(cont. from § 7) A language requirement in elderly care (cont. SoU26)
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned language requirements within elderly care. SD emphasized the importance of the correct linguistic level as a qualification to ensure quality 1. SD questioned whether the Center Party's policy with a focus on labor immigration is a long-term solution and argued that requirements for qualifications are not stigmatizing 1 2. C argued that hands are the most important tool, but that the staff must be able to communicate in good Swedish 3. C emphasized that elderly care is dependent on foreign-born staff and that everyone who contributes to the welfare is welcome 3. C accused SD of being the enemy of elderly care 4. L argued that it is the employers' responsibility to ensure that staff understand routines and can communicate with the elderly 5. L wanted to raise the level of ambition from "reasonable" to "good" standard of living for the elderly 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.
Jessica Stegrud (SD)
Mr. Speaker! In the member's speech, the figures regarding healthcare assistants and nursing assistants are mentioned. Of the healthcare assistants, 53 percent were born abroad, and for the nursing assistants, the figure is 37 percent.
The chairman also mentions that the most important thing we have in healthcare is not the language but the hands. It is the hands that help, and it is the hands that comfort. I do not remember the exact wording, but it is the hands that provide medicine and so on. And that is true. But the hands must understand what the hands are to do, I think, so the language is incredibly important.
I will explain what I wanted to say with the figures I just mentioned. I perceive that the member is speaking euphorically about the fact that we have such a large proportion of foreign-born people working in these professions. I wonder how the member reconciles that. Centerpartiet wants to allocate fewer resources to this expenditure area. Centerpartiet wants to increase immigration and lower the wage floor. I envision a staffing within elderly care that largely consists only of foreign-born people. Is that genuinely the long-term solution for elderly care, according to Centerpartiet?
I also have a follow-up question about this matter of those who help. The member mentioned the word color. I wonder what color has to do with the matter. The member also claimed that I am fixating on ethnicity. No, I am not; I am fixating on qualifications. For me as a Sverigedemokrater, it is important that one has the right qualifications, and that includes the right linguistic level.
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Jessica Stegrud for the questions. Yes, it is naturally the hands that provide elderly care. It is the hands that can help with washing dishes, cleaning, laundry, and administering medication. It is the hands that can shower, care for, dress, undress, and in other ways help the one who needs help. The hands are the absolutely most important tool that our staff have within elderly care. But the most important thing of all is that within elderly care, one has staff who these hands sit on.
I believe we are in complete agreement when it comes to the language requirement, which is what we are debating now. Those who work in elderly care should be able to or learn good Swedish, so that the elderly person and the staff can communicate in a good way.
I do not get hung up on the color of the hands, on the contrary. For me, the color does not matter. We need all the competence we can get for our elderly care. Elderly care today is completely dependent on foreign-born staff. During the last ten years, 33,000 people have come to Sweden who today work as nursing assistants or care assistants, largely within elderly care. Without them, the care would collapse.
For us in Centerpartiet, it is important that we have people who want to work in elderly care, who work in elderly care, who contribute to the Swedish welfare and who are appreciated, regardless of where they come from. That is our vision for society.
Jessica Stegrud (SD)
Mr. Speaker! The member says that this is what is important, but he is the only one who nags about ethnicity and color. I have not heard anyone else talk about it today. This matter of color and ethnicity therefore seems to be very important to the member.
The chairman says that it doesn't matter who works here. No, I understand that, because the Center Party's policy is obviously wage dumping and labor immigration. It doesn't matter where one comes from. It hardly matters if one learns Swedish either.
I still wonder: Is this the long-term solution? Should it be 100 percent with a foreign background? Is the Center Party satisfied then? Should elderly care be staffed 100 percent by personnel who have a foreign background or are foreign-born? Does the Center Party see any other solutions in the long term? How do we get more ethnic Swedes or native Swedes to engage instead? How do we increase that proportion? Or is it completely uninteresting in the Center Party's world?
I have a final comment. I heard in the member's speech that it would be stigmatizing for certain groups if, for example, one has local language requirements and requires certain qualifications. No, it is not stigmatizing, and it is not directed at any specific group. It is simply a requirement that we should have quality in elderly care. As I mentioned earlier, I know many people with an immigrant background who speak perfectly excellent Swedish. It has nothing to do with ethnicity. It has to do with qualifications.
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Mr. Speaker! In this debate, we have had to take part in hearing the Sweden Democrats' view on Swedish elderly care, and it has been enlightening, I think. One disparages Swedish elderly care and speaks of it in derogatory terms as an integration project. One is condescending towards the staff who work in Swedish elderly care based on this "integration project." One is condescending towards the elderly who receive help within elderly care based on this "integration project."
It appears, Mr. Speaker, that the Sweden Democrats would rather let elderly care stand without staff than keep the staff who have come here from other countries and whom we are completely dependent on. Without the 53 percent foreign-born care assistants and the 37 percent foreign-born nursing assistants, Swedish elderly care would collapse. But that is nothing that concerns the Sweden Democrats. What is important for the Sweden Democrats is not that elderly care functions, but who performs it.
That we need to increase the supply of skills by 50,000 people in the coming years is not what is important for the Sweden Democrats, but what is important is who performs the care. An active deportation policy has been pursued with wage floors that are significantly higher than today's wages for nursing assistants and care assistants. The purpose is to be able to kick out staff whom we need. In other ways, they have tried to make staff who have come to Sweden, work here and contribute to the welfare feel unwelcome.
The Sweden Democrats are not the friend of elderly care. The Sweden Democrats are the enemy of elderly care.
In the Center Party's Sweden, the elderly shall be able to receive both security and good care from the staff, regardless of where it comes from.
Lina Nordquist (L)
Mr. Speaker! Those who work in Swedish elderly care are immensely important for each one of us at some point in life – most often for our own sake and very often also for someone else whom we care about. It is obvious that those individuals must be able to understand their colleagues. They must grasp routines, delegations, and instructions. Of course, they must be able to communicate with the elderly and their relatives, who need support and help. Finally, Mr. Speaker, it becomes a responsibility for the employers to ensure that is exactly the case!
The Liberals have for many years pushed to secure the Swedish language in elderly care. This is about us – each of us – having self-determination and security throughout life. It is no stranger than that. Still, journalists, employees, and authorities have time and again reported that the language is lacking in daily home care and in other elderly care in almost every municipality in the country. There are employees who do not understand routines and delegations, who do not understand the elderly, and whom the elderly do not understand.
This is, of course, completely unacceptable in every way. Naturally, it is worst for the person who is a caregiver themselves and needs the help and support. But it must also be terrible as an employee to have to feel like you constitute a patient safety risk and to go to work and risk causing healthcare injuries – what one wants, of course, is to do good. It must surely cause a knot in the stomach to not really know if one is doing right or wrong and to not receive support from the employer to become truly skilled at what one does. This truly should be the employers' responsibility. They must ensure that every employee can feel proud of their work effort.
Mr. Speaker! Now the employers finally get the responsibility that they should have seen as obvious since time immemorial, or at least since the beginning of elderly care. The Swedish language is secured in elderly care. It is a relief.
The next step we liberals want is that it should be a merit in employment and salary increases to be able to speak other languages that older people are most comfortable speaking. Many of us forget a learned language as we age and may need to speak the language we spoke as children.
Most importantly of all, Mr. Speaker: We in the Liberals want to change one small word in the legal text that means an enormous amount. We want to raise the level of ambition in Swedish elderly care. The elderly should not have the right to a "reasonable" standard of living after a long life. They should have the right to a good standard of living. Living reasonably, yes, you hear it yourselves. What is that? It is not reasonable to live reasonably. The elderly should live well, and employees in elderly care should have truly good conditions to do a good job and feel proud after every shift.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.