The environmental party critical of S-bid on migration

For example, she points out that the Social Democrats (S) want to extend the limitation period for deportation decisions. According to Hirvonen, it could force families to go underground for a long time, waiting for them to submit a new asylum application.

"It would double the time that children need to live like paperless," she says.

MP is also critical of S opening up to "a kind of volume target" in asylum policy. Hirvonen is concerned that this could lead to a reduction in the number of quota refugees or tightening of the immigration of relatives so that the target is not exceeded.

In addition, Hirvonen Falk thinks that the S bid in a couple of aspects is not compatible with the January agreement between S, MP, Center (C) and Liberals (L). '

The Left Party (V) is strongly critical of the S-bid.

- S chooses to close the door for negotiations with both V and MP and instead turn to M who puts forward a blue-brown policy that S says wants to stop, says V's migration policy spokeswoman Christina Höj Larsen.

S, however, still hopes to bring his government partner MP to a broad agreement on Sweden's future migration policy. MP's Hirvonen Falk states that MP will continue to work for a human migration policy in the Migration Committee.

In the end, if the two government parties do not end up on the same line, this could pose problems for the government. It is usually the government that will submit a migration policy bill to Parliament.

When asked if migration policy could crack the government, MP's Annika Hirvonen Falk replies:

- This is a hypothetical risk in all negotiations on difficult issues where the parties think differently.

The Moderates (M) welcome the fact that S has now clarified its positions on the future migration policy.

"We are now entering negotiations and I can say that there is still a long way to go," says M's migration policy spokesperson Maria Malmer Stenergard.

She finds it gratifying that S says yes to a benchmark for migration policy. S can imagine a goal that Sweden's share of the EU's asylum reception should correspond to Sweden's share of the EU population. However, M has a different model.

One of the major disputes between M and S is family immigration. S is adamant that alternative protection needs should have the same right to immigration as refugees. This means that they do not have to make a living claim if they submit an application for family reunification within three months of a residence permit decision.

M is also critical that S wants residence permits to be granted on humanitarian grounds as well.

S presented its bid to the other parties to the Migration Committee on Wednesday evening.

"We are willing to negotiate with the parties that want to negotiate with us," says Rikard Larsson, member of S on the committee.

The Social Democrats' ambition is to reach an agreement with the Moderates, the Christian Democrats (KD), the Center, the Liberals and the Environment Party.

- We're starting to go in for landing and it's getting more concrete. That's good, says KD's migration policy spokesperson Hans Eklind.

However, he does not think that the S-command is as good as it looks now. Above all, Eklind lacks sharper proposals for getting people with deportation decisions to leave Sweden.

Negotiations now appear to continue alongside the Migration Committee, without V and the Swedish Democrats (SD).

SD's Jonas Andersson calls the S-bid "a half-measure" that it is meaningless to negotiate from the outside. SD considers that the direction for the asylum reception should be that no residence permit should be granted for a reasonable period of time.

SD has also submitted a bid, which will, among other things, abolish the right of dependents to alternative immigration rights. Although the SD does not participate in the continued negotiations, the party remains in the Migration Committee.