutional law: There are many that believe it isn’t. One country that Sweden could look at as an example is Norway, where anonymous witnesses are allowed.

SvD reports that Kristersson’s list also contains a suggestion for making it easy, and legal, for police to carry out body searches, in certain zones only, if the person is suspected, for example, of carrying an illegal weapon. No concrete suspicion must be presented for a body search to take place. The suggestion list is also said to include lowering the threshold for requiring the police to take someone into custody, and doubling the sentence of any gang member that is convicted of committing a crime. According to Kristersson, the increase in violent crime is something that requires just a broad mobilisation, and presumably some stiff law-making.

So far there has been no answer from Löfven, which is natural since perhaps it isn’t considered so seemly for the Prime Minister to jump when Kristersson says so. Kristersson says he expects an answer though: “Either he’s ready to make changes and lead the country out of this crisis, or he’s not.” “In the end,” Kristersson finished, “you have to lead the country or leave the job.”

30 aug. – more upset politicians

*pic:* https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/rekordhogt-fortroende-for-akesson/

There have been many politicians speaking their outrage over the violent crimes that have made the papers recently – see yesterday’s post. But they’re not happy today either. Despite concerted efforts at ignoring, freezing out, shunning and generally speaking ill of the Sweden Democrats, the popularity of party leader Jimmie Åkesson continues unabated. The latest DN/Ipsos poll shows that the number of people who express a strong confidence in – nay, have faith in – Jimmie Åkesson, is at its highest level ever: 27%. ().

Somewhat comforting might be that 68% of respondents say they have no confidence in Jimmie Åkesson. But that is his lowest number ever. As Expressen notes, he now has fewer voters opposed to him than Isabella Lövin, the Green Party leader.

That has just got to hurt.

Stefan Löfven (S) remains at the top with a 40% trusted rating. He is followed by Ebba Busch Thor (KD) at 35% and Ulf Kristersson (M) at 31%. Jonas Sjöstedt (V) and Annie Lööf (C) are neck and neck at 30%. Jimmie comes next with his 27%, followed by the last three: Sabuni (L) at 20% and the two Green Party leaders Lövin and Bolund at 17% and 11% respectively.

Jenny Madestam at Expressen explains the phenomenon by reasoning that Åkesson is a leader with firm principles: “He’s a known quantity – you know where you have him.” Possibly, the razor that is the January Agreement between the left block and members of the right block has cut both ways. Löfven’s average numbers can reflect a lack of enthusiasm for giving in to a chunk of right-block demands, and Lööf’s numbers (down from 41% last September) a reflection of the glitter vest and pompoms she waves around for the Social Democrats.

On the other hand, these numbers can mean very little in the larger scheme of things. Everything can be explained, or explained away. The latter is more likely: As Dagens Nyheter notes, every single party leader has more voters that don’t have faith in them than voters that do (). If that doesn’t take some mental manipulation to handle, nothing does.