This bachelor thesis asks in relation to Carol Bacchi’s “What’s the problem represented to be?” what the problem with the new proposed act of own housing, also know as the EBO law is, according to five represented parties’ within the Swedish parliament. The parties’ represented in the study are The Social Democratic Party, The Left Party, The Sweden Democrats and The Moderate Party together with The Christian Democrats. The questions asked in line with the WPR-analysis are: (1) what’s the ‘problem’ represented to be? (2) what presuppositions or assumptions underline this representation of the ‘problem’?. To answer these questions, Ernesto Lacau’s and Chantal Mouffe’s discourse theory is being used to build a analytical framework to extract individual results from the parties’ motions in respons to the governments proposition to change the EBO law. The results show different ideological understandings between the parties’ of what the problem is represented to the while the presuppositions or assumptions show no clear ideological understanding for the problem. Instead it shows a wide variety of underlying assumptions. The conclusions drawn from the study are that in relation to both the problem representation and the underlying assumptions, the parties’ still show signs of a rather collected understanding of what the problem with the EBO law is, what can also be described by Mouffe as agonism, rather than antagonism.