Sverigeval: One month after the vote, why is there still no government?
One month after Sweden’s parliamentary elections on September 11 and everything looks as usual in the Nordic nation.
Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson — whose left bloc narrowly lost the vote to right-wing parties — has represented his country recently European Political Community Summit in Prague; she has led her country response to explosions in the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea and on Tuesday was called a special meeting of the country’s “crisis council” to update the latest on the investigation.
But her days in the job are numbered.
Behind the scenes, the four parties that made up the winning bloc in September’s election have been negotiating, with few leaks to indicate how things are going.
A two-week extension from the Speaker of the Riksdag to the Sweden Democrats, Moderates, Liberals and Christian Democrats expires on Wednesday, and the politician who hopes to become Sweden’s next prime minister, Moderates leader Ulf Kristersson, must report on his progress.
“It’s in the balance whether it will be a result on schedule or not,” said Professor Jonas Hinnforsa political scientist at University of Gothenburg.
“If we have a government agreement on Wednesday, that means a vote on Friday or Monday in parliament and then a handover ceremony with the king present,” he told Euronews.
So what are some of the policy changes at play?
Although the far-right, anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats are the largest party on the right, it is the Moderates, the second largest party, that is leading the talks on forming a new government.
It is because the Sweden Democrats and their leader Jimmie Åkesson are so unsavory that the other parties do not want to see them as the prime minister’s party.
But the Sweden Democrats continue to have the strongest cards:
Scenario 1: The Sweden Democrats are a formal part of the coalition government, where their political agenda forms a large part of the new administration’s official program. However, they have indicated that they do not want to be in government with the Liberals, so this could freeze the Liberals out of the formal government, but still support them in Parliament.
Scenario 2: The Sweden Democrats are not formally part of the government but they have secured a detailed set of commitments from the other parties with strict policy goals and timetables – they would effectively be pulling the strings behind the scenes, and Swedish media reports that they have already secured the leadership of four important parliamentary committees and the role of the Deputy Speaker of Parliament.
Scenario 3: All four parties are reaching agreement — however uneasy — on a unified government program they’ve hammered out over the past month.
Both of the first two scenarios would see future Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson rely on one party or another in a supply and confidence agreement to get some work done in the Riksdag. He would potentially face the possibility that they would vote against him, but this is no different from how Magdalena Andersson had to work, relying on the support of her leftist allies in a minority government.
The third scenario would be the most unstable, bringing together parties and personalities that are fundamentally opposed to each other in so many areas: and if one party were to become too aggressive or demanding, it could cause another to falter and consider its place in government.
“The four parties were on speaking terms before the election, and they agree on some policy areas, but what speaks against a deal on Wednesday is that while they are on the same page on issues like nuclear power, stricter immigration rules, more police and longer sentences for criminals, there are huge areas where they don’t get along,” Professor Hinnfors explained.
Some areas where the four parties clearly disagree are social benefits – how generous the state should be with unemployment or sickness benefits – and levels of international aid.
There is also a gap in political positions regarding human rights, minority rights, culture and media policy over how to deal with Sweden’s public service company SVT, and decisively there are problems around identity politics and how “Swedish” society is.
– This is important for the Sweden Democrats because they see themselves as the party of ethnic Swedes, and they want to define the state administration and public institutions as a support for their Swedish values, says Hinnfors.
“On one side you have the Liberals, and on the other side you have the Sweden Democrats, and not only are they not liberal, but they are anti-liberal. Illiberal,” he added, noting that the Moderates must try and negotiate the formation of a government when there is a great deal of mutual suspicion between the parties.
So far, the negotiations have been conducted by a senior representative from each party, but not the leaders themselves. On Saturday, however, the four right-wing party leaders met at a conference center outside Stockholm.
This was either a sign that their negotiators had reached an impasse and needed to refer matters to their bosses or a sign that some sort of deal was close at hand – depending on which political commentators you happen to read.
“It is not unlikely that we will get an agreement,” said Professor Hinnfors.
“But perhaps a more likely outcome is another extension so the parties can continue to talk.”