SVT24.
Strängnäs. We continue our party leader interviews ahead of the election, and now we have come to the home of Moderate leader Ulf Kristersson.
Yes. And we are standing here outside the library. We have the harbour and Lake Mälaren behind us.
What is special about Strängnäs in particular?
It is a fantastic small town, I would say. It has all the historical assets of a small town, including Lake Mälaren, and yet it is close to rather large cities — Eskilstuna, Södertälje, Stockholm. So you can both live the small, intimate small-town life and have access to everything a larger city offers.
We are wondering a bit what marks you have left in this town. We have sent out our reporter William Brynsson to find out.
Classic ground: Ulf Kristersson's Strängnäs. In here he was municipal finance commissioner from 2002 onwards. It was also exactly here that he did an interview when it became apparent that he would leave Strängnäs to become social welfare commissioner in Stockholm. We move on. Ulf Kristersson lives here in Strängnäs. Have you seen him?
Yes, but it was about half a year ago that I saw him running. He took a run along the quay by the mill, and then I saw the bodyguard jogging about 50 metres behind him.
And he seems to be doing well here, he and the family. What is it that makes Strängnäs good?
Well, just look around. It is beautiful. Yes, that is true. I think we should go to the church.
Yes, his wife works there.
Strängnäs Cathedral. Birgitta Ed, Ulf Kristersson's wife. Yes, she is a priest here in the parish.
Many people see her jogging here. Does he have a good pace, would you say?
He has a really good pace, and he runs right past where I live.
Yes.
And he is very fast. Twenty years ago he ran a race up at Vasavallen.
Where should we go then?
Then you need to go through town and up Eskilstunavägen, and you will come to our old sports hall.
Yes, this is historic ground, because here at Vasavallen in Strängnäs, Ulf Kristersson and other municipal politicians gathered 20 years ago before the 2006 election to run 60 metres in some kind of election race.
Only terrible starts. It is left against right. Aronsson goes well. Kristersson goes well. Kristersson throws himself forward. He can run across the finish line. Left second. The People's Party third.
Well, what a victory. But the question is, could the prime minister have managed that time today? He will have to answer that. We move on.
Yes, we are at the library here in Strängnäs. The audience is invited by the Moderates and Ulf Kristersson. That looked fast. Are you as fast in the sprint today as you were then?
Probably not. I probably trained even more back then than I do today, especially on the short, fast distances. There was a lot about running here, but we thought we would leave that now.
We leave it now.
Instead we should start with the latest developments on your side of politics, because it seems a bit messy. This weekend Jimmie Åkesson criticised Ebba Busch for flirting with the left and questioned whether it can be trusted that the Christian Democrats will not put forward Magdalena Andersson as prime minister if the Tidö side loses the election. That made Ebba Busch reroute her election campaign bus to Sölvesborg today to calm Åkesson down over a coffee.
Yes. And Åkesson is not satisfied. He now demands that Ebba Busch come out publicly and assure that she will dismiss all invitations to put forward Magdalena Andersson as prime minister. Otherwise he does not want to go in for the other parties, as he says.
What do you say to this demand from Åkesson on Ebba Busch?
Well, if you want to talk about Jimmie Åkesson and Busch, it is better to talk to them. I feel very secure in the overall team. Of course, when you cooperate as intensely as we have done for four years, and as we now also want to do after the next election, it is clear that, as some people point out, sometimes it is hugs, sometimes it is a bit of bickering. That is how it is when you work closely together. We are also in the middle of an intense election campaign. Everyone is working around the clock. One or another nerve is lying a bit on the surface, so to speak. So this is nothing serious — I know these people well. We have a common blog. We cultivate the strengths in our common ability, and we want to show the risks in the blue-and-yellow team — no, in the red-and-green team.
But there are only two weeks left until the election. And what do you say to Åkesson's demand on Ebba Busch? He is very clear that she should say that in no situation will she contribute to putting forward Magdalena Andersson as prime minister. Do you agree that she needs to make that clear?
Well, I know Ebba Busch well. We have worked almost daily for nine years. This is our third joint election campaign. I have not the slightest doubt — we have a common team. We want to win this election too, because we have common tasks ahead of us, so I... [sighs] Ebba Busch will not do an Annie Lööf and suddenly switch sides and prefer a Social Democrat.
But how do you see Jimmie Åkesson demanding this?
They have had a cup of coffee today. I think that will settle down. It is intense now. It gets a bit bickering sometimes. But everyone knows that the dominant experience of our cooperation is that we get things done. We agree, we compromise, we get things done. That is still the big story. Of course, sometimes there can be a bit of disagreement about something. We have had that before. We have resolved those things too.
But you are the one leading this team, and here you have Jimmie Åkesson, who is clearly not satisfied with the state of affairs after this coffee with Busch. He has a demand that she should publicly clarify whether she completely dismisses the idea of supporting Magdalena Andersson after the election.
I feel very secure that this election has two government alternatives. There is a blue-and-yellow team and there is a red-and-green team. Everyone knows this. Then there will always be illusions created of all sorts of other completely unrealistic alternatives. The four of us go to the polls together to win this election. I feel completely secure in this.
But it does not seem like it is the media that has created this — it is actually Jimmie Åkesson who has made these demands on Ebba Busch, and he demands that she should explain herself and publicly distance herself from the ideas of cooperating with Magdalena Andersson. And he says she should do this because if it does not happen, he is not sure he could vouch for the Tidö parties' cooperation.
Is that not serious?
I just feel secure in this cooperation, and I also feel secure with the Christian Democrats, so I just take a position. As I said, we have nine years of experience. It has worked every time so far. We have four years behind us with daily cooperation, and we have decided to jointly meet the voters to be able to form a new common government after the election. All of this is much, much more than the other side has ever managed. So I feel completely secure. She will not do an Annie Lööf and suddenly prefer a Social Democrat.
You feel secure with her, but Jimmie Åkesson is apparently a bit...
Then they should have another cup of coffee.
But can one interpret it this way: if Busch does not do as Åkesson demands, then you no longer have a real team?
I think everyone is fully aware that we do. We have everything the other side does not have — both the experience, the credibility, and common plans going forward. We have that.
But he says that you are whipping yourselves up over individual incidents, he says.
Perfectly fine. And they have had a cup of coffee afterwards. It is not more dramatic than that. Sometimes things happen during an election campaign. There is a bit of friction. I have experienced friction before. Then you resolve those things calmly. And they will do that too.
I think many people who see and follow this news still think — because they have heard that you are such a welded-together team — and then when this comes out and Åkesson is clearly not satisfied with the state of affairs, then the question arises of how welded together you really are.
Well, then one could say this: if you compare the two sides with each other, everyone knows that we have the common direction that is missing on the other side. That there are four different parties — that is no secret, you cannot have missed that either. That there are four parties that sometimes think a bit differently, have slightly different priorities. Four parties that all want to be the biggest, best, and most beautiful. It is an election campaign. You cannot be unaware of that.
You think a bit differently on another question too. The opposition still has a big lead. The Liberals are still far below the Riksdag threshold in the opinion polls, and even on this question Jimmie Åkesson has made a move. Here is what he said in our interview in Sölvesborg last Sunday.
We have said that if there are 10 days left until the election and they have not reached 3.5% in the polls, then it is at least my opinion that all blue-and-yellow voters should vote for one of the other parties in this bloc.
So they should not vote for the Liberals at all.
No, there are no historical experiences that say you can manage then. On the contrary. You usually need to be above the 4% threshold in the polls in order to manage that threshold.
Jimmie Åkesson thinks that no Tidö voters should vote for the Liberals if the Liberals, on Thursday when there are 10 days left, have not reached 3.5%. Do you agree with him?
I have said throughout this election campaign that it is quite obvious that every party must win confidence on its own merits. I have not changed that. I have never urged anyone to cast a tactical vote, not once. If you fundamentally think the Moderates are the best party, you should vote for the Moderates. I spend every day trying to get more people to vote for the Moderates. Then everyone knows that the Moderates can cooperate well with other parties. I have no other message there. If you think we are good, vote for the Moderates. Tactical voting for someone — I do not really believe in that.
He also seems to be of the view that even those who otherwise intended to cast their vote for the Liberals, since the Liberals do not seem to be entering the Riksdag, should cast their votes for one of the other Tidö parties in order to strengthen your chances of actually winning the election.
I will always think that everyone should vote for the Moderates, including people who otherwise think that some parties on my side are good or second best. So there is nothing new in that.
But is there a situation where you would urge people who would otherwise vote for the Liberals to vote for...
All voters eventually draw their own conclusion about what to vote for, and we respect that. You vote for what you yourself think is best. There can be different grounds for why you choose that party, but as I said, I will never urge anyone to cast a tactical vote.
But what Jimmie Åkesson is saying here is that if you do not do something now, the risk is that the Liberals get 2% and your side loses. Must you not then either decide whether you will urge voters to cast tactical votes for the Liberals, or instead say that they should cast their votes for other Tidö parties?
As I said, every voter chooses — it is ultimately up to them how they want to cast their vote, and there can be various reasons for voting for a party. My message is that I will never urge anyone to cast a tactical vote for any other party. I have held that position for a long time, and I hold it in this election too.
You are the prime minister and leader of this team on your side. But one could get the impression that it is Jimmie Åkesson who is setting the guidelines for how you should behave at the end of this campaign.
Well, you always want to talk about Jimmie Åkesson. It would be better if you talked to him about him instead of talking to me about him. We have had this conversation quite a few times, haven't we?
About what he has said and how he has acted, and we wonder how you see it. One just wonders how it has come about that he has taken the lead here.
Everyone has the right to express what they think. I have said again and again, I do not recommend anyone to cast a tactical vote for any party at all. If you think my party is the best, vote for the Moderates. That is my leadership task.
Then we change the subject.
Yes, we shall do that. And it will be about unemployment. This is what it looked like on your election posters in 2022: 'Europe's fourth-highest unemployment should make the government unemployed', you said then.
And today Sweden still has the EU's fourth-highest unemployment. Should that make your government unemployed?
Not at all, because we take this matter very, very seriously, and above all we have done something about the dominant cause of long-term unemployment, which was the far too large asylum immigration over a very long time. I think most people in Sweden understand that if you come to Sweden with low education or none at all, do not speak Swedish for natural reasons, and perhaps have no experience of working at all, then the Swedish labour market is hard to enter. And now we have changed the whole migration policy. The structural unemployment, as it is called — which is not about cyclical fluctuations — we now have much, much better conditions to do something about when we have much, much lower asylum immigration. That is the single most important thing. The previous government did not want to do that, and that is why this unemployment just keeps getting worse.
But if you look at how things stand, Sweden had the EU's fourth-highest unemployment four years ago and still has it.
Yes, but there are some other differences too. The first is that it has taken us a few years to change the whole asylum immigration. That does not mean unemployment automatically goes down at once. The second is that we have gone from a relatively good economic cycle to a prolonged downturn. Everyone knows that too. We have 10% inflation, we were almost last in the growth league. Then the cyclical unemployment also grows, which most people I think understand. That too is now on its way up. We have better growth, lower inflation, lower interest rates, and we have seen several months of falling unemployment. It is brightening now. That is also good for the immigrants who do not have such high qualifications, because then it also becomes easier for them to enter.
But if we look at the figures, unemployment today is 8.7%. That is 500,000 people in Sweden without a job. That is 100,000 more unemployed compared with when you took office.
And then again the question — you talk here about inflation and so on, but I mean, all governments run into a lot of problems and challenges. Previously it was the corona pandemic and so on. What is it that means you have not brought down unemployment during these four years, when it was such an important issue when you went to the polls four years ago?
Well, I have just answered those two things. We have changed the migration policy. That creates entirely new conditions. We are not building up a new exclusion. Had we taken in another 320,000 asylum immigrants, how do you think unemployment would look? And on top of that we have turned the economic development around — out of the downturn, from high inflation to low, from low growth to higher growth. Now the conditions in the Swedish economy are much, much better. So this will turn around. But the first thing to say is that of course we want everyone to work. The benefits reform means that those who can work should also work and not live on benefits. We are doing many such things. It is turning around.
At the same time, Sweden has fared worse than the EU average during this mandate period. In Sweden unemployment has increased, while in the EU on average it has decreased somewhat. Why is that?
There are many different measures. One measure everyone knows is that we have a very high labour force participation in Sweden, and that makes it easier to have unemployment when you have high labour force participation. That is no reason not to make an effort at all.
But the combination of an economy on the way up and migration on the way down creates entirely different conditions than having more unemployed today than when you took office. And wait a moment — you have fared worse than the EU average. You said on that poster that it was so important to get unemployment in order, and yet it does not really look like that.
Migration policy, changed the economic policy. It takes a little time.
What do you think happens in a prolonged downturn in one of Europe's most export-dependent economies?
Well, all of Europe has had a downturn.
Yes, but there is a big difference. The Swedish economy is very much export-driven. We trade with very many other countries. When there is a downturn, not only in Sweden but also in Europe, the Swedish economy is affected more than other countries' economies.
This too is now slowly but surely turning around. If you read Dagens Industri yesterday, best in class. The Swedish economy is best in class. I am a bit worried about the constant running down of Swedish economic success. We have exceptionally good conditions... And then I say that we have changed the policy and thereby got better conditions to bring down unemployment in the coming years.
But you say you have changed it, but if you look at what you are talking about — structural unemployment, those who are very far from being able to get a job because of lack of qualifications and perhaps poor Swedish and so on — they are long-term unemployed, and that group has not decreased during these years.
That is why we are changing the policy there too. Requirements to learn the Swedish language.
But if I may just ask you, because you knew this when you went to the polls. That was what you really wanted to achieve — something to bring down this long-term unemployment, to get these people into working life so that they do not have to live on benefits. You cannot wish unemployment away. You have to take the measures that remove unemployment.
Yes, but as I said, we have drastically reduced asylum immigration in Sweden. That creates new conditions. We have changed the policy for immigrants — we now require people to also learn Swedish. We are working on the benefits reform. Those who can work should work, move into work. Benefits must never lead to higher incomes than wage incomes. All of this is major change. Of course this does not show results immediately, least of all when you are simultaneously in a downturn. You cannot wish for results if you are not prepared to take the measures. It is like the Social Democrats with crime — they want our results on crime but not to do any of our measures. That is simply how it works. In the first place, stick to your own policy.
Yes. Or the Sweden Democrats — no, that was your view of what happens there. But I just thought that you have been on this a great deal — that you want to increase the differences between having a job and being on benefits, to increase the economic incentives to work. But as you are surely aware, the Fiscal Policy Council — they mean that the vast majority in this group of long-term unemployed are far from the labour market and so on. They already have good incentives to work, the Fiscal Policy Council's experts say. What they lack is precisely qualifications in the form of education, language, and so on. Why have you not invested more in that?
Well, we are doing a great deal on that, as I said. Swedish for immigrants is a completely decisive thing — if you cannot even speak Swedish so that you can go to a job interview, then the chance of getting a job is zero, I would say, unless you are prepared to move to places where there is work. When I am in Norrland now — I have been there quite a lot during this election campaign — very many people remind me that when there was a shortage of jobs in northern Sweden and plenty of jobs in southern Sweden, people were expected to move. Wait, wait, wait — I can answer that. And then surely today we must also expect people to move from southern Sweden if they cannot get a job for a long time, to the places where jobs are emerging, both simple and advanced.
I understand. But I also want to understand this, because moving for a job sounds good, but if you do not have the qualifications to take a job, that does not really work either.
And that is why I say for the third time that learning Swedish is an incredibly good foundation for being able to apply for any job at all. Vocational training, which we invest a great deal in — craft training, driver training, things that really only require a driving licence.
But regarding vocational training, the experts also say that this group has such low qualifications that they need other types of tailored training, labour market training and so on, and cannot really take these vocational training...
Wait. Yes, no, I understand. The labour market training — they have been relatively still throughout this downturn. The number of vocational training places we have invested a great deal in. But it seems to be difficult for this group.
Yes, but it is clear that it is difficult if you have come to Sweden, have not worked on the Swedish labour market, have no contacts in an economy where many jobs come through contacts, and do not speak Swedish. Thank you for acknowledging that it is difficult.
That is why we are systematically doing something about all of this at the same time. I would have had respect if they had said this: if we had said that only a benefits reform will do the job — it does not, but in combination: the benefits reform, lower taxes on labour, relocation grants, firm or clear requirements for Swedish skills — all of these things together. The alternative is to give up and say that hundreds of thousands of people have come to Sweden and they will never work. That would be completely...
If we just summarise this, because there are 144,000 long-term unemployed in Sweden now. And the Fiscal Policy Council points to subsidised jobs but also these labour market training programmes. That is what can raise the competence of these people. And as Anders touched on, it has been quite still during these years. It is 6,000 on average every month who go on these training programmes.
Should you not have invested a bit more in trying to lift these people during the downturn so that it is easier for them to get a job?
Well, in Sweden there are very many opportunities, but the opportunity to enter the Swedish labour market is built on speaking Swedish well enough to manage a job or go to a job interview, and on being in a place where those kinds of jobs are available at all. Now jobs are emerging in all sorts of places. I mentioned northern Sweden because it is interesting — it has both the most advanced jobs and also very many simpler jobs. Swedes have always moved for work. You do not have to live in that corner of the country for the rest of your life without gaining experience, a CV, the first jobs from which you can get your second and third job. That is how it works in Sweden.
Then we shall change the subject.
Yes, now it is instead a quiz. A quiz with Strängnäs and Sörmland character, one might say.
Strängnäs and Sörmland.
Yes, exactly. Do you get a little hint?
We start with question one. At the so-called meeting in Strängnäs in 1523, Gustav Vasa was elected king of Sweden. But the question now is, where was he crowned? Was it in Strängnäs Cathedral, in the Great Church in Stockholm, or in Uppsala Cathedral?
Yes, it was not — he was not crowned in Strängnäs. He was elected in Strängnäs at the end of the longship, I believe. Then I wonder whether it was the Great Church or Uppsala Cathedral. I say it was the Great Church.
The Great Church in Stockholm. It was not that.
It was Uppsala Cathedral. Exactly.
Question two then. You went to St Eskil's upper secondary school in Eskilstuna.
It is about half an hour away, roughly.
Yes. And you are also a big fan of the pop group Kent, which comes from the same city.
What was the youth centre in Eskilstuna called that burned down and that Kent has also sung about?
We all mourn it.
Yes, then you know the name. Gården, Gulan, or Grönan?
I spent many days and nights there.
And that was completely correct. So, question three. In Sörmland we have the hiking trail, Sörmlandsleden. How long is it? Is it 80 mil, 100 mil, or 130 mil?
It is 100 mil long, and I have walked about 50 to 60 of them.
Okay, that was a quick answer and it was a correct answer too.
