Sweden election 2022

[Person Man]

Yes, policy-wise an S and M government (or at least some kind of support deal) could indeed work well.

Both parties represent The Establishment^TM and thus share a number of policy positions and have compatible governing attitudes:

• Both parties prefer incremental change and pursuing broad consensus and dislike radical policy swings.
• Both parties agree that the threat from Russia should be taken seriously and Sweden's defenses should be strengthened (especially the airforce and cybersecurity).
• Both parties now agree on NATO membership.
• Both parties agree that Sweden has taken in a large number of refugees and asylum seekers in a very short time period and while a minimum number should continue to be accepted, the overall numbers need to be cut
• Both parties agree that Sweden's immigration rules for low-earning labor are too generous and should be tightened, and conversely Sweden needs to do more to make high-skill/highly-educated immigration more attractive
• Both parties agree that growing segregation is a problem and that the police should be strengthened to deal with issues such as increased gang activity
• While they disagree on the specifics (obviously S being the labor union party and wants more worker-friendly policies while M is the party of the business community and wants to tweak rules such as the turn-taking and hiring & firing protections), both parties agree on the general structure of the Swedish Model regarding the pillars of the welfare state and maintaining the current labor market.
• Both parties agree that an industrial base should be maintained and becoming a purely service-based economy is undesirable.
• Both parties agree that nuclear energy forms a reliable base for about 35% of electricity generation and going fully-renewables carries too many risks.

But of course, as Realpolitik said, they despise each other to a pretty strong degree. M's entire thing is that they can take out a social democratic government, so supporting such a government or even PM would be a betrayal of their main issue. S would almost certainly demand the post of prime minister in any such arrangement as a condition for support, and this is unacceptable to M.

This isn't like Germany where the SPD and CDU can agree on things even when out of power (e.g. the asylum compromise between the CDU-FDP government and the SPD in 1992 or the defense spending package this past spring between the Scholz government and the CDU) or even like Finland where the Big 3 parties (SDP, NCP, Centre) take turns forming governments of two parties and then one goes into opposition. The SAP has been so dominant in Sweden historically that it changes the dynamic completely.

So such a coalition would be very "conservative" in a low-c way.

[Person Man]

Annnnnnd we have an agreement. Details still forthcoming but here is what I have so far:

It is called the "Tidö Agreement" because it was negotiated at Tidö Castle outside Stockholm. Looks like L has completely caved to SD in the end. The government will be M + KD + L, with SD as a support party

• The increased A-kassa unemployment benefits that were instituted during the pandemic will stay
• Nuclear power will be expanded, with up to 400 billion SEK in government financing guarantees
• Increased requirements for citizenship.
• The number of quota refugees is to be reduced from 6,400 last year to 900
• The right to asylum must be protected, but also limited in relation to today
• Sweden's legislation for receiving asylum must be adapted so as not to be more generous than is the obligation according to EU law.
• Strongly reduced labor immigration
• Investigation into how voluntary return migration can be encouraged.
• There should be an investigation which must analyze the conditions for reintroducing the possibility of deporting foreigners who show a lack of character, such as a lack of compliance with the rules such as crime, prostitution, abuse and participation in violent organizations
• A national census will take place
• The energy policy goal is changed from 100 percent "renewable" to 100 percent fossil-free
• An investigation into the restart of Ringhals 1 and 2 will be carried out quickly
• KD gets through its points on healthcare, which include an investigation on the nationalization of the healthcare system from the regions, expanding primary care, investigating the inclusion of dental care, special investments in cancer and childhood cancer care, including aftercare and rehabilitation, and a plan about childbirth standards and services
• A new independent school law is to be introduced
• Teaching time must be increased and the school's governing documents (curricula, course plans and subject plans) reformed and given increased focus on learning, skills and factual and subject knowledge
• A knowledge-focused grading system is introduced to stop problems with grade inflation
• Profit distribution must not occur in the first years after a school is started or bought by a new owner.
• Major subsidy reform with, among other things allowance ceiling and activity requirements for those living on welfare.
• The tax on work is reduced with a focus on low and middle income earners.
• Reduced tax on pensions and savings
• The independence of the public service media must remain and its long-term funding maintained
• Measures are taken to reduce the political control of cultural content.

Overall a marked shift to the right but relatively tame. SD gets what it wanted on immigration, while L completely caved. In turn, L gets its way on education and media. KD gets its healthcare proposals, M gets tax cuts. L and KD maintain the current levels of foreign aid. M, SD, and KD get their crime proposals. Defense policy is unanimous.

Of course, many of these are agreements in principle and the devil is always in the details. There are many proposals for parliamentary investigations into pet issues, but an investigation does not automatically mean a party gets an actual law through.

It will be interesting to see how the Liberal voter base reacts to this. Basically their behavior over the past few years has shown they cannot be trusted in what they say, and they always cave in the end. It will also be interesting to see if the parliamentary group accepts this; this is a major concession to SD and just a few weeks ago, three of their members defected in an anonymous vote and they only need two to defeat Kristersson on Monday. They basically agreed to sell out entirely on SD influence, immigration & refugees, and even welfare cuts. And what do they get in return? Some scraps on education and media.

This actually feels like a Kotek or Youngkinesque sort of deal with a welcome emphasis on nuclear infrastructure.