A right-wing resurgence: The end of the Swedish dream?

A young, right-wing politician emerges from nowhere, captures the centre ground and ousts a discredited government after more than a decade in power. On Sunday, the dream of every conservative may be realised, not in Britain but in Sweden.

The land of Volvo, Ikea and the much-vaunted Swedish social model may be on the threshold of a political earthquake. For the past 10 years, Göran Persson has been Prime Minister, leading one of the most formidable vote-winning machines in democratic politics. But opinion polls show Sunday's election is on a knife-edge. The remodelled, centrist, Swedish conservative party, known as the Moderates, led by 41-year-old Fredrik Reinfeldt, could emerge at the head of a new coalition. And, whatever the result, the traditional dominance of Sweden's left is under threat as the country asks itself whether its famous social model is all it is cracked up to be.

Outside a wooden cabin used by Moderate party campaigners in central Stockholm, the Reinfeldt message has struck home with Kristina Isacsson, a supply teacher, as she stands in a the September sunshine. Pointing to a poster of the Moderate leader, Sweden's answer to David Cameron, she says: "He's pretty good."

Ms Isacsson is thinking of backing the Moderates because of her long struggle looking for work. She says she has just got a job but the search was frustrating. "Every time I went for interviews there were 100 or so people after the same job. There must be some changes."

Mr Reinfeldt may bear a close physical resemblance to Iain Duncan Smith, but his politics are straight from the textbook of David Cameron. His is the story of one of the most dramatic political makeovers in Swedish history.

On paper, his odds were not good. The Social Democrats have held power for all but nine years since 1932, in the process building up a generous and popular benefits system seen as a model across Europe. High taxes have funded massive investment in education, health and research and development, delivering impressive economic growth.

Many of the right's sacred cows have been unceremoniously slaughtered as Mr Reinfeldt seeks to usher in an era of caring conservatism. He knows Swedish voters expect to pay high taxes and regard their excellent welfare system, including its enviable health and child care, with pride.

But he also recognises an undercurrent of discontent. Mr Reinfeldt's deputy, Gunilla Carlsson, says: "Swedes are happy in a homogenous society where you have good chances in life even if you come from a family without much education.

"Swedes like to pay to the welfare system but it really has to be built on the fact that everyone is working. Today, we have the black market and people misusing the system."

Unemployment has emerged as a key issue in the campaign, something of a surprise in a country where economic growth stands officially at 5.5 per cent, inflation is low and the budget deficit is the envy of most European states. Unemployment is, according to the government, a respectable 6 per cent.

But the rate for those in the 18-to-24 sector is thought to be at least three times that, making it among the worst in Europe. Immigrants, who now make up one in 10 of a once-homogenous population, are badly affected. And much joblessness is hidden by the country's generous benefit system.

Sickness benefits account for no less than 16 per cent of public spending. So contentious is the system that Ms Carlsson says Eurostat, the EU's statistical body, "is not happy with the way the Swedish authorities are reporting their figures".

The Moderates, once a party which wanted to deliver 90 per cent of tax cuts to the richest 10 per cent, now want to concentrate them at the lower end of the wage scale.

But they also propose modest inroads into the welfare state. One plan is to cut the level of unemployment benefits - worth 80 per cent of workers' salaries - after they have been on the dole for 300 days.

Though the Moderates have had success in setting the policy agenda, things have not gone all their way. The campaign burst into acrimonious life when their centre-right allies, the Liberal Party, emerged at the centre of a Watergate-style computer-hacking scandal.

Its secretary, Johan Jakobsson, was forced into a dramatic resignation after Social Democrat campaigning plans fell into the hands of Per Jodenius, a youth member of the Liberals.

Mr Jakobsson accepted responsibility for failing to stop Mr Jodenius accessing the timetable and media agenda, when he found out about the spying in March this year. Mr Jodenius, who admitted accessing the network, was sacked as the Liberal Party's youth-wing press secretary in what was billed as the biggest Swedish election scandal since the 1930s.

But if that gave a fillip to Mr Persson, putting his rivals on the defensive, the Prime Minister's own personality has become an issue, too. In power for 12 years, the Swedish Premier's autocratic style (his nickname translates loosely as "He who decides") has become a growing liability.

Mr Persson was slated in the media for his administration's slow reaction to the Asian tsunami 18 months ago in which Sweden suffered heavy casualties. After so long in power, the Social Democrats look tired, and the murder of Anna Lindh, the former foreign minister, deprived the party of its only other big hitter.

The Prime Minister has added an element of uncertainty to the election by refusing to enter any formal agreement to form a coalition (if necessary) with the centre-left parties with whom he is allied. Mr Reinfeldt has a deal with the centre-right bloc with whom he is preparing to construct a government.

But Mr Persson remains a formidable campaigner, and one recent opinion poll shows the centre-left bloc of parties marginally ahead (another gives a clear lead to the right). The bigger question is whether the result really matters. Mr Reinfeldt's success is built in not challenging the basis of the welfare state but saying it could be better run.

Mats Wiklund, author of a well-received biography of Mr Reinfeldt, says: "People think that something is wrong with this country. Reinfeldt is trying to be a better social democrat than the Social Democrats."

In a country where nearly one-third of the working population is employed in the public sector, radical changes to the welfare state are inconceivable, even if it is creaking. In the centre of the city, Emanuel Noren, a salesman who supports the Christian Democrats, one of the Moderates' centre-right allies, explains why.

Mr Noren backs the Reinfeldt vision of reform, saying: "We have so many social benefits that it's sometimes easy for people to get a bit lazy. The system is very good for those who really need it but for some people it's too easy to use it." However, he does not want a change too far. "There is a social democrat in every Swede," he says. "We have had them now for 70 years. I was always a Christian Democrat but even I was fed social democracy in my breast milk."

Fredrik Reinfeldt may be about the same age as David Cameron but his upbringing was rather less comfortable than his Etonian counterpart. Born in the village of Osterhaninge, he was brought up in a lower middle-class apartment building in a modest suburb of Stockholm. Theatre and light entertainment were among his early interests and he was a fan of the BBC television series Not the Nine O'Clock News.

At Stockholm University, where he studied economics, he became active in politics. He was elected to the Swedish parliament in 1991, the year after his graduation.

In the Moderate Youth League, he soon showed his teeth, ousting the organisation's former chairman in a famous showdown. His battle to move the Moderates to the centre began well before Mr Cameron's election. Indeed, Mr Reinfeldt's political odyssey may owe more to Tony Blair.

Like Mr Blair, Mr Reinfeldt has renamed his party - in his case the New Moderates - to underline a break with the past. And, like the outgoing British Premier, Mr Reinfeldt has seen the need to occupy the centre ground.

He lives in Täby, a suburb north of Stockholm, with his wife Filippa (a Moderate Party councillor) and three children.

The opinion polls are very close still, predicting a cliff-hanger on election night.
Two institutes have the non-socialist alliance in the lead by 2-3%-age points, the third has the socialist block in the lead with less than 1%.

I'm sceptical. The polling institutes used to be extremly good, but not any longer for a variety of reasons.

My gut feeling is that there will be a relatively low turnout (in Sweden that means less than 80% !!!), and a clear but not overwhelming win for the Alliance (ie the non-socialist opposition).

The small parties (feminists, sort of anti-EU-party, pro-file sharing party, pensioners party, etc) will not gain many votes at all, with the possible exception of the Swedish Democratic party ( anti-immigration party).

According to the polls it will not be able to win the 4% of the votes on a national basis that is needed to take part in the sharing out of parliamentary seats. However, if any party wins more than 12% in any one election constituency it wins at least one parliamentary seat (per constituency).

It is not imppossible (although not very likely) that SD will gain a seat in one of the southern constituencies around Malmö. (I guess you can understand why just there.)

Unless the difference betwen the socialist bloc and the Alliance is very close, this will not have any effect, except maybe, maybe, as a wakeup call for our politicans to the big and growing immigration problem.

I must say that I don't have large expectations for the non-socialist Alliance at all, but we MUST change government. A win for the socialists would mean even more influence than before for the Greens and Left Party (former Communists).

As I wrote above I am pretty optimistic about the outcome, but I rather not contemplate the result if I'm wrong.

PS: Former FReeper fdsa2 is working actively for the Alliance. The reason he is "former" is that hasn't had time to FReep during the last six months or so, working full time to oust the socialists. Please, wish him and us good luck.

I lived in Sweden for almost four years, and was virtually "un-hireable". It was very easy to get funds from the government (I was there because I had been married to a Volvo engineer and was there for "six months" but then he wanted to seperate, and keep me and my kids from leaving the country--six years later, two run in's with the US State Department, and a costly federal court case, I have FINALLY been"allowed" to keep my kids in the home country of their birth.
While in Sweden, I had to go to an immigrant school, where I was virtually the only westerner. Immigrants are really "ghettoized" (not me, as I was married to a Swede, and looked more "Swedish" than he does) and there are rules about speaking the language before you can be hired. It sucked (in a nutshell).
I had to go to the emergency room one time with a horrific kidney infection (I have kidney disease) and though I couldn't walk and was urinating blood, I was told that my wait time was something to the tune of eighteen to twenty-four hours. I asked if I would be helped faster if I was unconscious, but was not rewarded with an affirmative answer. Luckily, a friend of a friend had a stepfather who was a doctor and I got a prescription written (I needed antibiotics quickly!) after waiting for two hours (gotta love the cell phone!) and left, vowing NEVER to go back. The thing is; medical care is "free" (sixty percent of taxes free!) but at the convenience of the government. My kids got postcards with the dates of their appointments at the kommun doctor, and I really think that at least one out of every three was postponed the day of, with about a half hour's notice. When I hear dem's spout on about "universal healthcare" I know that my emergency room fiasco would be repeated indefinitely! It makes me CRAZY!!!
The majority of my friends were members of the moderate party, and their plan was to break the system from within; try to get welfare aid for any little thing, work as few hours as possible and "milk the system" in order for it to tumble. Pretty scummy, I know, but. . .
Don't even get me started on the standard of living!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
SOCIALISM SUCKS B*TT!

16-19 -- comparing unemployment statistics between countries are difficult because of how they count, how they count someone employable but not employed, etc. The 16-19 number from the Department of Labor typically matches the 18-24 number that other nations list, but the only way to get an accurate number is to dig into the survey numbers which DOL only releases once a year (if you can lay your hands on it.)

But in the past, the numbers have matched pretty accurately.

Oh, and the seasonally adjusted number for the 16-19 is 16.2 percent for August 2006.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.