Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK

POLITICS

Sweden’s controversial December Agreement collapses

The Christian Democrats' decision to pull out of the controversial December Agreement has led to all of Sweden's centre-right Alliance opposition parties nullifying the accord in a decision which some fear could lead to a snap general election.

Published: 9 October 2015 16:41 CEST
Updated: 10 October 2015 15:18 CEST
Sweden's controversial December Agreement collapses
The Swedish prime minister, Stefan Löfven, and Anna Kinberg Batra, leader of the main opposition party, the Moderates. Photo: Henrik Montgomery / TT

Sweden's mainstream parties struck the December Agreement to avoid unexpected opposition to future government financial plans, following a political crisis sparked by the nationalist Sweden Democrats last autumn, when they sought to prevent the coalition's budget getting through parliament.

Christian Democrat bosses, including leader Ebba Busch Thor, had wanted to keep the hotly debated deal, but were voted down by party members at a party conference on Friday afternoon.

READ ALSO: Why the December Agreement matters

“The December Agreement is a parenthesis in Swedish politics,” said a triumphant Sara Skyttedal after the vote, head of the party's youth wing and who had campaigned for the deal to be scrapped.

“We are not prepared, during this and the next term of office, to be some supporting troops to Stefan Lofven,” said Christian Democrat Anders Andersson, who championed ending the accord at the party's annual convention.

“We don't accept that a left-wing, socialist policy is pushed through the Swedish parliament even though it lacks support.”

As a result, the Moderates and the Liberal People's Party also immediately announced that they were abandoning the accord.

“The Liberal party wants to avoid Sweden being thrown into political chaos, but unfortunately that cannot be excluded,” party leader Jan Bjorklund told Swedish news agency TT, while Anna Kinberg Batra, leader of the Moderates, simply said that if one party pulled out of the deal, all parties would have to.

In a written statement late on Friday night, the Swedish prime minister, Stefan Löfven, said: “It is outrageous that they have violated an agreement that they signed and defended to the voters.”

“Sweden is facing some of the toughest challenges in modern times. The crisis in schools, high unemployment and the refugee crisis must be addressed forcefully. There are now demanding that these parties account for their new promises and not to create another parliamentary deadlock.”

The December Agreement was struck in late 2014 after Prime Minister Stefan Löfven's Social Democrat-Green coalition called a re-election after his budget fell in parliament when the nationalist Sweden Democrats instead of abstaining backed the centre-right opposition's budget.

The snap vote was later scrapped after secret negotiations with the four Alliance parties led to the December Agreement, designed to prevent future similar crises and cut the Sweden Democrats' influence by agreeing to let future government budgets through parliament.

But many of the centre-right parties, including the Christian Democrats, have faced internal criticism over the controversial deal and its bosses were defeated on Friday with 151 members voting for a motion to pull out of the agreement while only 103 voted against.

Some observers warned that the collapse of the accord might lead to a snap general election. 

“This means a much more volatile and unstable situation,” Gothenburg University Political Science Professor Ulf Bjereld said. “The risk of snap elections has increased, but most parties don't want that.”

With Sweden expecting a record number of asylum seekers this year as Europe deals with its biggest refugee crisis since World War Two, the right-wing nationalist Sweden Democrats have been the only party to make significant poll gains since last year's election.

One opinion poll in August had them as the largest party, with a quarter of respondents favouring them, although another poll on Friday put them at just 19.5 percent.

“They (the Sweden Democrats) are the only clear winners of a snap election,” said Bjereld.

However, most experts agreed on Friday that the decision would have little practical implication when parliament votes to agree on a budget this October. The four Alliance parties have previously said they will put forward four separate proposals, which on their own will not enjoy enough support to overrule Löfven's bid.

“It's only if the Alliance parties put forward a common budget and vote for that that the government would be able to lose a vote. But the other parties have not agreed on that,” political scientist Magnus Hagevi of the Linné University told Swedish newswire TT.

But the move could still cause trouble for the mainstream parties, with Sweden Democrat leader Jimmie Åkesson welcoming the decision and announcing on Twitter that he would push for a vote of no confidence next week in an attempt to oust Finance Minister Magdalena Andersson.

 

For members

POLITICS

‘Very little debate’ on consequences of Sweden’s crime and migration clampdown

Sweden’s political leaders are putting the population’s well-being at risk by moving the country in a more authoritarian direction, according to a recent report.

Published: 29 April 2024 08:56 CEST
'Very little debate' on consequences of Sweden's crime and migration clampdown

The Liberties Rule of Law report shows Sweden backsliding across more areas than any other of the 19 European Union member states monitored, fuelling concerns that the country risks breaching its international human rights obligations, the report says.

“We’ve seen this regression in other countries for a number of years, such as Poland and Hungary, but now we see it also in countries like Sweden,” says John Stauffer, legal director of the human rights organisation Civil Rights Defenders, which co-authored the Swedish section of the report.

The report, compiled by independent civil liberties groups, examines six common challenges facing European Union member states.

Sweden is shown to be regressing in five of these areas: the justice system, media environment, checks and balances, enabling framework for civil society and systemic human rights issues.

The only area where Sweden has not regressed since 2022 is in its anti-corruption framework, where there has been no movement in either a positive or negative direction.

Source: Liberties Rule of Law report

As politicians scramble to combat an escalation in gang crime, laws are being rushed through with too little consideration for basic rights, according to Civil Rights Defenders.

Stauffer cites Sweden’s new stop-and-search zones as a case in point. From April 25th, police in Sweden can temporarily declare any area a “security zone” if there is deemed to be a risk of shootings or explosive attacks stemming from gang conflicts.

Once an area has received this designation, police will be able to search people and cars in the area without any concrete suspicion.

“This is definitely a piece of legislation where we see that it’s problematic from a human rights perspective,” says Stauffer, adding that it “will result in ethnic profiling and discrimination”.

Civil Rights Defenders sought to prevent the new law and will try to challenge it in the courts once it comes into force, Stauffer tells The Local in an interview for the Sweden in Focus Extra podcast. 

He also notes that victims of racial discrimination at the hands of the Swedish authorities had very little chance of getting a fair hearing as actions by the police or judiciary are “not even covered by the Discrimination Act”.

READ ALSO: ‘Civil rights groups in Sweden can fight this government’s repressive proposals’

Stauffer also expresses concerns that an ongoing migration clampdown risks splitting Sweden into a sort of A and B team, where “the government limits access to rights based on your legal basis for being in the country”.

The report says the government’s migration policies take a “divisive ‘us vs them’ approach, which threatens to increase rather than reduce existing social inequalities and exclude certain groups from becoming part of society”.

Proposals such as the introduction of a requirement for civil servants to report undocumented migrants to the authorities would increase societal mistrust and ultimately weaken the rule of law in Sweden, the report says.

The lack of opposition to the kind of surveillance measures that might previously have sparked an outcry is a major concern, says Stauffer.

Politicians’ consistent depiction of Sweden as a country in crisis “affects the public and creates support for these harsh measures”, says Stauffer. “And there is very little talk and debate about the negative consequences.”

Hear John Stauffer from Civil Rights Defender discuss the Liberties Rule of Law report in the The Local’s Sweden in Focus Extra podcast for Membership+ subscribers.

SHOW COMMENTS