Here's a question for you: in which EU country do left-wing social democrat politicians passionately defend the virtues of free-market capitalism while conservatives defend the welfare state? The answer is Sweden.
In several ways, this country of nine million people puts preconceived notions of left and right to the test. An icon for many on the Irish left, over 60 years of social democratic government has not prevented Sweden from being a monarchy with compulsory military service and a law and order regime that Michael McDowell would have little to complain about.
In relation to one of Sweden's problems, however - unemployment - the left-right split is quite traditional. The Social Democratic response to rising unemployment has been to implement what economists call demand-side measures, ie more spending. Since a fiscal crisis in the early 1990s, that route is now closed. Sweden runs healthy budget surpluses with the approval of most, but not all, on the left. But Social Democrats are strongly opposed to any further reform of Sweden's generous welfare benefits, as well as to any cuts in taxation.
Sweden's new trade minister is Sten Tolgfors, a member of the conservative Moderaterna party and the new government's second trade minister. Tolgfors replaced TV personality Maria Borelius, who resigned in October over a tax scandal. The scandal shook the new government and Tolgfors was distinctly nervous when talking about the welfare system. Despite winning the election, his party has discovered that Swedes - particularly older ones - are resistant to change. His clear message is that the welfare system will stay in place, but that reforms must happen.
"We need to do different things at the same time. We need to make it more profitable to work, easier to employ people and improve the quality of service in our hospitals," he said, his last phrase appealing to the strong degree of support for Sweden's public healthcare system.
On unemployment, the government is more forthright. As officially measured, Swedish unemployment remains stubbornly high at 7.5 per cent. But hundreds of thousands of Swedes not counted in the unemployment statistics would work if social benefits were less generous. Youth unemployment is particularly high in Sweden.
There is no agreed alternative measure of unemployment but most agree that it is effectively higher than 7.5 per cent. But not everybody agrees who is to blame. Lena Westerlund is an international economist with Sweden's powerful trade union federation. Although equally concerned about youth unemployment, she blames government cutbacks in work training and rejects the idea that unemployment is significantly higher than official estimates.
But she will admit that unemployment could be lower. "One thing to discuss is whether we have too many people in early retirement. Yes, we have. Another is to discuss if there are people with long-term illnesses who could be able to come back to work".
On the opposite side of the spectrum, I interviewed Urban Backstrom, a former governor of Sweden's central bank and current head of the employers' federation. Backstrom came to Ireland two years ago to see what Swedes might learn from one of Europe's fastest-growing economies. He expressed disappointment that reforms have not gone further. "We have to convince people of the benefits of the free market," said Backstrom.
But far from opposing the free market, Social Democrat Leif Pagrotsky said his party endorses it wholeheartedly. For him, welfare reforms undertaken by his party in government during the 1990s were about preserving the welfare state in a way compatible with free trade. "I would say that although many people thought it was treason to cut back on the state pension and child benefit and so on, without the change the system couldn't be maintained at all."
As an MP for Gothenburg, Pagrotsky represents a town hit hard by the decline of Sweden's shipbuilding industry. When I ask him to explain how a welfare state is compatible with free trade, his response is for me, at least, counter-intuitive, but highly effective: while "socialist" Sweden has no tariffs on steel, tariffs were introduced to shore up the US steel sector in the 1990s in response to pressure from workers who - in the absence of state support - faced economic ruin. When Sweden's steel industry declined there was little pressure to defend an industry that everyone accepted would decline.
"Unlike in the US, you didn't have the insecurity of taking parents out of old age homes, or children out of school. We didn't have any riots over free trade in Sweden," said Pagrotsky.
