How Sweden’s dramatic citizenship law deadline day unfolded

Hello and welcome to Sweden in Focus, the local weekly news podcast. We're recording this episode on Thursday, April 30th and this week we're going to spend most of the episode looking at Wednesday's controversial vote in Parliament to pass stricter citizenship laws. But we'll also talk about King Kong Gustaf's 80th Birthday celebrations, Sweden's bonfire night, Valleborg and Mayday celebrations. I'm your host, James Savage in Stockholm and joining me from Sweden's Deep South are Emma Loughgren and Richard Orange. How are you bearing up guys? I feel like I've been on a roller coaster marathon. It's not a thing. That's what it feels like. I would love to go on a roller coaster marathon. It sounds wonderful. Yesterday was eventful. It really was and you are talking of course about the citizenship vote in Parliament yesterday or three of us and Mandy and indeed Paul Omani. We would need deep in it all day or neck deep in it all day. There was a hell of a lot going on and it was quite a surprising turn of events, wasn't it? Yeah, it was. But it's beautiful as a journalist to be working on days like that. Sorry, but being in a newsroom where there's big breaking news is like everything just sort of comes together and suddenly things are less chaotic than they normally are and everyone knows what to do and everyone's pulling their weight and it just clears your mind. It really does and it's super stimulating. It's why you become a journalist right for days like that. So let's get stuck into this straight away. So just for those who weren't aware of this, what was happening yesterday was effectively that the hopes of 100,000 people waiting to have their citizenship applications were dashed. After Swedish MPs voted by the narrowest of margins not to introduce transitional rules. In other words, new rules, meaning language tests and longer qualifying times for citizenship will apply from the 6th of June even if you've been waiting years to have your application dealt with. This was a tough blow for campaigners and for many would be citizens, but the vote in parliament was much closer than expected and it's failure to pass a set of an almighty row. Look, we'll get on to what this means in practice for people who've applied for citizenship, but first Richard, it looked for a while like these transitional rules would pass. Why was that? Well, we've been sort of tracking this as readers will know for weeks or maybe even well over a month because the fair transition campaign had been pushing really hard to try and get. I think there's about three liberal MPs who've said they're not standing at the next election because of the liberal party still with the Sweden Democrats. So they, the campaigners thought maybe, maybe just maybe we can get them to vote against their party, which is something as we said before that almost never happens in Sweden. It, I and clad party, the Sippling and Sweden MPs always vote with their parties, not like in the UK where they rebel all the time about anything. So we were expecting that, but what we hadn't really factored in was the fact that some of the independent MPs who used to represent government parties might also rebel. So on the day in parliament, what we, the first thing we saw was that all of the liberal MPs who we thought might vote along with the opposition on this were absent. So the liberal party had basically told them, don't turn up, we don't trust you or for whatever reason they weren't there. So that avenue was closed off. But then I think when you met Annika Hirvenen who's the green party MP who's really been driving this, she was quite hopeful and the reason she was hopeful is that Else Viding who's a former Sweden Democrat. She had written on her blog that she thought there should be transitional rules and that the council on legislation was right and you know, she gave her very kind of legalistic explanation why it's important that there are transitional rules in this law. And she has started a party with the other former Sweden Democrat who's called Katja Niburg. So Annika Hirvenen was hopeful that Annika Niburg would also vote for this. So suddenly after thinking this morning, it was all, there was no chance. Suddenly it was in play again. And these two votes would have suffice in normal circumstances for the government to lose and for the opposition to win right. And these two MPs actually did go right ahead, it turned out later and voted against the government, yet the government won by one vote. So Richard explained what happened. Well, it was super confusing because we saw that the vote had had not passed. But when you see the numbers, you don't know who's voted on what. And then when I think Paul got hold of the list of what everyone had voted on this, we saw that these two MPs had actually done exactly what they had hinted that they might do and voted along with the opposition and against the former party, the Sweden Democrats. So what we couldn't understand was say, say, say, say, so what has happened? How come the votes? How come it didn't pass if they did vote against the government? So and what it turned out, I had an interview set up with Elisavidding, the former Sweden Democrat MP and she said, well, what happened is that the Sweden Democrats cheated. They cheated their way through this. They sent a couple of MPs. They said, wouldn't vote and made them vote, even though they had agreed with the other parties not to do it. And what this comes down to is in the parliament, there's this thing called kvittning, which I think in the in English is called pairing off, which is where MPs on the opposite side on certain issues agree to stand down so that you know, you might have an MP who's a government minister or you might have an MP who's ill. And so the parties informally agree, well, this MP can't vote. Can you make one of your MPs stand down who would have voted the opposite way so they can't see each other out? And that's a system that has existed. I don't know how long in the Swedish parliament, but decades at least. And the Sweden Democrats had basically cheated. So they had two MPs that they had said would stand down. And then just on that vote on transitional rules, they made them vote. It's a gentleman's agreement and they broke it. And how unusual is it to break these pairing agreements? Well, Anika Hervin says that it has never happened before, at least not deliberately. She says, you know, sometimes there's been a mix up, maybe. You know, somebody's supposed to stand down because an MP's ill and, you know, the wires get crossed and there's a mess up. But she says this has never happened in a way that's so deliberately intended to pass a bill that otherwise would have been blocked or blocked or bill that otherwise would have passed. And Nears Porak Peterson, who's the immigration spokesperson for the Centre for the Hewls, so went out on Facebook and said, this has never, ever happened before. And I asked him, how do you know this has never happened before? And he said, if it had happened before, the system would not be there. So his argument was, if this happened, there wouldn't be a fitting system. And, you know, the examples you give them there, they're, they're sort of fairly sort of youngish MPs, but even actually I was just listening to Fred Fertonbach, who's Swedish Radio's long time policing with Correspondent. He said the same thing. He's, you know, he's a veteran. He's been following this kind of stuff, nerdily, for a decade. And he said, he doesn't remember anything like this happening before. It's incredibly unusual. But how do the Sweden Democrats justify doing this? I mean, what they argue, when I contacted them yesterday, they said, well, actually, as it happens, we've got a statement ready. So they, this was planned in advance. They had very deliberately done this. And the statement came from Linda Lindbergh, who's the group leader of the Sweden Democrats. And she said that when voters voted in the 2022 election, they voted for a TIDA majority, which is a majority of Sweden Democrats and all the other parties. And she was not going to let the fact that two MPs from one of these parties have then left at the party. Under mine, that majority, and she thought it was voters had a right to expect that the majority they voted through would be able to pass legislation. And she wasn't going to let two power hungry MPs break the system. Or kind of a little bit, there's a bit of sort of publicity hungry as well, right? Yeah, maybe publicity, hungry MP, attention seeking, something like that. Does she have a point? I would say no. I would say absolutely no, because Sweden's, but Sweden does not have a party-based system that you, MPs have an individual mandate, which is why when MPs are kicked out of parties, they sit on as independence. That's why there are independence. And by being independence, they can vote how they like that Sweden system. You can disagree with Sweden system, but you can't override it just because you want to pass a piece of legislation that you would otherwise not pass. So yeah, so that's what the Sweden Democrats, I think, would say to back to that is that, yeah, they sort of have individual mandates, but they're voted on a list system. Very few MPs get in because they've had what they're calling Sweden "pissue on Christmas" where people have moved them up the list by putting across against their name. They've just voted for the list and they get in that way. So that would be the counter-argument to that. This is a known thing, but having said that the government parties used the fact that what's the name Kakabarvi? I mean, a Kakabarvi who she was an old left party MP. She threatened to vote with the what are now the government parties, but within the opposition. And that caused a massive government crisis. So you can't have it your way, one way and the other way, the other way. They've themselves used this, the states of independent MPs in the past. The social democrats at that point, on those key votes back in 2021 or whatever, could have just, could have done this, pulled this move and made the same argument. And the what are now the government parties would have caused a huge ruckus. So I think it's totally, I don't buy that at all. I was pretty surprised when we got her a statement because we were the first ones to report on it, like the Dindalian Berg statement because when this first happened, I thought, okay, they clearly did this deliberately, but there's no way they're going to admit to that. They're just going to say that. So why has got crossed or something like that? But it was clear from her statement. that was free, prepared for this. Like, this was planned. I mean, I thought from a Sweden Democrat point of view, they are annoyed, probably presumably with winning with Viding and they thought Viding's going to stitch us up on this vote as a petty act of revenge. And we're just going to screw it up for her. You know, I imagine that was the logic, you know, it is from them. It's probably internal. They probably not, I mean, they all have all the about transitional rules, but, but, but for them, it's just their angry with else, a Viding for basically losing them a vote. I mean, they couldn't lose this vote either because it would have been like the first huge setback for the TIDA priorities migration, paradigm shift. Hmm. Yeah, they would, and you know, part of the TIDA part is promised a vote as part of their argument ahead of this next election is, look, we are united. We get our program through Parliament vote for us and not for the chaotic left wing parties that can't even agree on basic, on a, on a basic party program. So, you know, it's, it would have been damaging to them if they'd lost the vote, I guess. So maybe this benefits them. But what about the opposition? We took about the Sweden Democrats, but, you know, the opposition are saying, hang on, we've, we've got the system of pairing. You've just blown a massive hole in it. I mean, they're pretty cheesed off, right? Yes. So as I say, like, Anika Hervonen was absolutely outraged. I also had you feel about this and she goes, it's not me. It's the 102,000 people waiting in the queue for citizenship, who whose chances have been dashed because of this underhand, moved by the Sweden Democrats. But, but after that, the social Democrats who in, in a, in a way, a much more heavyweight party than the, than the green party, they came out very strongly against this. So, Lee and a Halengren, who's their group leader in the Parliament said, you're a rurd, which means I'm, you know, enraged, upset. And she said it was extremely serious. And she called it undemocratic, said it was like, it was like cheating when he played cards. And it means that you just can't trust the Sweden Democrats. And Anika Hervonen made a similar point. She goes, you know, this is a gentleman's agreement. You know, if you, if you can't, you know, shake hands on something and trust that someone will follow it, how can you trust them on anything? And the left party said the same thing. They said, you know, the Sweden Democrats are very deliberately breaking the most fundamental democratic rules of the game. So, so that they are extremely upset by this. And I imagine they're going to try and keep this issue live up until the election, because I think it's quite important for them because you're, you're, basically, it's really strengthens the argument that the Sweden Democrats are not a normal party of government who can be trusted to follow parliamentary conventions and government conventions. So what does this mean for, you know, if you give the ministers, will they respect, you know, the, the conventions on ministerial rule? Will they, what, what else are they going to break? And also, I mean, what this means in practice, if this system of pairing breaks down, if the, if the opposition party decide to, um, to, to, to make a big deal out of this and say, actually, we're not going to do pairing anymore. This could make it much harder for the government to get it to get its program through because they've got this, um, majority of three in future now. If they don't have pairing, votes could fall on the basis of one or two government MPs being ill or otherwise indisposed. Um, and we won't know, you know, we won't really know who's going to, who's going to win votes in parliament between now and, and, and, and, and the, and parliament breaking up before the election. So, and they've got quite a lot to get through between now and the summer as well. Yeah. So from now on, like every MP would have to be present for votes. Like even, I think it was the center party's migration spokesperson, Neil Sir, Porto Pethason, who has said that even Yumi Orcason will have to be there. Yumi Orcason is the leader of the Sweden Democrats and he's notorious for hardly ever showing up to debates. Yeah. Exactly. If somebody's sick and entire policy proposal could fall through, yeah, a delayed flight from New Holland could lead to, could lead to a, could lead to a bill falling. Yeah, it's, it's, it, this could be really, really serious. Um, so I hope the MPs didn't have any plans for the summer holidays. Well, quite. Just going back to the sort of issues that is fell on, there are lots of controversial issues in Swedish politics. But Emma, can you explain why this issue in particular might, of course, these two former Sweden Democrats evoke with the opposition? I mean, introducing transitional rules for citizenship seems eminently reasonable, I, I dare say, to a lot of our listeners, but it, it feels like a funny hill to die on for two former Sweden Democrats. What do you make of it? I mean, okay, so what ends up eating herself said, and when in her blog post, she cited the recommendations from log order, which is the Council on legislation, very senior committee of legal experts that scrutinized bills before the go before Parliament, which had said that we should have transitional rules. And she said that she agreed with that and that the new party that she has started on Bikun Svaryja is, you know, four strict immigration policies, but that there's also a fundamental principle that you shouldn't change the rules mid-match, she said, that ultimately, it's about the rule of law that people should be able to understand what rules apply. They should be able to trust that they don't suddenly, suddenly change. So if we, if we take her words for that, that's, that's, that's the, that's the reason. So also, bidding has come out as a constitutionalist, this woman who, who's a fact in, vaccine skeptic and lots of other things that you associate with the kind of populist right, nonetheless, is a, is a firm constitutionalist. That's her line. When I spoke to, she also pointed out that she had voted for this opposition motion to bring in help for people who sort of these young adults or teenagers who are being deported. That was, I think, in January. So, so, so it's not like this is the first opposition issue that's about fair, but strict migration rules that she's jumped on. You could argue that the word strict also kind of implies fair and predictable, not just tough. But anyway, there's also kind of, this was a bit of political game to it, right? So there are, I would say that there are two kinds of independence in Sweden. There's the ones that, um, that leave the party, but they keep kind of towing the party line and respecting that this is what, what people voted for, and they kind of keep their head down for the rest of the term until the next election. And then there's also the kinds that kind of live up more to the name that these independence have in Swedish, which is, which means like savages, the wild ones, who do everything they can to screw things up for their former party. And Vitting left the party on not exactly good terms. So I suspect that there's an element of that as well. Now these laws are passed without a transitional regime. They passed in a controversial, controversial manner, but they passed. So is this a case of close, but no cigar for the campaigners or will this controversy change anything at all? I mean, the opposition has called for a revote. I think chances that that will actually happen or very, very slim. The tea department is don't have an interest in holding the vote again, because that's then a real chance that I might lose. So they're not going to be like, okay, now, yeah, sure, let's do a retake. The group leaders and parliament, they're probably likely to hold a meeting. And it could, like we talked about, it could conceive to be the end of the, the quick-witting system. We don't know that could happen. I know that campaigners are probably after the election going to try to approach the new government, which might then be a central government, maybe, and try to get transitional rules back on the agenda for those who are still able to benefit from it. Don't know if that will happen either. Again, probably the chances are pretty slim. But I think even though this campaign failed, it's been really nice seeing like so many foreigners taking an active part in the political debate and engaging in the parliamentary system and actually getting the issue to this level. That in itself is a huge step and it shows that foreigners are actually a vote to be reckoned with and Sweden. I wonder whether this sort of, whether non-sweeds lobbying have a different sort of a slightly more forthright and out there kind of styled as some of the lobbying that Swedes do, which can be perhaps a little bit more respectful and low-key. Maybe there was something with the passion behind the lobbying from the Fair Transition Group and others around it that helped this really come up on the agenda and create the sort of parliamentary, hollow balloon that we very rarely see in Sweden. I think it was also the personal stories of everyone involved. They were writing letters to MPs and I don't know how many of those letters MPs actually read but they tried very much to focus on the personal stories like how this affects me. Maybe the Fair Transition could start a lobbying firm in Sweden and make some serious impacts on the Swedish legislative process. I don't think we've seen the last of them. I really don't think we have either. Interestingly on your point there I was speaking to Eda Kakeinen who was the social democrats spokesman on this yesterday and she kind of ruled out the idea that this. that they would be a rematch of this particular point around, you know, transitional rules or around the rules on citizenship. But one of the things she did open up for, which would help quite a lot of people among our listeners and readers, was to give more funding to the migration agency to speed up processing of citizenship applications, which obviously won't help people who no longer qualify for citizenship, but it would at least help those who do and have been waiting an awfully long time. It could be done also by the government still without losing face too much, as coming up with some sort of furthest gift, which is like a regulation. Something the government can do independently without consulting parliament to sort of step down from the law. Some sort of furthest gift that tells the migration agency that people should be allowed to, you know, halt their applications until they meet the new requirements, for example, that they don't get rejected and then have to reapply again and pay the fee again a couple of years later. Right. So their application sort of goes into a bayonet, but isn't deleted. Yeah. I mean, that's interesting. Well, we'll see and we'll keep asking these questions. But let's just go back to the main sort of point here of what, you know, the actual issue and the politics here. Why did the government not want these transitional rules? Well, they've given two reasons and one is that they don't want to parallel systems to be running at the same time like where the new rules apply to some people and the old rules to some people. And the other reason that they've kind of doubled down on a lot is national security, that it's essential to get these rules through as soon as possible. So that, especially the more people have to wait longer to become Swedish citizens so that they can be investigated properly, you know, and all of that and serve with the security police. They support this. They recommended against transitional rules, which is what you would expect them to say. I mean, it makes sense from their perspective, right? But, you know, as a government, as a parliament, we have to consider the whole picture. And I think, honestly, it all comes down to, they want fewer immigrants. It's tough on immigration, tough on the causes of immigration government. From a Sweden Democrat point of view, if you have transitional rules, it's just a long time before this law will actually block anyone. You know, the queue is so long that your policy is not going to have an impact until you're like left politics and being away for ages. I mean, they want to see results now. So Richard, finally, what does this now mean for people who are waiting for citizenship? Is there any kind of light in the tunnel? I'm not as pessimistic. I think there's maybe a bigger chance of having a re-vote on this. I mean, I, then maybe Emma thinks. I think it's unlikely. Not going to happen. You think it's no chance. You think it's absolutely no chance. I don't know. It's undremacatic. I don't know if you can just let that pass. Richard, this is 2026. I think. I agree with you, Richard. I just think you're. Nave. But I'll buy you a beer if I'm wrong. In terms of light at the end of the tunnel, especially after hearing what Eda Cuckoyine has to say, I don't expect that the social democrats, if they win in the next election, will reverse this or add in transition rules just because it'll be a nightmare for the Migration Agency to bring something in on June 6th. And then, you know, four months later, everything goes, changes once again. You have to re-evaluate another whole set of cases. I think it's just too complicated to go back on it once it's been brought in. And also, they also want to be seen as being tough on immigration. I mean, it was a big thing, even the fact that they backed this joint opposition proposal, but it's not something they're going to go out and campaign on. Yeah. I think most Sweden thinks Sweden should have strict citizenship rules. It's a popular policy. It's not like the kind of teen deportation. It's not like the issue of people being deported who you don't want to be deported. This is where the foreigners who are still allowed to live in Sweden get to be citizenship a bit sooner or a bit later. And whether they have to take language tests, which everyone thinks they should have to take, or a specific test, which most people also think they should have to take. It's not a real winning issue for the social democrats. I don't expect them to try and reverse this when they get into government. I think we would need much more coverage in the Swedish media for this to become a big deal. And it has been more coverage, but just because of this voting controversy, it's been really interesting to see that, you know, in the side bars, they've all said, well, what are transitional rules? Why do they want transitional rule? Suddenly, for the first time, the Swedish media is actually covering this. I have a question for you, James. So I reported on all of this from my desk, but you were actually in Parliament. What was it like? I've been in the Swedish Parliament before, but this was the first time I was there with a press pass, actually. I was sort of able to move freely around the Swedish Parliament. It was quite exciting, actually. I was rather enjoyable. You can sit there as a journalist. You can sit right outside the chamber and catch people as they're going in and out and catch up on gossip in the hallway. So that part was really, really fun. So talking to some of these MPs, they were gossiping. So this is when I first heard about this Elsa Viding that she was possibly going to vote against the government. I heard that from Niels Porra, Peter Schum, to begin with, and he sort of basically whispering into my ear, like he couldn't resource it. And so it, and then, and then, you know, talking to other journalists and saying, don't you think that the government could lose on it? So I'm like, no, no. And having all that sort of gossip going behind the scenes, it was great fun, actually. Yeah, I remember you speaking to journalists at the start of the day and they were just completely like dismissive of the idea that there was going to be anything exciting happening yesterday. Completely. And you know, they're like, well, I was like, could the government, I was asking, could the government lose on this? And, you know, a couple of journalists were like, no, of course the government went lose on this. And of course the government didn't lose on this, but it sort of should have lost on this, as it turned out. And that I think shocked most of the journalists, you know, who were there at the beginning of the day. So being on the spot in Parliament was really, really interesting. And it's a fascinating building as well as Parliament's off now. They're sort of big and cavernous and lots of corridors going all sorts of directions. And you see lots of interesting, well-known people in the corridors had a little chat with a former speaker of the Parliament and a few other sort of former ministers. And not that they were sort of really on the board on this issue, but just sort of just the fact that they're all just sitting there and you can just sit down and have a chat with them. It was super interesting. So I reckon those, if you guys are ever in Stockholm, head long to Parliament. And anyone listening, you can also go to Parliament as a member of the public and you can sit in the gallery and watch proceedings there. And you know, often it's not very dramatic, but it's kind of, I think it's kind of interesting if you're interested in the process. I think it's definitely worth paying a visit. It was really difficult following the speaker there. Can we talk about that as well? The speaker sort of, yes, the way that he managed, the voting was fascinating. Yeah. They go through it really, really quickly. Yes, they go, they really, really do. And of course, this being Sweden, it's all electronic. They just sit in their seats and they press a button and you see, exactly, you see immediately how people are voting. It's just all done in an instant. They take the main bill and then they take all the amendments. So you've got to really focus to follow what's going on. It's not all that easy to follow. Yes, and now we'll be with Procession Bob-Bob-Bob. Can we have a vote? Somebody wants to press the buttons. Let's press the buttons. Okay, that's a yes. Yes, bang, next topic. Exactly. I was like, how do they even have time to press the buttons? No. There's a speaker sort of talk. Like, if you've ever watched horse racing on this television and the commentary from the man's, or the speed of sound, it's fascinating. Sweden's King Karl Gustaf is celebrating his 80th birthday as we record this podcast on Thursday. The birthday is being marked with a military parade, a Thanksgiving service and a big shindig at the palace in Stockholm, involving an impressive array of royals from across Europe. Emma. He came to the throne quite young. He's been King for more than 50 years, making him one of the world's longest reigning monarchs. And he's pretty popular. With 63% of Swedes in a poll in 2024, these polls aren't taken very often, saying he's doing a good job compared to just 13%, saying he's doing a bad job. And why do you think he does so well in these surveys? I mean, he has. In the past, been involved in some scandals, like saying stupid things. He once talked about how the Sultan of Brunei had a very democratic rule, for example, but those years are kind of all behind him, those were decades ago. And I think, I think nowadays, he's just, he's just this sort of old, harmless man, but hardworking. And he's kind of like that, that uncle who says some stupid things sometimes, but you know him and you love him and you know that he means well and you've just known him for so long that it's part of the furniture. And I think Swedes also respect that he is hardworking. But the royal family have a reputation for, you know, when they say that they're going to be somewhere, they turn up. Like they very, very rarely cancel participating in anything. And he seems to be in fine fettle, the King, but it's a big birthday like this, it's 80th birthday, it's obviously a time when you perhaps look with one eye to the next generation. Crown Prince has Victoria, she's pretty popular too. Oh yeah, I mean she's even more popular. Why? She's also very hardworking but she's quite ambitious like she reads up on things, she knows everything before she you know attends an event, she makes sure to get involved and you know like Sweden and how Sweden works like she's done lots of military things for example she she goes on hikes she she um this is you know community organizations like that that's something that she said is very important to her because what she can do with her kind of royalness is to help smaller organizations kind of get publicity for their work because the press will follow her and she's just nice she's very open very friendly always smile on her face uh so I think the monarchy as Sweden is it's not going anywhere because if Victoria takes over after the king you know it's it's solid and she is also not involved in any scandals. I think I've seen polls a long long time ago but where where where Swedes were asked if Sweden were to become a republic who would you want as president and uh Victoria I think one the polls um it's strange because I remember the king gave a very very good speech after the tsunami when was that in 2004 I think he gave a very good speech that kind of helped people move on sort of wet at the time when the government was absolutely collapsing because they just didn't know what to do and uh I remember they were also given really good speeches you know after the after the terror attack in Stockholm Victoria did this interview just after where somebody some reporter asked her like how do we move on from this and she was like together and she it was just it was just a instinctive immediate response was not I remember that so well yeah and also during the pandemic they they said very sensible things that kind of clearly tapped into how people were feeling at the time and it's funny because you think of the royals as the people who are completely out of touch with you know ordinary people like us but often it feels like they're actually the ones more than you know the governments that are saying the right things sometimes I mean it's maybe it's something to do with royalty you sort of they're on a pedestal and then when they come down from it has a sort of magic if they just do it every now and again it sort of it perhaps perhaps that's part of the trick and I think it might also be to do with the fact that they actually do travel around quite a lot and they do meet a lot of people and when they do they don't have to kind of you know promote their own politics and things like that so they can actually focus on just talking to people so I think they actually kind of have a good ear to the ground definitely and I think you know the tsunami speech you mentioned from the from the king was was a really good case in point so just to just to remind everyone except for those who don't remember I mean this was a long time ago now but there'd been a massive tsunami in the Indian Ocean and lots of Swedes had been killed because it hit Thailand and many Swedes were on Christmas holidays in Thailand many hundreds of Swedes were killed and the king spoke to survivors and relatives of those who'd been killed at Stockholm City Hall and what he did was he was to say look I know what it's like to lose a parent and he went through this his whole history of his father had been his father was killed his father who who should have been king before him was killed in a plane crash when cargo stuff was was still an infant and he you know he talked about the the experience of growing up without a father and it was really personal and really moving and I think you know a lot of people felt that sort of connection to him because of that it was it was it was extremely well done have to say yeah and say it talking about how how he um he wished that he like the king in the farotales could make everything good again like he'd address that to children who were listening and he was like but I'm just a human like everyone else but now talk to us talk to your parents we want to help it was it was not a dry eye in the house I can be I can be serious I just think about it now it's it's it's like it was it was very moving and very it wasn't actually it was a big turn around for the king because he had had a series of incidents before that where he said some things that were really really strange to say and then he came out as this sort of unifying figure yeah although then there came a few there was there was some there was some really odd biography that came out a little later I think it detailed with questionable degrees of accuracy but nonetheless detailed his his life as a as a lover of parties he does seem to be a lover of parties and some of those parties may have had some some scantily clad women and and and you know possibly more than that and but you know and some of his friends were sort of you know even bigger party animals than he was that that created a big stir for a while but it sort of then kind of just gradually receding as the background I think a richer how do you think how do you feel that the Swedes relate to the monarchy I mean you come from you you like me grew up in a in a different monarchy how how do you sort of compare the two it feels a bit more low key than the than the British monarchy that if I compare different monogues if you look at say the Nordic monarchy which is really low key like they bicycle into all's low and stuff like that and they kind of I think that I think the Swedish monarchy is slightly more elevated than that slightly more ceremonial but that but they're not you know in another stratosphere like the British royal seem to be I think the character of the individuals in the royal family is also kind of interesting because like you say like a cultist of himself he's he's slightly clumsy he's slightly awkward whereas you know Queen Elizabeth had an incredibly short touch so there was that for a long time there was that contrast between the slightly stumbling monarchy in in Sweden and this incredibly very poised but maybe slightly distant Queen we had in the UK whereas I think a King Charles is a bit more in the same oldest Cole Gustav in that he's he's a slight slightly eccentric individual on it kind of comes across he doesn't have quite that short touch that Queen Elizabeth had Cole Philip is also a little bit clumsy there's this sort of dyslexic strain in the Swedish royals that comes across sometimes I mean they are dyslexia and they talk they talk about it a lot says this kind of clumsiness and awkwardness which they deal with and you say like they talk about which makes them maybe makes them more human to an extent but also makes it harder to see them as these sort of perfect celebrities yeah I think Swedes are really comfortable with the monarchy I mean that they incredibly popular the republican movement in Sweden is minuscule and almost non-existent and yeah that they're going to be part of the system for for many years to come and it's kind of it's for for such a social democratic country it's it's amazing how resilient the monarchy's been at times Sweden's been you know extremely left-wing country and there's even even in those times there's been no real calls to get rid of the monarchy no exactly but I mean I think you know the social democrats have had it in their party program forever getting rid of the monarchy they've never read that much about it yeah I mean the quite the social democrats policy is mainly like okay on principle we don't think we should have a monarchy but let's not rock the note yeah yeah although they did when when the current constitution came into being you know that was written in a way that really reduce the monarchy's formal powers but also left it in a sense quite vulnerable because it said that only the children of King Karl Gustaf can exceed to the throne at that point you didn't have any children so it was you know it was it was a little bit of pressure on the poor fellow to to produce some errors but he he succeeded very well yeah he's he's got he's got a lot of errors now so he's he's he's secured the the family line the King's birthday also coincides with two other Swedish celebrations which is quickly we got ball ball on the 30th of April and that's today as we're recording this and Mayday on well the 1st of May uh emma ball boy that's bonfire night how do we celebrate it we like bonfires fabulous and why do we celebrate it uh well there was a apparently an English missionary who promoted Christianity and in parts of Europe who was called Saint Walperna which becomes volleyball in Swedish and especially in Germany she was for centuries remembered on April 30th but there's also the tradition of lighting fires around this time of the year which dates dates back to priest Christian times in Sweden you know it's one of those things that the Christianity kind of took over but I will it's I will it to credit the English for this I'm all up for this these days I should say it actually has nothing to do with religion uh not not at all and is mainly seen as just a way of celebrating the arrival of spring like you know you'll sing songs to welcome spring and light the bonfire and and then go home or get drunk if you're a student but don't turn up with a hangover to the 1st of May because what happens on the 1st of May Richard it is a huge deal still for the social democrats and the left party and their supporters for the sort of workers movement in Sweden and it seems to me it's like very it comes be quite anachronistic. You get like big processions of workers with red banners. There's a lot of red. It feels almost like a sort of Soviet parade. In Stockholm, I was just looking at the program. It starts with a memorial for the communist volunteers who went to fight in the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s, which is, you know, one of the defining battles of the international workers movement, but also something that happened a hundred years ago. So it's kind of like, it's very historic and the events is not going to end with the singing of the international oil, which is the workers anthem, which was again, was penned in the Paris commune back in 1871. So it's steeped in kind of workers movement tradition and you get speeches by all the big hitters. So Magdalene and Anderson is going to have a speech in Stockholm and Tobias Baudin, who's the party secretary for the Social Democrats, who will have a speech in Malmo. And there's also a bit of fun stuff. So in Malmo, Mickola, the beer company is hosting a big Mayday thing in the Falkets Park. So yeah, it's a celebration, but it's mainly about speeches and solidarity and people who are left wing. It's almost like Easter for Christians, you know, you have to go to May the first if you count yourself a social Democrat or a left wing party supporter, left party supporter. I think it feels more like for me, it feels like gay pride for leftist sort of commie pride or something. Commie pride. Commie pride. Similar thing. And in a similar way, if you don't go, you feel a bit guilty, you know, but if you're that way inclined at least, yes. Well, happy first of May to all those at celebrates, happy recovering from your ball, boy, hangover for those of you who don't. And we'll leave it there for this week. Our panelists today were Emma Loughgren and Richard Orange, the producer of the Apollo money. I'm James Savage and we'll be back on Wednesday with Sweden and Focus and Extra. Sweden focuses a podcast by the local Europe the publisher is me, James Savage. That's all for this week's free edition of Sweden and Focus. If you'd like to hear a full length version of the podcast each week, as well as an additional midweek episode with more interviews and analysis, please upgrade to membership plus. Make sure to check the episode notes for details on how to upgrade. Sweden and Focus is a podcast by the local Europe. Our sound engineer is Reese Edwards. The publisher is James Savage.