Analysis: The January agreement lives dangerously

On Thursday, the formal decision was made in Parliament's Finance Committee: The opposition runs across the government for more money for welfare. The decision was expected.

It is interesting to note, however, that the January parties choose not to actively support the opposition's proposals. Instead, the plan is to cast votes at next week's vote in Parliament's chamber.

Thus, it is obvious for further debate on the issue. For example, the Moderates and the Left Party are strongly critical that the government and its support parties do not actively support a proposal that gives the country's municipalities more money at the box office.

The Social Democrats, on the other hand, accuse the opposition of loosening up the orderly budget process in the Riksdag, and warns of a sloping plan where economic stability in the long run risks being undermined.

The tone is high and, of course, both politically and in principle, it is a big thing that the opposition runs across the government on a budget issue. However, in order not to lose the proportions, it may be appropriate to point out that today's decision in the parliamentary finance committee is only about a couple of a thousandth of the state budget. Thus, some major financial consequences do not make the decision for either the budget or the government's overall policy.

Symbolically, however, it is a major setback for the government when the opposition has now succeeded in rounding the tactical arrangement with the January agreement. The idea was that the Left Party would not be able to agree with the opposition on the right and thus the January agreement would have been free in the Riksdag.

Still, that's exactly what happened. The bitterness within the opposition both on the left and the right in the Riksdag is so great that the ideological barriers to settlement seem to be blown away. This was first manifested in the threat of distrust of the Minister of Labor and, most recently, the extra money to the municipalities.

The question is what is happening now. The opposition has suffered a bleeding tooth and is already discussing new issues where one can give the government a nose burn. Talks are underway regarding restrictions on labor migration, but it is uncertain whether the parties can agree there.

The opposition on the right would also like to run the government on issues related to penal discounts for young people and the possibility of banning access in shops and libraries. But again, it is doubtful whether it is possible to build a majority in Parliament.

Instead, a temporary calm can take over the Riksdag after a conflict-filled winter.

The next budget to be presented is the Spring Economic Bill and the associated amending budget. It is presented in mid-April and opens up new opportunities for the opposition to act.

If the opposition in such a situation can again agree on one or a few issues to run over the government, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven may again ask himself where his pain limit goes. The budget is central to a government policy.

At the same time, it is of course important to keep in mind that a minority government is never anything other than a minority government. If a minority government wants to avoid being overrun in Parliament, it must submit proposals that a majority does not oppose.

Otherwise, the January agreement's writings on clearly extended exceptions in the rules of rotation can become the really big battle issue during the term of office. Because even though both the Moderates and the Christian Democrats would like to have changes in labor law and thus in essence behind the wording of the January agreement, the will is even greater to dismiss Prime Minister Stefan Löfven.

Take the Left Party seriously out of its threat to issue a declaration of confidence to the prime minister if a proposal for changed rules of order is put on the parliament's table, then both the Moderates, the Christian Democrats and the Swedish Democrats will vote for such a declaration of confidence.

Stefan Löfven is thus given the hope that the negotiations between the social partners will result in a settlement which means that the issue of changed rules of order is politically disarmed.