Here is the fight that the serious parties must win

One thing became clear during Wednesday’s party leadership debate in Parliament: Now we know how next year’s electoral movement will sound.

Ulf Kristersson (M) warns of the Social Democrats’ left turn in general and how bad it is with their possible partners V and MP in particular. Magdalena Andersson (S) contradicts that the politics of the time parties affect households with small margins, with a special focus on the increased high -cost protection on drugs. And Jimmie Åkesson (SD) strikes for the chest because it is now cheaper to refuel.

Tactics and rhetoric is expected. But it must not stay there.

In this situation, it is reasonable that the state does not take the whole bill.

For as true as the government changes high -cost protection by SEK 900 per person per year, it is that the time parties do not raise to make life more difficult for « ordinary people ». In recent years, state’s costs for medicines have increased significantly more than deductibles, According to the government. And in that situation, it is reasonable that the state does not take the whole bill.

This is especially true, when Sweden is facing major investments in defense, preparedness and climate change, which means that politicians from right to left need to learn to prioritize. This obvious, the government parties, with Kristersson at the forefront, must be able to defend – because today they are not close to owning what is usually called the problem formulation privilege on the issue, but most appears to be jealous.

The same applies the climate measures. During the last electoral movement, the « price at pump » was a recurring mantra. And Åkesson was obviously satisfied when he was in the plenary hall on Wednesday and said that the gasoline has become cheaper, which is a simple message.

It is a price that is necessary to pay for the whole to work in the long run.

It is much more difficult to win the debate about why the climate change will be noticed in people’s everyday lives and wallets, whether we want to or not. And the parties that care about the climate and the future are constantly in defense position, instead of fully playing the ball on their half.

There, the message – just as with the high -cost protection – is that higher costs for the individual is obviously not a goal in itself. It is a price that is necessary to pay for the whole to work in the long run.

And if there is one thing to be desired before the electoral movement, it is that all serious parties stay too good to give the light of something else. Like that the opponent’s reforms aims at to make voters poorer.

Read more:

Leader: The feature of SVT should make the whole of Sweden shudder

Leader: A motorcycle gang burns through the idyll of the Swedish Democrats