A paradigm shift was promised after the election. But in the debate with the Liberals” Martin Melin, Markus Allard argued that the government had let down its voters - and that the changes made were ”too little, too late".
It was in Studio 3s ”Duel” as the Örebro Party's Markus Allard focused on what he believes is at the heart of the Tidö project's problems: that the government had the opportunity to implement far more extensive changes, but refrained. This was in the debate with the Liberals' spokesperson on justice policy Martin Melin as Allard pointed out the betrayals.
- The paradigm shift is a fraud on voters. It cannot be argued otherwise.
He elaborated that Swedish legislation, in his view, allows for much faster and more radical changes than the government wanted to use.
- You have had every opportunity in the world to push through one radical and reasonable and necessary piece of legislation after another. And you have sat on your hands and done nothing.
”You promised a revolutionary change”
When Melin claimed that the government had nevertheless carried out reforms, Allard replied that this did not correspond to what was promised before the election.
- You say one thing before the election and then you say one thing after the election, and that's exactly what we've got with you.
He repeated several times that the word paradigm shift implies a fundamental change of course, not minor adjustments.
- You promised a paradigm shift, a fundamental revolutionary change in this given truth.
When Melin still claimed that changes had taken place after all, Allard briefly dismissed it:
- It is too little, too late.
The only exception: NATO
As an example of how quick decisions are indeed possible, Allard cited the NATO process, which he said shows that political will can overcome inertia when power wants it to.
- There is a single example of the Tidewater government passing a bill very quickly. Can you guess what it is? NATO! That was a hell of a hurry.
The point, according to Allard, was that the same determination had not been shown on migration and return issues.
- It was apparently not urgent enough in the case of migration.
”Four years have been wasted”
In the end, the debate focused less on individual reforms and more on whether electoral promises had been kept. Here, Allard's message was consistent: the government has not delivered what it campaigned on.
- Four years have now passed, he pointed out, That's why we haven't had a paradigm shift.
Extremely tiresome to hear a lecture from a liberal who sits on his pedestal and for all the world did not want to be outside the EU, but Gustav Kasselstrand had handled this debate much better than Allard - sure he appears ”popular” with his constant swearing - but it does not impress. Dare to take the debate with Gustav! I think I would have done better
I fully agree with what you say.