Children and young people within social services

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! This past week, Sweden has once again been shaken by shootings. A teenage boy was shot dead on a football pitch in Vårby gård, an 18-year-old was killed in a brutal shooting on a bus in Tyresö, and in Solna, a man was shot in a suspected murder attempt. He was shot by a child.

It is about shootings on open streets, in residential areas, and even in public transport. It is about shootings in the middle of the day among completely ordinary people on their way home from school, work, and training.

We have a development where younger and younger people are being recruited into violent crime. The police have repeatedly confirmed this. In several cases, it concerns children aged 15 or younger.

When children and young adults are recruited into serious crime via social media and criminal networks, the adult world must ask what conditions and values lie behind the fact that we in Sweden have so many children who are prepared to commit crimes against others. How is it that so many mothers, specifically in Sweden, will have to bury their children for this reason? How is it that we have so many children who murder other children?

Madam Speaker! Children are the most valuable thing we have. Secure children who grow up in secure families with good values and hope for a better future is what, more than anything else, prevents crime.

More children in our country need a meaningful leisure time and community where they can develop and be nurtured with good values. More children also need to receive the support required to have a chance to succeed in school and be able to feel hope for the future.

Safety always begins with the children and with safe families. In cases where the family does not function – or perhaps functions but is not sufficient – the social services' preventive and crime-preventive measures play a decisive role. Early interventions are required to prevent crime. It is about a social service that actively works outreach-oriented, close to the families.

Expanding the family support programs and family centers has been an important issue for the government and for my party, Kristdemokraterna. It is about being able to better prevent social exclusion, work health-promoting, and not least detect the children who are in a vulnerable situation in time. Social services need to meet the children where they are – in school, in preschool, and out in the field. It is also precisely the direction that the new Social Services Act is heading towards and that the country's municipalities are transitioning to.

The new Social Services Act that has entered into force during this parliamentary term gives the social services a clear preventive and crime-preventive mandate. The social services also need more tools to protect children and young people, for example in cases where consent to support measures is lacking. Such legislation is now on its way.

The government has allocated more resources to the social services. The municipalities also need to allocate more resources to the social services. The municipalities are given the mandate to act earlier and sufficiently powerfully. But it is also required that the social services recognize the need for cooperation around every child in order to prevent crime. It is about cooperation with preschool, school and police but also with local businesses, healthcare, civil society organizations and not least the children's family and friends. Society is so much larger than the state, and the whole of society needs to be involved in preventing and combating crime for Sweden to seriously become safe again.

Madam Speaker! We cannot accept that children become tools in the gangs' violence. The preventive work needs to be prioritized on a broad front in every municipality in the country. It needs to be done before more young lives are lost.

When 15-year-olds run around with weapons and murder other children, the entire society needs to mobilize with full force. Therefore, the government pursues a policy for safer and stronger families, and therefore the government also strengthens the social services' preventive and crime-preventive work. We are building up a social service that continues to have heart for the vulnerable but with significantly larger muscles than before in order to be able to protect the children. The goal is that every child should be able to grow up with the security and faith in the future that every child in Sweden has the right to feel.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Madam Speaker! I believe that many of us parents have sometimes reminded each other that even small pots have ears. I believe that many use that proverb to explain that they might have to have the conversation about the alert at work in private once the children have gone to bed. We might have to sit down in private with the calculation and look at what the a-kassa can actually offer these days. But be so sure – many children understand what is happening in Sweden and in the world and that it is a crisis.

Children living in poverty do not only have big ears; they also have thin skin and eyes to see with. All children recognize the feeling and know how much it hurts when one is not allowed to be included. There are very many children in our country now who are not allowed to be included and participate in leisure activities. They sense this. They feel excluded, and it hurts.

Many children also feel hunger in 2026's Sweden. There are many children who go to bed hungry in the child poverty we see spreading. In a survey that some voluntary organizations, including the Red Cross, Save the Children, and the Tenants' Association, have produced, one in ten parents in families with weak finances answers that during the last six-month period they have seen that their child has not been able to eat until full. What has also emerged is that 41 percent of single parents with low incomes state that they themselves have not been able to eat until full during the last six months.

I pause a bit at those figures and imagine the situation of sitting at the dinner table and letting your children eat until they are full while you yourself are hungry and take the leftovers. Many are in that situation. I believe that many children understand what is happening at that dinner table. They understand that mom or dad is holding back so that they themselves can eat until they are full, and it is very tough for a child to bear.

It is now hundreds of thousands of children living in poverty in Sweden, but it did not have to be so. We could have addressed unemployment with tough action programs, with educational initiatives, and with extra jobs. We could have refrained from dismantling the protection via the a-kassa. Many families are forced to go down to an income of 13,000–14,000 kronor with the new a-kassa rules. That is the compensation for a full-time job. We have not raised the child allowance. Budget after budget, the government has chosen to prioritize in other ways. They have chosen to lower taxes for those with the highest incomes. They have been allowed to go first in the queue.

Now the government proposes that the social assistance should be reformed and chooses to target specifically those children who happen to have many siblings. They want to give children with many siblings significantly worse opportunities in life and push them into poverty.

It is not only families' finances that determine children's opportunities in life. It is also how strong society is. It is how well the school functions and how well child and adolescent psychiatry functions. It is how well the social services function.

Now that we are soon making a final assessment of this government, we see that tax cuts have been prioritized over the additional resources that would have been needed in the cost crisis we have had. Taken together, this is of course something the cynical gangs exploit. They recruit the children who live in poverty and who are susceptible to their recruitment attempts.

When it has gone so far that children have one foot inside organized crime – then, Madam Speaker, society must be on its guard, be strong and truly try to make a difference. Then we do not only need the modern Social Services Act that is now in place, thanks to this and the previous government, but we must also have the resources to work with it.

We must have resources to be able to offer targeted interventions toward those who are entering criminality as young people. We must have the possibility to invest in early interventions. We must have the possibility to not only offer exit programs but also U-turn programs so that more children take a U-turn from organized crime when they are heading in. For that, resources are needed, something that the social services would need now, but it has not been prioritized.

If we look at the children who have truly entered into organized crime, who have ended up in Swedish youth care and who do not live at home with their parents but are to receive care, we see one of perhaps the greatest failures that we have in Swedish society today. I believe we all agree on that. They can end up in HVB homes that are infiltrated by organized crime and that are owned and operated by criminals. But the remarkable thing is that it can only continue.

We Social Democrats have submitted proposals to allow the police to forcibly close these HVB homes when suspicion exists. We have submitted proposals that there should be a reverse burden of proof when permits are examined. It is the one who runs the youth homes who must show that they have clean hands and not the other way around. But we have also proposed that the public should take back control over that youth care, those HVB homes, which are directed at criminals. The government has said no to all of this, and the problems remain.

Some arguments that often come up are that this would mean a restriction of property rights. Yes, absolutely, that is true! But in the choice between being able to run businesses undisturbed and collecting tax money on youth care and protecting children's rights, children's safety and the best interests of society, there is no question about where I as a Social Democrat and my party stand. Let us take back control over Swedish youth care, preferably now but at the very latest after the election!

Madam Speaker! I would like to conclude by mentioning the staff who do an outstanding job. When we talk about youth care, we sometimes forget about them. Of course, there are people who should not work within Swedish youth care and who should not do so, but there are also those who get up every day and do a fantastic job.

I have had the privilege of meeting many trade union activists within Seko who have big hearts and great expertise. They also see major deficiencies. They say it is frustrating to work a tough and long day at Sis-homes and then know that when they discharge these children, they often end up in HVB-homes owned and operated by criminals.

I think we should take this concern seriously and seriously deal with the crime within Swedish youth care. Above all, we should do it for our children's sake, so that they can have a bright future despite difficult circumstances at the beginning of life.

With this, Madam Speaker, I move for approval of reservation 14.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! Initially, I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

I believe that we all here in the chamber have had personal reasons for entering politics. For my part, it was never a plan, not even a thought, that I myself would do it, until something began to grow in me. An increasingly burdensome insight began to grow.

Madam Speaker! With the years, it became increasingly clear that the fine, calm, secure and homogeneous country that I and my brothers had the privilege to grow up in no longer existed. It became increasingly clear that decades of harmful and irresponsible politics had changed Sweden fundamentally. Sweden had slowly but surely become a completely different country than the one I knew.

When I then had children of my own, not only did my sorrow over the state of affairs increase, but also my frustration. Is this what we are to hand over to future generations? Is this what I am to hand over to my children? Are we to hand it over to the children whom we usually call our future, to the children who are our future? No, Madam Speaker, we shall not. We must not.

But what was it really like when I grew up? It wasn't a perfect society in every respect then either, but it was a different society. We had fewer resources, and the standard of living was lower. But we could move much more freely. We did not have phenomena such as humiliation robberies, gang rapes, gang shootings, drug crime, and honor-based oppression.

We grew up in a society that in many ways held together, a society characterized by clear boundaries, respect for law and order, security and shared values. It gave us, for the most part, a belief in the future.

Today, reality looks completely different for far too many, as the effects of the totally irresponsible migration policy in combination with the largely failed integration have begun to seriously strike in large parts of our society. Many children are today forced to grow up in a Sweden increasingly characterized by violence, cultural clashes, and insecurity. Furthermore, many children grow up without what should constitute the foundation for their lives and development: a safe and healthy family.

The consequences are in many cases devastating. We see how crime creeps further and further down in age, how ever younger children are recruited into gangs and how children as young as 13-year-olds become contract killers. Children today are both perpetrators and victims. More and more upbringing environments are characterized by insecurity. Furthermore, the school does not always represent the same calm place with a focus on learning anymore. We also see how mental ill-health is increasing, as well as addiction problems of various kinds.

These are not abstract problems. It is today's reality, and it is something we must unite against.

Madam Speaker! Sweden has for many years had a system, a safety net, with the ambition of catching those who fall. But with the increasingly extensive problems, it is no longer enough to work as we did before. We simply must be clearer. We must act much earlier and, unfortunately, take an even greater responsibility when families do not want to or are unable to.

It was with that insight that we, together with the government, initiated an extensive reform work to meet today's problems and give children, young people, and future generations a real chance into a good adult life and into a future.

Much has already been done, and more is underway. This includes, among other things, a new Social Services Act with a clear preventive focus, tightened supervision of HVB, increased resources to Sis, and new tools to stop the recruitment of children into crime.

These are not one-off measures. It is the beginning of an absolutely necessary systemic change. Some of the social services' tasks, which I just mentioned, are about preventing children from suffering, detecting problems early, and providing support that actually makes a difference. We know that the results are often not visible until much later, but that does not make the work any less important. It makes it even more urgent and crucial.

When the social services act, when proper support is provided, or when a child is placed in care, one principle must be completely paramount, namely the best interests of the child. The goal of the interventions is and must always be to, to the greatest extent possible, provide children with good upbringing conditions and to protect them from things such as crime, substance abuse, violence, and honor-based oppression. We must ensure that they can continue into adulthood as well-functioning citizens.

Madam Speaker! Through the Social Services Act, the public has a responsibility to protect and help children who are suffering, but that is not enough. It is often said: It takes a village to raise a child. That is true, and many of us need to join forces and help one another. It is not just about those of us who are parents, neighbors, or for that matter, politicians. It is about all parts of society, where everyone from teachers, doctors, and other fellow citizens to civil organizations plays an important role in the general safety net.

But when a child is placed in society's care, the state takes over the responsibility fully, and then we must be able to guarantee quality. Today, there are significant deficiencies in some respects, and that is why the proposal for a national register of foster homes is an important step.

Furthermore, Madam Speaker, one of the absolute key factors for children's future is school. Here, reality speaks its clear language. Only half of placed children achieve high school eligibility today. As long as we see that school failures are often linked to exclusion, unemployment, and an increased risk of crime, we cannot view it as anything other than a failure. But we also know that it can be reversed, among other things through measures such as school social teams and, definitely, better cooperation between authorities. It is a task that we continue to encourage and strengthen. We know that school can be one of the primary protective factors that exist against an adult life in chaos.

I finally want to mention one more of all the things we are focusing on, namely the HVB homes. They fulfill and shall fulfill an important function for those young people who need support, help, and care but for various reasons cannot stay at home. There are many good examples, thank goodness, but we have also been forced to read about homes characterized by violence, abuse, and links to serious crime. This is, of course, completely unacceptable. Therefore, we have tightened the supervision. At an ever-increasing pace, we are now stopping unserious actors and carrying out a review of the entire system.

Madam Speaker! Responsible politics is not about saying the most, but about doing the right things and prioritizing. That journey has begun for our children and future generations.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Madam Speaker! I noted that Jessica Stegrud said in her speech that we had no gang rapes when she grew up. Since the member is so certain about this, I thought I would ask: When did the first gang rape occur in Sweden?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Gustaf Lantz, for an incredibly niche question! I believe I expressed myself as that it concerns a phenomenon, and that is correct. One group rape or another also occurred at that time, but the extent that we have received as a result of the Social Democrats' mass immigration policy, we have never witnessed before.

Much of what I mentioned in my speech, the problems we have today, are a consequence primarily of the Social Democrats' completely irresponsible mass immigration policy and lack of integration, Madam Speaker. There was a time – it is only a few years ago – when, according to the Social Democrats, it was even considered racist to demand that one can speak the Swedish language to obtain Swedish citizenship. Citizenship has been handed out as easily as possible, and now we are left with imported crime.

Gustaf Lantz spoke, among other things, Madam Speaker, about the problems with the HVB homes and criminal gangs. I do not remember exactly how Gustaf Lantz expressed himself. This is largely an effect and a consequence of the policy that the Social Democrats have pursued for so many years: a lack of controls of all kinds, the distribution of citizenship, and no integration policy worth the name.

I admit, Madam Speaker, that there were one and another group rape even when I grew up, but absolutely not in the extent and in the way that we have seen during the last 10, 15 or 20 years.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Madam Speaker! Without revealing the age of anyone here in the chamber, I can say that everything was perhaps not better in the past. Five years before Member Stegrud was born, it was legal in Sweden to commit a rape within a marriage. I want to assert that we have made quite large progress when it comes to women's rights, and it is not thanks to those at the far right.

If the Social Democrats are the root of all evil and have not been tough enough regarding regulation and whatever it was, perhaps the member can answer why one says no to all our proposals concerning tightening up around the HVB homes – to take them back into public administration, reverse the burden of proof when testing permits, and let the police close HVB homes directly. They say no. There, I do not see that one is showing signs of taking tough action and tackling the situation.

The truth is that Stegrud is part of a right-wing bloc that now governs Sweden – which is worsening child poverty and has dismantled the a-kassa despite Stegrud's party Sverigedemokraterna promising dearly and solemnly that this would not happen. And this hits the children. It means that more will apply for social assistance; we see that trend already now.

Sweden is not on the right path that the Sverigedemokraterna member is talking about, but rather the opposite. More children are becoming poor and more children are going to bed hungry, and there is no policy against this.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! Finally, we have a government and a cooperation that actually ensures action is taken. The member says that we say no to a lot of measures. One might wonder why the Social Democrats year in and year out have said no to increased penalties and everything that we are now implementing at a rapid pace in the crime area.

The Speaker is talking about women's safety. Women have surely never been as insecure as during the Social Democrats' time in power. We are talking about honor culture, honor oppression, and rape.

I personally think this is embarrassing, Madam Speaker. I hope that the Social Democrats will never come to power again. The self-awareness, the understanding of the development, and the understanding of what one has actually been involved in and caused is non-existent. How can a party that does not even understand causes and connections be able to come up with the right measures? This is fascinating, to say the least, I must say.

Since this matter regarding the economy. Yes, it is a concern today. For large parts, we are also sitting here with the effects of social democratic policy. We have today 700,000–800,000 illiterates who are very difficult to make productive and to get to contribute both to their own livelihood and to the state treasury. There won't be much money to distribute in the end, when fewer and fewer are to support more and more. It is also something that we are actually taking action against.

I do not know what to say. With our policy, women can finally begin to feel safe again. That shall be the end of my speech.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Madam Speaker! I intended to ask the member about two things.

Firstly, over the years, a number of remarkable deficiencies and problems have been noted regarding the completely dysfunctional HVB housing market. I hope the member has had the opportunity to read, for example, the Children's Ombudsman's report *Ni måste hinna före* (You must manage to be first), which I find very gripping and exemplary – I will return to it – and which describes something, together with all the other alarm reports. Just the HVB market, which has been built up largely with private actors and deficient control, simply has not functioned. We must regain control.

There, I wanted to hear if the members also see the problems that we see with the private HVB market, which rather stems from profit interests and where criminal actors can run HVB homes. Do you also see a need to reclaim this in a public control where we can raise the quality?

The second question is: Do the Sweden Democrats want a more equal society? Do the Sweden Democrats want to reduce relative poverty and child poverty – and if so, how?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Nils Seye Larsen, for the interesting questions!

Yes, I absolutely see this problem. It is a crime that unfortunately has entered quite many sectors in Swedish society. A large part of this is so-called imported crime.

We see major problems within LSS, for example. The member mentions HVB – absolutely. I remember clearly – we have had meetings with the department and with the responsible minister – measures are being taken. A good number of HVB homes have been closed. There must, therefore, be meticulous controls in this type of activity. It is incredibly important.

That is how it is, as I said, in many areas today. We see that organized crime is entering the welfare sector in an ever-increasing extent. We see the problems, and they are being addressed.

Sometimes people believe that municipal activities are completely free from problems, fraud, and crime. Unfortunately, that is not the case today. We have had dysfunctional Sis-homes, for example. They are indeed state-run, but we have also taken action there, and major changes are occurring there as well. More resources and clearer guidelines have been provided. We are, therefore, working on constant improvements, because these are incredibly important areas.

Then the member asked me if I want a more equal society. Yes, absolutely. No one should have to be poor in Sweden – that is how it is. It is a motto that we truly stand behind. But one must look at the root causes, as I mentioned before. It is about, for example, this issue of that we have so many illiterates, who actually cannot become productive in a Swedish high-tech society. It is no easy equation to solve. This is part of the relative poverty, quite simply.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin with a clarification. When it comes to this matter of the economy, investigations, even those commissioned by the government, state that we make a profit from the immigration we have. I say that so that it is clear.

Then I think it is interesting that the big problem we have with the dysfunctional HVB market – which is one of the private markets that has developed in our welfare society – according to the Sweden Democrats is a problem due to imported crime. One might say that if one is from a party that does not have problems with crime in its own ranks.

When it comes to poverty, I am surprised. This government has been able to make economic priorities. There have been several billions in tax cuts. One has very clearly prioritized tax cuts for those who have means, while we have a growing inequality, more and more in relative poverty, and more and more children in poverty. We would need to work purposefully.

I would like to ask something precisely because the Sweden Democrats often return to the idea that it was better before. Before, there was a thought of building an equal welfare society. Before, there was also a thought that taxation could contribute to a stronger public sector and to stronger safety nets – through which poverty would be kept down.

I see none of this in the Sweden Democrats' policy. Is it because one has been forced to accept the Moderates' tax cuts despite wanting otherwise? It would be interesting to hear. Or is it because one does not think that a dysfunctional private market is the problem when it comes to HVB homes, but rather that there is a lack of control, and because one does not think it is a problem that one lowers the tax for those who have the most while simultaneously keeping it down when it comes to the safety net for our welfare?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jessica Stegrud (SD)

Madam Speaker! No, the major problem is naturally the lack of controls, and that is something I became very aware of when I entered politics and ended up in the Riksdag. I became aware that it has been so substandard in that area. That is what you hear from everyone you talk to: Försäkringskassan, the police – whoever you talk to who has contact with the welfare sector. The controls have been completely substandard.

It also concerns LSS. This is not a new phenomenon. This is something that has fascinated me since I entered politics and ended up in the Social Affairs Committee and became aware of it. Lack of controls is the primary cause of the problems here. It must be rigorous, especially if one has such a free market for this type of service. I think that one should balance this significantly better – that is what I can say. That is my personal opinion. But controls are the foundation for everything.

Then there is this matter regarding tax cuts. I am slightly annoyed by what one usually hears: that we have lowered the tax for Magdalena Andersson. Yes, we have. But above all, we have lowered the tax for people with completely ordinary jobs, not primarily party leaders. One can take an example family with a nurse and a police officer. They have 5,000 more to move with per month today.

Then it concerns this matter of an equal society – once again. I have never claimed that everything was better before. I even said that in my speech: No, everything was not better before. But some things were better before.

A welfare society is built on high taxes. It is built on high tax morale. It is built on the fact that most people work. We do not have such a situation today. It is as I mentioned before, Madam Speaker. We have a situation where fewer and fewer are to support more and more. People who actually toil and go to a job because they want to and have the opportunity – it varies, of course – must also be able to live on their wages. That is the trade-off.

I believe that the key in the end is that people have a right to education, which one has in Sweden today, and that there are many steps into the labor market. That is what ultimately makes it equal.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Maj Karlsson (V)

Madam Speaker! I have been around for so long that I was involved in and helped make the decision to make the Convention on the Rights of the Child Swedish law. It is a day I will always carry with me. At that time, we had a vision that Sweden was – and would remain – a country at the forefront when it comes to the well-being of children.

Not in my wildest imagination could I believe that just a few years later I would have to defend these rights. I did not think that what would set us apart would be whether that right would apply to all children or not. But I know that now. Under this government's leadership, children's fundamental rights have been put into severe jeopardy. With gang violence as a shield, the government has made a clear distinction that children's rights are different for different children. For some, they are completely fortified and for others completely scrapped.

We see deportations of children, children who are now to be imprisoned, reforms that increase children's poverty and economic investments that go to some children but not to other children. More children are evicted. More children live in economic and social vulnerability. It is not a beautiful result of four years with the Tidö government.

Madam Speaker! In the latest poverty report, which was mentioned earlier, figures show a lasting economic vulnerability for children of single parents with low incomes. One in four single parents has become indebted. Half have had difficulty buying nutritious food, and just over half have had difficulty buying new clothes for the children that suit the season. The proportion of single parents who have become liable for payment after missing a bill has doubled since 2023, from 13 to 29 percent.

Even though the government cannot be held responsible for the world economy, it must be held responsible for how it meets inflation and price increases. Instead of supporting, it punishes the most economically vulnerable: the children who need food, housing, security, and leisure.

The government paints a picture where poor families are not actually poor but live well at the taxpayers' expense, while the hardworking neighbors go to work and do their part. With this lie as a basis, the government is driving what could become one of the reforms that increases child poverty the most: a benefit ceiling that actively risks placing children in economic and extreme vulnerability.

I have a completely different vision. In my Sweden, children shall be prioritized. Children should not have to bear the responsibility for adults' failures. We in Vänsterpartiet want instead to build a foundation that gives children the opportunity to flourish and where safety, food, education, health, and protection are self-evident parts of their lives.

We want to make a comprehensive investment for stronger welfare and a more secure life situation with a job to go to, a home to live in, and a strong economy. In addition to that, we want to strengthen children's rights. Vänsterpartiet wants to introduce children's rights budgeting, i.e., a tool that makes it possible to follow the state's budget and its priorities from a children's rights perspective. It is a way to ensure that resources go where they are needed most and that children's rights are realized in practice. We also want the Children's Rights Delegation to receive a clearer mandate to coordinate and monitor the work on children's rights at local, regional, and national levels.

Public activities concerning children must include clear goals linked to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The focus shall be on the best interests of the child, children's participation and influence, as well as requirements for respect and care. Every municipality should have an overall strategy for implementing the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Reforms concerning children in society's care should always be evaluated with a collective child impact assessment in order to be able to understand the effects on children.

Madam Speaker! We in Vänsterpartiet still have the backbone to stand up for ensuring that children do not grow up in poverty. We, like the research, know that it is one of the biggest risk factors for vulnerability. It is also a matter of basic decency. Children should be able to leave home with full stomachs, on their way to school or an extracurricular activity, in clothes that suit the season. It is the opposite of the politics we see today.

We want to immediately establish an action plan against child poverty and review the social security support so that it actually provides the economic protection that the law prescribes.

Madam Speaker! For twelve years, I have followed the reality of placed children with horror. Today, there is not a single major instance that does not criticize Sweden's child and youth care. Society receives criticism from top to bottom from Ivo, JO, the Children's Ombudsman, the Riksdag, the Institute for Human Rights, the UN, children's rights organizations, and so on. The criticism covers the period before a child becomes the subject of society's care until the society – we – completely take over it.

We fail to act in time, we do not listen to the children, we do not make sufficient assessments, we do not follow up on placement decisions, we do not inform about rights, and we let criminals run HVB homes. Children live in dirty and life-threatening premises and are subjected to sexual abuse. Children are subjected to violence by state staff, and children take their own lives in the care of society.

Many of us have long fought to stop the abuses at Sis. Three years ago, I thought we had finally achieved victory and that we would provide redress for the children whom society subjected to abuse. I believed in my simplicity that the government was serious when they raised our demand to reform the entire child and youth care, but I was obviously wrong. We have not even received an investigation. We have received new deadlines and a new investigator, but Sis remains in exactly the same form, the children remain who are still subjected to abuses, and the deficiencies and abuses remain.

The government, however, has completely lost its way. Right now, one of the most child rights-violating reforms in Sweden's modern history is taking place. All around the country, prisons are being built for 13-year-olds. We see how cells are being adapted for children and "nallar" (soft restraints) are being brought out. They are adapted so that the children do not harm themselves or anyone else. Prison clothes are sewn in size 152, and weighted blankets are brought out to dampen the expected anxiety of the locked-up children.

Prisons are not built to help children out of crime, because all expertise and experience show that it does not work that way. They are not built to protect society from crime either, because in that case the interventions would reasonably be placed before crimes are committed. They are built to punish children because adults have not done their part and because the policy has not done its part.

At the same time, the government has not even managed to present concrete proposals for the reforms that would actually provide children with protection, support, and care. Here it becomes clear that actions speak louder than words. We are now in a Kafkaesque situation, where it may take many years before we eventually have a functioning child and youth care in place, but already this summer, children can be imprisoned. Instead of developing the new forms of care that are needed, we are forced once again to patch up and repair a broken system.

We do not give up, however. Now we really must ensure that the segregations are phased out and that the Riksdag's promise becomes a reality. We must increase the staffing at Sis, and we must ensure that the staff receive the right competence and support. The agency must learn from functioning Sis homes and implement these as models for the entire operation.

We must have clear accountability, and those who commit abuses or do not act on deficiencies shall not be able to remain in service. Children must already at admission receive clear knowledge of their rights, of what staff may and may not do, and of the possibility to complain about grievances.

It is not only when it concerns Sis that we must act. We want HVB homes not to be operated in private ownership but in operations with full insight and control. We want the Children's Ombudsman to be given the right to conduct unannounced visits, and we think it would be nice if the proposals in the HVB investigation were implemented promptly.

Not a single child shall be placed in the hands of criminals or be subjected to violence and abuse. Instead, their safety and care shall be prioritized, and the policy shall live up to the promises we have given regarding children's rights. Children shall not be punished. They shall have security, protection, care, education, and a decent standard of living.

We want Sweden to become a model when it comes to children's rights and that all children, regardless of background, shall receive both rights and opportunities.

Madam Speaker! In a few months, there is an election. I dare to believe that the voters will then think a little and look with open eyes at what is actually happening here and now.

In the Left Party's Sweden, the adult world does its job first – not because we think it sounds good, but because it yields results. To stop a child from taking a weapon into their hand, society and our adults must offer a warm and firm hand to put in the weapon's place. The reason why one decides to turn a convention into law is actually so that it cannot be optional. That requires standing up for children's rights even when it is blowing really cold. We have that courage.

I vote in favor of reservation 13.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Noria Manouchi (M)

Madam Speaker! This report is about children and young people and about society's responsibility when a child is at risk of harm.

One can start by stating that there is actually a rather broad consensus on society's goals in this, which is that every child should be able to grow up under safe conditions. But unfortunately, reality does not look like that – it does not now and it did not when I grew up – and therefore a comprehensive reform agenda was needed to strengthen the protection for children throughout the entire social chain.

Madam Speaker! For a long time, the systems have not been connected. The school has worked for itself, the police for themselves, social services for themselves, and healthcare for itself. When they have needed and wanted to cooperate, legal hurdles and difficulties have sometimes made it impossible to prioritize under the time pressure that often characterizes the situation when a child is harmed. The consequences have been that children fall through the cracks – that they are discovered too late or not at all – and it is precisely this that the Moderate-led government is now changing.

We do it with the introduction of school social teams where school and social services work together to catch students early.

We do it with investments in family centers and strengthened parenting support to provide support to parents and entire families before the problems grow too large.

We do this through the introduction of an intermediate measure, which means that social services receive more tools between voluntary interventions and a compulsory takeover so that interventions can actually reach the child in time.

We do it with the establishment of the new Social Services Act, where the focus is shifted to early, clear, and preventive interventions.

Madam Speaker! All of this will make a difference for children and families throughout our country, but the government's work does not stop there. As I mentioned initially, it is about strengthening the entire system.

Through the collaboration model Bob, Children and young people in organized crime, cooperation between authorities is improved to stop gangs from dragging another child into their activities.

Through substantial investments in the dropout program for children, pathways are created for those who have already gone astray. Furthermore, the activities shall now be better adapted for children under 15 as well as for girls, who, as we know, take a more prominent role.

At the same time, we are strengthening the support for children who are suffering, which we do through investments in child and adolescent psychiatry.

Madam Speaker! The Government is also acting where the protection has been most lacking. The work against violence against children has been strengthened, and secrecy barriers have been removed to enable better information sharing and cooperation between relevant actors. Through the reform on safer homes for children, it is ensured that a violent parent shall no longer have an automatic right to visitation. Now, it is the child's safety that is prioritized.

All these changes will make a decisive difference for real. It is not about individual changes, but it is about a systemic change of a system where children are to be identified earlier and where interventions can be implemented in time – sometimes for the entire family. It is about a society that acts collectively instead of divided. The Government is building a coherent system, from early interventions to protection, treatment, and ways out.

Madam Speaker! If we are serious about every child getting a secure upbringing, it is not enough to tweak things here and there in the system. What is required is the largest reform of preventive work in 40 years in our country, and that is what the government has delivered during this mandate period. A society can only have one top priority, and for us, it is the children.

(Applause)

(cont.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)