There have been many occasions in the last 70 years when we have been able to learn from the positive example of the Swedish Social Democrats. Now at last, after their narrow defeat in last Sunday’s election at the hands of a young and supposedly charismatic Conservative leader, we have a chance to learn from their mistakes.
Their election was like the prequel of the election we could face in 2009. A government that has been in power for 12 years, led by a prime minister and former finance minister who’s 57 and who has made the economy one of the most successful in Europe, facing a new Conservative leader of 41 who has ruthlessly pushed his party to the centre and mentally downloaded the entire political strategy and most of the rhetoric of Tony Blair.
Fredrik Reinfeldt called his party the new Moderates in all his posters and actually said in his victory speech: ‘We fought as the new Moderates, won as new Moderates and we shall govern as new Moderates.’ In the campaign he promised no tax cuts for the rich, at least in his first term, and he said he would leave the Swedish welfare state more or less as it is, which is far bigger than ours.
Reinfeldt’s second strategy was to de-politicise his campaign, rather like Cameron, keeping his policies to a minimum, surrounding himself with young technocrats, rooting out right-wing candidates and keeping his party dinosaurs out of the media, on the basis that if you can present the election as a choice between two candidates, old and new, rather than two parties or two philosophies, then you have a better chance.
Reinfeldt’s third strategy was to humanise his party. He was often pictured at home doing housework and looking after the children. He was not good-looking but ‘the kind of man women think would make a good father for their children.’ And, unlike his predecessors and unlike Cameron, he was not in any way posh or patrician.
His problem was that the Social Democrats had a brilliant record in government, especially on the economy, where the prime minister Goran Persson forced through a shake-out of the public sector in 2003 to make space for growth and has been vindicated by a 5.5 per cent growth rate last year and 15 per cent over the last three years.
But the Social Democrats still had their weak spots. Although unemployment fell to four per cent, there were four per cent in training and maybe eight per cent on early retirement or long-term sick-pay. Jobs were coming through, but more slowly than anticipated and young people were still finding it hard to get jobs.
There was also a fear that the high level of unemployment benefit, already 70 per cent of previous pay, was encouraging fraud. The Social Democrats’ response was to take on 300 anti-fraud officers and get 100,000 back to work. But they proposed in their manifesto to raise benefit even higher to 80 per cent, arguing that if you want a flexible workforce you have to give people the security to retrain while they are out of work.
Reinfeldt exploited these vulnerable spots, calling his party ‘the new workers’ party’ and proposing a cut in unemployment benefit (though only to 65 per cent), greater freedom for small employers to hire and fire and tax cuts for the low paid.
He also proposed minor cuts in benefits for parents. The Social Democrats wanted 16 months parental leave at 80 per cent of salary. Under the Moderates it will be 12 months at 70 per cent. But before Cameron claims Reinfeldt as an ally, he should perhaps explain why his party voted against this government when it raised paid parental leave to six months.
Even with a centre-right government the Swedish welfare state will remain far more generous than ours and with a majority of only seven seats Reinfeldt’s government is unlikely to go beyond his election manifesto. A year ago the Social Democrats and their allies were 10 per cent behind in the polls and they mounted a brilliant campaign which closed the gap to less than two per cent on the night. Indeed at one point during the count they were forecast to win.
The last time the Social Democrats lost power was in the early 1990s. On that occasion they rethought their policies and came back to win the following election. On this occasion Persson promised on election night that the party will do the same – though he himself will stand down in March – and fight back to regain power in 2010.