[WIP] Address review comments and update opposition motions articles

[Copilot]

Thanks for asking me to work on this. I will get started on it and keep this PR's description up to date as I form a plan and make progress.

Original prompt

Overview

Address all review comments from PR #326 review thread #326 (review).

Issues to Fix

1. Replace placeholder content in 10 opposition motions articles

Files news/2026-02-19-opposition-motions-{ar,de,es,fi,fr,he,ja,ko,nl,zh}.html all contain <p>...</p> placeholders in their "Political Analysis" and "Outlook" sections (around lines 128-132).

The English version news/2026-02-19-opposition-motions-en.html has full content in these sections (lines 216-263). You need to translate and insert the full content for each language.

English content to translate:

Political Analysis section (lines 216-240):

These six motions demonstrate sophisticated opposition tactics. On property transparency, Social Democrats and Greens coordinate on shared goals while positioning themselves differently—the Social Democrats as pragmatic reformers, the Greens as principled advocates for radical transparency. This allows both parties to criticize the government while maintaining distinct identities.

The waste legislation motions reveal deeper challenges for opposition unity. When three parties file competing motions on the same proposition, they signal to voters that they offer genuinely different approaches—important for maintaining electoral differentiation. However, this fragmentation weakens their collective leverage in committee negotiations and chamber votes.

The Centre Party's renewable energy motion is particularly interesting. As a former member of the centre-right Alliance, the Centre Party now sits in opposition but shares the government's pro-business orientation. Their motion criticizes government implementation failures while endorsing the underlying policy direction—a positioning that could attract Liberal Party support and create cross-bloc consensus on permitting reform.

For the government, these motions provide valuable intelligence about opposition priorities and potential vulnerabilities. The property transparency issue clearly resonates across the left-green bloc, suggesting the government may face sustained pressure. The waste policy divisions, conversely, reveal opposition disagreements that the government can exploit through selective compromise.

Outlook/What to Watch section (lines 244-263):

- Committee hearings: The Civil Law Committee (CU) and Environment and Agriculture Committee (MJU) will hold hearings on these motions, likely inviting expert testimony from industry, civil society, and authorities.
- Additional opposition motions: Expect further motions as opposition parties respond to the nine government propositions tabled February 17th. The Left Party and Sweden Democrats have not yet filed on these topics.
- Cross-bloc alignment: Watch whether the Centre Party's renewable energy motion attracts Liberal or Moderate support, signaling potential for cross-bloc compromise on climate and energy issues.
- Social Democrat-Green coordination: The property transparency motions suggest coordinated strategy. Monitor whether this extends to other policy areas as both parties position for potential red-green cooperation post-2026 election.
- Municipal reactions: The waste policy debate will trigger responses from the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SKR), municipal waste companies, and private contractors—each with significant lobbying capacity.
- EU compliance pressure: Both waste recycling and renewable energy permitting involve EU obligations. Commission pressure or infringement warnings could shift Swedish political dynamics and force cross-party agreement.
- Election framing: These motions preview opposition campaign themes: transparency and accountability (property registration), environmental ambition (waste, renewables), and effective governance (permit delays). The government will need compelling counter-narratives.

For each language file, check the heading text used for the Political Analysis and Outlook sections (they differ per language), then replace <p>...</p> after each heading with a proper <ul class="watch-list"> for Outlook and proper <p> paragraphs for Political Analysis. Use the correct translation for each target language. Also update wordCount in the Schema.org JSON-LD to reflect the actual word count.

Language-specific heading names to look for (found in the files):

• fr: <h2>Analyse des partis</h2> and <h2>Perspectives</h2>
• de: <h2>Parteienanalyse</h2> and <h2>Ausblick</h2>
• ko: <h2>정당 분석</h2> and <h2>전망</h2>
• ja: Check the file for the h2 headings
• nl: Check the file for the h2 headings
• he: Check the file (RTL language)
• ar: Check the file (RTL language)
• es: Check the file
• fi: Check the file
• zh: Check the file

2. Security fix: payloadPath path traversal vulnerability in scripts/mcp-client.js

In scripts/mcp-client.js around lines 567-575:

if (parsed.payloadPath) {
  const fs...

</details>



<!-- START COPILOT CODING AGENT TIPS -->
---

✨ Let Copilot coding agent [set things up for you](https://github.com/Hack23/riksdagsmonitor/issues/new?title=✨+Set+up+Copilot+instructions&body=Configure%20instructions%20for%20this%20repository%20as%20documented%20in%20%5BBest%20practices%20for%20Copilot%20coding%20agent%20in%20your%20repository%5D%28https://gh.io/copilot-coding-agent-tips%29%2E%0A%0A%3COnboard%20this%20repo%3E&assignees=copilot) — coding agent works faster and does higher quality work when set up for your repo.