Letter to the editor. Listen to the voters and bring V into the government

In an interview with DN, S leader Magdalena Andersson said that the most important thing for Sweden now is to get a government that can govern the country in accordance with the clearly expressed will of the people.

It is a reasonable reasoning. The voters gave their support to the red-green bloc with the Social Democrats, the Left Party, the Center Party and the Green Party rather than to the Tidö parties. Although this block has gained a parliamentary upper hand, no government has yet been able to be formed. The question is why.

The voters have had their say, but the winning parties still can't seem to agree on a common way forward. It is also important to remember that the red-green bloc's majority position has been made possible by the Left Party's strong election results and the Center Party's cooperation with the red-greens.

The Left Party made a historically good election and became the second largest force within the red-green cooperation, while the Social Democrats recorded one of their weakest election results ever. Despite this, there seems to be a reluctance on the part of some to fully accept the new political reality created by the electorate.

All four parties say they want to see Magdalena Andersson as prime minister. So why is it so difficult to agree? Why are we still looking for solutions with an uncertain parliamentary basis instead of building on the cooperation that the voters have actually given their support to?

The ongoing attempt to form a centrist government without the Left Party currently appears difficult to realize. There is no indication that any of the Tidö parties are prepared to leave their bloc to support such a solution. The risk is therefore that this strategy rather prolongs the political stalemate than leads to a functioning government.

In the current situation, there are at least two possible ways forward.

The first is that S, V and MP form a minority government, while the Center Party, through a clear cooperation agreement, gives its support in the Riksdag. Such a model is not unusual in Swedish politics and could create the stability required for the country to be governed.

The other, and perhaps most natural, solution is for the four parties to form a complete red-green government together.

Before the election, they sought the voters' support because of a joint alternative to the Tidö government. After the election, the ambition should therefore be to realize this option. No party will get their entire program through, but it should be possible to agree on a common political platform.

There is also an obvious risk if the red-green parties fail to form a government. If the process ends in a new election, it may instead benefit the Tidö parties. Voters may perceive it as the parties that were given the mandate to create change failing to cooperate when it really mattered.

In such a situation, the Social Democrats risk suffering further voter losses, while the Center Party's position may be weakened without the red-greens. The Left Party, on the other hand, may strengthen its support, as the party has consistently stuck to its demands and presented itself as willing to implement the election results.

However, one thing is clear. Voters did not vote for continued political gridlock or prolonged power struggles. They voted for change.

Therefore, it is now up to Magdalena Andersson, the Center Party and the other parties in the red-green collaboration to put prestige aside and find a sustainable solution.

The best way to respect the voters' mandate is to translate their decisions into a functioning government that can give Sweden political stability and the power to act.