The Alliance saw the Government’s proposals – Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet

– It seems forced by the man lost control of public finances, says Jakob Forssmed (KD).

A compelling reason to scrap the surplus target is that it would require major cuts and tax increases in the current situation to reach to one per cent surplus, according to Finance Minister Magdalena Andersson.

– It is not enough better economic situation, one would need to make austerity 75 billion to reach the goal, says finance minister at a press conference.

According to Andersson also has several of the factors that gave rise to the fiscal framework was introduced changed. Therefore ask the government now NIER (KI) to review whether the surplus target can be changed to a balansmål. KI shall complete its investigation in August this year.

But the economic policy Representatives of the Alliance parties today is not impressed.

Erik Ullenhag (FP) recalls that Magdalena Andersson previously talked about the barns were empty and now says that the Swedish economy is so strong that it may be time to revise surplus target.

– Meanwhile, garners so full and public debt so low that we need a discussion on how the fiscal framework looks. But then we need a different type of anchors in economic policy, he said.

Ullenhag emphasizes that if a review is foreseen aim must be to provide space for future investments that can enhance growth.

– It must not be taken to mean that the government will conduct a leftist policies with higher premiums and increased consumption, he said.

Emil Kallstrom (C) requires a cool head in any revision of the surplus target:

– This is such a big and important question that you can not change feet over a coffee break.

Even Jacob Forssmed (KD) urges caution.

– The surplus target has served Sweden well, and will be making changes should be done with caution, he said.

– risked confidence in the Swedish economy is bad, especially for vulnerable groups

Meanwhile, he admits that the economic situation looks different than when the surplus target was introduced and Sweden may need to spend to get the economy moving.

Even Ulf Krister Andersson (M) is critical.

– I fear that the risk is great that we end up on an inclined plane. Now if you think that it is hard to reach the goal after the financial crisis and recession, and therefore removes it, then the field is free to propose cost increases that make up the deficit, he said.

He argues that removing the surplus target may lead to the actual investment will be about “pet projects” of the individual parties.

– There is a constant pressure of increased transfer expenditures, he said.

The Government’s ambition to bring talks with the Alliance parties think, however, they are positive, although at least Ulf Krister Andersson believes that it is difficult to see a settlement of the block boundary.

– It is hard to first sit to the left and then believe them to have The Alliance’s support, says Ulf Krister Andersson.

John Hassler, chairman of the Fiscal Council, was one of those who was critical in the fall. According to him, need the government’s proposals, however, do not be so dramatic in itself.

– The assessment we did last fall, that government policy as it was presented in the budget bill violates the surplus target, it persists after all. We can not have a surplus that is not followed, it is pretty useless, says he said.

– But a lowered target or a nollmål for a time is not very dramatic, as long as it is also followed. The key is that this is not a step on a slippery slope.

The surplus target was introduced in connection with the tough economic years in the 1990s. Since then, however, including lending in the pension is lower. The Government’s proposal is a consequence of it.

“The idea was never to the public sector would go with the surplus of one percent for all eternity without the level of the target should be reconsidered in the future,” writes Stefan Löfven Prime Minister, Minister of Finance Magdalena Andersson and Deputy Minister of Finance Per Bo (MP) in an article.

In the short term, a scrapped the surplus while not provide any budgetary room, finds the trio. “In the longer term will free a space for urgent public investment in infrastructure, housing, climate adaptation, research and education.”

The idea is according debate article a broad coalition for a possible decision. Therefore, the government will conduct ongoing conversations with the bourgeois parties.