Sweden Election Update: Failed First Attempt of a Potential Four Tries

As a quick repeat of events: Sweden is currently attempting to form a government due to an inconclusive election. To form a government, a party (or group of parties) needs 175 votes. A minority government can form if other parties allow it. As mentioned in prior blogs, there are 2 main blocks of parties: the centre-left and the Alliance. There is also the far-right Sweden Democrats.

There have been a couple informal attempts to form a government.

And just to list out the major players/facts:

Swedish parliament speaker: Andreas Norlén
Leader of the centre-right Alliance (Moderate party): Ulf Kristersson
Past prime minister though still caretaker of the government (centre-left bloc): Stefan Löfven
Sweden Democrats leader (far right political group): Jimmie Åkesson
Centre Party leader: Annie Lööf

Centre-left bloc parties (144 total seats):

Social Democrats (100 seats)
Left Party (28)
Green Party (16)

Alliance parties (143 total seats):

Moderates (70)
Centre Party (31)
Christian Democrats (22)
Liberals (20)

Sweden Democrats (62)

Okay . . .

The centre-right Alliance, led by Ulf Kristersson of the Moderate party, was given the first official attempt to form a government. They failed to form a government last week (Wednesday, Nov 7th). This was the first attempt out of a possible four attempts before a new election is required.


Politico (14 Nov) has the following to say about this failed vote:

Kristersson had sought parliamentary approval that would have cleared him to govern in a minority coalition with the Christian Democrats, but the Riksdag voted by 195 to 154 against him. Those rejecting the mooted coalition included the Social Democrats, the biggest party, as well as the Liberals and the Centre party — Kristersson’s partners in a center-right Alliance — who expressed concerns that such a coalition would rely too heavily on the far-right Sweden Democrats to pass legislation. 

As mentioned by Sweden's Local (Nov 5th), this result was already a forgone conclusion. Ult Kristersson got 154 votes for Prime Minister, which indicates the Moderates, Christian Democrats and Sweden Democrats voted for him. (The Economist article that I mention below verifies that the Sweden Democrats voted for him.) The Local had already mentioned that the Liberals and Centre Party were out if they felt the Sweden Democrats were given too much say. The Economist article states; however, that the Sweden Democrats decided to vote for him without any explicit deal. As the Politico article mentioned, there are now concerns about the future of the Alliance.

My question is why exactly did the Liberals and Centre Party back out from supporting Ult Kristersson. Did they believe that promises were actually made to the Sweden Democrats (contrary to what The Economist states)? Or could they simply not vote for anyone who got support from the Sweden Democrats? Or are they simply trying to get some addition concessions?

What's the next step?

Sweden's The Local (15 Nov) states:

Centre Party leader Annie Lööf will be the next person to lead exploratory coalition talks . . . Parliamentary speaker Andreas Norlén on Thursday appointed Lööf as the next sonderingsperson, giving her one week to break the deadlock between the parties. He said it was possible the deadline could be extended.

First, I find it interesting that Stefan Löfven of the Social Democrats wasn't given an attempt to form the government as they are the largest party. Yes, they already had a chance, but there wasn't an official Prime Minister vote for him.

Second, the article goes on to say that it is unlikely that Lööf will be prime minister. Instead, Norlén hopes she can bring together a coalition of parties to come behind a candidate.

Political (15 Nov) adds this piece of information:

Lööf added that she would try to build a consensus around concrete policies with all parties except the Sweden Democrats and the Left parties.

By Left parties, I'm assuming this means Left and Green parties and not just the Left as the word parties is used. If she is also excluding the Social Democrats, she's wasting her time as she would only have 143 votes in favor of her solution to this deadlock. Somehow, she needs to work things out with the Social Democrats to move them to the right for her to succeed.

If she fails, my bet is that the third attempt goes to the Left Party. The final attempt would be the Social Democrats. Of course, if her attempt doesn't even lead to a vote for a Prime Minister, I'd bet the now second attempt would go to the Social Democrats. Confusing? Well, the four attempts are actual votes so if she doesn't even come up with a potential Prime Minister than it doesn't count towards the four attempts to form a government.

Finally, The Economist has some interesting insight into why the Sweden Democrats are currently such a powerful force and their potential upside:

Between 2013 and 2017 Sweden let in 353,000 refugees, equivalent to 3.5% of its population. It has failed woefully to integrate them. Red tape makes it hard for them to find jobs. After five years in the country only 40% of male refugees and 20% of female ones are working. For native-born Swedes of either sex, the figure is nearly 80%. Combined with large handouts, this means that refugees tend to drain the public purse. And this avoidable policy error has helped to poison Swedish politics.

Basically, liberal Sweden allowed massive numbers of refugees to enter the country. But then this same liberalism is preventing the integration of these refugees due to too much government.

The article also provides additional insight in how the Sweden Democrats benefit no matter what happens:

But the mainstream parties hesitate to embrace the SD itself. To do a deal with the nationalists would lend them respectability. But if the mainstream parties form a grand coalition to exclude the SD, it would become the only serious opposition, and protest voters would have nowhere else to go. Either way, the SD stands to gain.

From what I've read, the Sweden Democrats are doing everything they can to become more "respectable." Also, it does appear that the Moderates and Christian Democrats are at least willing to tolerate them. It is the other parties that are unwilling. In terms of The Economists saying that protest voters would have no other party to turn to if there is a gran coalition, I disagree. If Lööf is able to form a coalition, this coalition would exclude the Left and Green parties (this is my assumption). Protest voters could split to the right or to the left.

Also, if there is another election, I'm not sure this benefits the Sweden Democrats. Voters, in their frustration with a lack of government, might shift away from the Sweden Democrats. If so, my bet would be they shift to the Alliance as two of the parties in the coalition were open to Sweden Democrats support. Maybe the Liberals and Centre Party votes against Ult Kristersson (and with his knowledge or the reasoning) as the speculation would be that a second vote might favor the Alliance and this was all a political maneuver to try and get Sweden Democrats' voters -- showing at least a modest attempt to reach out.