(cont. from § 10) Response to interpellation 2023/24:166 on the conditions for regional safety representatives
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the conditions for regional safety representatives and the government's handling of an inquiry into their activities. L argues that the government has referred the matter and that it is important to weigh in criticism from referral bodies in the assessment before taking a position 1. L emphasizes that it is unwise to anticipate the ongoing preparation process in the Government Offices 2 3. S argues that the role of the regional safety representatives is vital for small companies 4. S considers the criticism of the inquiry to be groundless 4 and argues that L uses excuses to avoid taking a position 4 5. S questions whether L wants to abolish the activities of the regional safety representatives 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Mr. Speaker! It was claimed in the member's speech that I did not answer the question regarding how the government intends to handle the investigation we have received and referred concerning the regional safety representatives. I mean that I gave a clear answer in my interpellation response: The government has referred the matter, criticism has emerged during the referral process, and the government thinks it is important to weigh this criticism in the assessment before we take a position on how we proceed with the matter. The answer to the question the member asked is therefore that the investigation's proposals are being prepared in the Government Offices, and I will not anticipate this process.
Johanna Haraldsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I intended to continue by emphasizing what important role the regional safety representatives play for both employers and employees at smaller workplaces with few employees. Here, a few people are responsible for what, at larger workplaces, several specialists are employed to manage. Small companies have fewer resources, often a lack of knowledge, and limited time for work environment issues. Many employers testify that the regional safety representatives are an important asset in the local work environment work. They make life-saving efforts every day at our workplaces to prevent accidents and ill health.
I react when the Minister says that it is sufficient to say that it is being prepared in the Government Offices. I think it may be time for the Minister to decide what she thinks. Is this something we should take further or not?
The Minister of State addresses the criticism that has emerged, but there is actually no basis for it. These are various party submissions where one may fundamentally not be so positive toward the issue at hand and therefore criticizes the investigation's methodology. The person who has investigated the issue and evaluated the regional safety representatives' activities has a long research background and no loyalty ties to any parties in the labor market or similar. Nor has anything emerged that shows there is a basis for the criticism the Minister of State addresses.
If the Minister thinks, as she says here in the chamber, that it is important to weigh in the criticism - however groundless I maintain it is - what does that mean? Will she appoint a new investigation? Or is it just another excuse not to take a stand on the issue? What does the Minister actually think? Is the work of the regional protection officers important? What does she think about the proposals? When can we expect a decision on the future? I still think I have not received answers to the questions. It is not an answer to say that this is being prepared. You have had the opportunity to prepare it for about a year.
The question remains: Does the government accept the conclusion from the evaluation – that the regional safety representatives play an important role for a functioning work environment at our workplaces – and if so, what prevents the government from taking a position on the proposal for expanded access rights? Why does the government not want more people to benefit from the increased protection that the regional safety representatives contribute to?
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Mr. Speaker! It is important with a systematic and preventive work environment work. In this work, it is the employer's responsibility to cooperate with the employees and with the employer's and employees' representatives who together can carry out this important work environment work. In the work environment work, the regional and local safety representatives also have important roles to play.
This government has an ongoing preparatory process regarding exactly this proposal. It is, therefore, a proposal that has previously been examined in the Swedish Riksdag and voted down. Now the question is on the table again. We have received the responses from the referral bodies, and we see that there is, among other things, criticism where the evaluation of the activity's method and objectivity has been questioned.
When a preparatory process is underway in the Government Offices, it is very unwise for a minister to preempt that investigation and provide their own opinions and reviews of the content of the investigation. I will not preempt that process, but the government will return with a decision when the preparatory process is complete, but not before then.
Johanna Haraldsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Yes, it is an important task. One must cooperate in the workplace. We all have important roles in the work environment work, both safety representatives, employees and employers. These are self-evident matters, as the Minister says.
It is just as obvious as the fact that the right-wing majority in the Riksdag voted down this proposal earlier because they wanted an evaluation. That was at least what was claimed. Now we have an evaluation in place, and now they are starting to question the evaluation. I would appreciate it if the Minister and her comrades in the government were actually honest about what they think and feel instead of putting forward a lot of excuses.
The lack of an answer from the Minister forces me to look for answers elsewhere. The last time I heard a Liberal speak on this issue was in the parliamentary debate on the work environment in the spring. Then, the answer was that the Liberals did not want any regional safety representatives at all. That answer would, if it became reality, mean that trade union regional safety representatives would no longer be allowed to perform their vital work, not even at the workplaces they currently have access to.
Is this announcement also from the Minister, or does she have any other announcement to make today? How does the Minister think such a proposal is consistent with the way we have chosen to organize the labor market in Sweden, where the parties on the labor market regulate the conditions?
There is a well-functioning organization for the work environment work at our workplaces with local and regional safety representatives. Does the Minister want to build upon that model and strengthen the safety work, or does the Minister, like his party colleague, want to abolish the regional safety representatives and dismantle a well-functioning organization that it has taken decades to build up?
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Mr. Speaker! It is positive that we both see it as a matter of course that there are many who have important roles in the daily work environment work at our workplaces across the country. But it is also actually a matter of course not to preempt an ongoing preparatory process. This is not something that this government has come up with; even previous governments have handled preparatory processes in a similar manner. One waits until the preparatory process is finished. That is how one conducts serious legislative work.
The Government will return with a decision on the matter when the preparatory process is completed. With that, I would like to thank the member for this debate, and I am convinced that we will continue to have more debates on this important area concerning issues of the working environment.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.