(cont.) Healthcare, medical care and social care (cont. SoU1)

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Lina Nordquist, for the speech!

The chairman mentioned LSS and personal assistance. That usually comes up when the Liberals give speeches within the social affairs committee's area.

On 1 January 2023, a new law on strengthened right to assistance entered into force. The very idea behind the legislation was precisely that the right should be strengthened and a greater equality across the country should be achieved.

Relatively quickly after the law had entered into force, however, reactions began to emerge from the disability rights movement that it was not becoming as intended from the legislator's side. Above all, it concerned how children were assessed according to the new legislation and how what came to be referred to as a double parental deduction was applied in practice.

Too many hours were removed from children's right to assistance, which resulted in some receiving very few hours after assessment while others were left completely without assistance. This was established in a report from Försäkringskassan in October 2023, which prompted me to submit a committee initiative in the Social Affairs Committee to zero out the flat rate in the regulation governing this and begin investigating new legislation.

After rejecting the committee initiative, the Tidö parties have now chosen in the budget to meet us halfway by halving the parental template in the ordinance. The Liberals usually stand up for LSS and personal assistance all the way. Therefore, my question is: Why was it only a halving of the parental deduction and not a full deduction?

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, member, for the question! One of a state's most important tasks, I believe, is to be there when something happens to us in life that makes life in general break down or perhaps completely break down for a while, or if we are born and it turns out that we will need more than others to live a truly good life with opportunities.

Then there must be opportunities for meaningful employment, and there must be opportunities to go to school and learn things and have friends, a rich life, leisure time and other things.

I am incredibly proud that the Liberals once introduced personal assistance and ensured that people have the opportunity to live their lives and personally steer their future and their everyday lives. A piece of the historiography was missing there in the beginning. Gradually, this incredibly important reform has been depleted through judgments and various types of legal processes and complications, and it has become harder and harder for people to obtain these rights.

Just as the member said, something was introduced in 2023 that was intended to be an improvement but turned out not to work fully and which for some people meant a deterioration. That was not the purpose. This must be rectified, and therefore I am very pleased that we in the government have agreed that from January 1st - in a couple of weeks - we will halve the parental deduction. This is very important so that more children can receive personal assistance.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Lina Nordquist for the statement on how important personal assistance is and with LSS in general. As I mentioned in my speech earlier, the right from 1994 has unfortunately been eroded over the last 10-15 years.

I did not receive a proper answer to my question. What I raised was the legislation on strengthened rights to assistance, and I mentioned that the government is halving the parental flat rate. We in Centerpartiet are adding an additional 100 million kronor to our budget to completely choke off the flat rate until we have new legislation in place.

I have two questions. One is: When will we have new legislation in place? I do not know if the member can answer this, but we have a minister here who is about to give a speech in a short while.

Regarding the second question, which concerns the budget, I assume that the Liberals and the member are well informed. The government has allocated 100 million kronor to halve the parental flat rate from January 1, but the flat rate would have needed to be reset in order to truly address the problem that arose through the changed legislation, pending the arrival of new legislation or the adjustment of the existing legislation.

My question remains: Why did the Liberals only go halfway and not all the way this time to reset the parental template?

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Mr. Speaker! It is a tragic fact that the Liberals do not have a sole majority in either the Riksdag or the government, even though it is, of course, a matter of time before we get it. Then I can promise that LSS and everyone's opportunity for good schooling, a good labor market, and a good life with opportunities throughout life will be and will continue to be a priority for us.

With this said, I turn to the idea that for some people, only one thing exists at a time. I would like to say that it is not only one priority that exists in this country. We need to do much more for these children in school, and we do. We need to do much for the children's leisure time, and we do. We need to do much more so that these people have meaningful lives and an occupation both as children and as adults. And just as the member himself said, work is currently underway on new legislation in this area.

Since then, it is interesting that the Center Party in an opposition role always has a huge amount of money, but that there have very rarely been any tendencies from the Center Party in a government position to push forward on these issues. But I look forward to when the Center Party returns to the bourgeois side and that we can then together push these issues, with this renewed interest which I am very grateful for.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Green Party's budget motion shows the way to a different society. We want to carry out the green transition required to meet the climate goals and preserve nature's diversity, but also to create a better life for people.

Instead of lowering taxes for those who have the most and earn the most, we want to invest in our common welfare, which provides security and stability for people and more resources for families, social services, the school and the preschool so that children can get a more secure start, which in itself is the best investment to eventually eliminate violence.

We want a society where those who work in healthcare can manage to stay in their jobs and where everyone can trust that they will receive care when they need it. We want a society where young people feel that they are involved and contributing and where hope and faith in the future are created.

Mr. Speaker! Miljöpartiet indexes the general state grants to municipalities and regions, which means an increased contribution of 4.5 billion. It is a fundamental prerequisite, we believe, in order to not have to make further austerity measures. The operations in both health and medical care shall be a reasonable working environment for those who work there. We also believe, therefore, that reinforced sector grants of 4 billion are needed, as opposed to the government's 2 billion. That type of investment we believe is better than performance-based funds linked to queues and care beds, because we believe it risks leading to even more stress among the staff.

In addition to reinforced sector grants and an increase in the general state grants, we also want to make a specific investment in a preventive boost with primary care as the hub. There is a broad agreement and consensus that the reform should become a reality.

However, to reduce the pressure on admissions to hospitals and in specialist care, it is required that there is an opportunity for structured and long-term work, and that requires resources over a longer transition period to develop new ways of working. Therefore, we allocate 3 billion next year to be able to conduct reinforced analyses and take clearer steps in the desired direction. How this is best done, we believe each region can decide for itself.

Mr. Speaker! Now comes a small, nagging point from the Green Party regarding the recovery bonus. We want staff working in healthcare and elderly care services to receive relief for their harsh working conditions and the strained work environment. We pushed through the so-called recovery bonus which was established in 2021. Working groups within healthcare and elderly care have been able to apply for funds to test the development of new ways of working for an improved work environment, and that also includes working time models. The purpose, of course, has been to take advantage of the staff groups' own development ideas and to give them the opportunity to test them. It has involved important change processes across the entire country and contributed to preventing ill health. Therefore, we think it is unfortunate that the government has interrupted the development by abolishing the recovery bonus. We want to reinstate it.

Mr. Speaker! High demands are placed on the social services to work proactively, preventatively, and with high quality in social work. The needs are great and the working conditions are not sufficiently good. A new Social Services Act is much anticipated and shall be established. Then even greater demands will be placed on preventive measures and that the work carried out shall be evidence-based and in accordance with research. For this to become a reality and a new start, reinforcements of the sector are required. We allocate 1 billion in addition to what the government has signaled as a supplement to the social services for next year and in addition to that also 1 billion for crime-preventive measures which include partly social services, partly police and other actors.

Mr. Speaker! For people who are dependent on personal assistance, the level of the flat-rate payment is crucial. It is about what working conditions can be offered for personal assistants, and it is also about the possibility of employing personal assistants for those who are in need of assistance.

The government announces an increase of 3 percent, which is better than before and very pleasing, but not sufficient, as everyone knows. We believe instead that the level should be increased by 6 percent during the next year. We also look forward to following the work with the indexing of the flat-rate adjustment.

Mr. Speaker! Last week, a recommendation from the Public Health Agency came that many have been waiting for. Now, everyone up to 26 years of age is recommended to receive the HPV vaccine. Here, we will all have a massive information task ahead of us as knowledge must increase and spread that the HPV virus does not only cause cervical cancer but also other forms of cancer. Right now, a research study is underway where women born 1994-1999 are offered to receive the vaccine for free in order to reach the goal of herd immunity as early as 2027. It is very pleasing that that goal can now potentially be achieved, and the project was recently extended to the summer to provide the opportunity to achieve the goal.

It is also important that we all inform that the HPV vaccine is something that all young people should receive. Certain risk groups have a higher risk of developing certain forms of cancer, and therefore it is recommended to make a special effort to reach these; men who have sex with men, trans people, and people living with HIV. But the large, broad, and important message is that everyone up to 26 should now be recommended to take this vaccine. Miljöpartiet believes there are strong reasons for the state to contribute to the cost of reaching the target group with information initiatives and costs for the vaccine. Therefore, we have allocated the sum that Folkhälsomyndigheten considered would be required in our budget.

We are also making an investment in TBE vaccinations so that these can be provided free of charge to children who run a high risk of getting TBE, and also adults who are in the particularly affected areas shall have access to vaccines at a lower cost than today.

Mr. Speaker! I naturally stand behind the entire budget of the Green Party and the specific statement contained in the report. I move for approval of reservations 1 and 2.

In this speech, Katarina Luhr (MP) agreed.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! The government parties went to the election on a promise to make Sweden safer and more secure, to crack down on crime and to stop the recruitment of children and young people into criminal networks. This is a very focused work that the government is now undertaking.

When we took office in 2022, the Social Democrats had left behind a country with skyrocketing inflation. They had also left behind a society where crime was allowed to spread, where increasing welfare crime led tax money straight into the hands of criminal organizations, where children as young as eight to ten years old were drawn into criminal gangs and children aged thirteen or fourteen killed other children.

Sweden was simply heading in the wrong direction. This government is now working intensively every day to steer Sweden onto a new, safer and more secure path.

The previous budget had inflation as the enemy. Everyone in here knows that with a very high inflation, it will soon be the end of the possibilities to invest in a future welfare and all the necessary reforms that the government can now focus on. We have defeated inflation, and that means there is now a completely different reform space in the budget. It also means that we have a completely different space to tackle the society-threatening crime and to work with what is my strongest focus, namely to turn and stop the recruitment of children and young people.

In the social area, we are now shifting the policy to achieve a society with early and preventive interventions that help people, both adults and children, to get on the right track in life. We want to get back a society that sets requirements but that at the same time is there when it is needed.

If we are to stop the recruitment, we must work in all areas and at all levels. Our policy therefore entails a general preventive work with a school that functions, a healthcare system that helps them with their needs, not least regarding mental ill-health, and a work line that gets people into self-sufficiency.

But a more targeted prevention is also needed towards people in risk behavior or those who are developing a risk behavior. We are therefore introducing early and clear interventions through a new Social Services Act with a crime prevention responsibility for social services, parenting support, and investments in increased cooperation between school and social services. We also need to take really tough measures against those who are already criminals, both because we need to get them off the streets and to show crime victims and others that we as a society do not accept criminal behavior and that we stand on the side of the crime victims.

To set demands and mark positions firmly is to care. All the parts together constitute a whole that we are convinced will reverse the negative development that the previous government left behind. Important in this is that we initially transition to a preventive, present, and proactive social service.

The objective is for the law to be able to enter into force on July 1, 2025, and we are now working to ensure that it is implemented across the entire country, in all 290 municipalities. We therefore did something as unusual as ensuring that there were resources for a service in every single municipality, as every municipality needs to make its own journey of analyzing where it stands and carrying out its implementation in order to be able to begin working according to the new law on July 1, 2025.

We have also ensured that a number of things that were not in the original investigation are now included in the new Social Services Act. It concerns something that has been received with great joy and an "at last!": that we now have searchable reports of concern, which means that children who previously have risked falling through the cracks do not do so because there is also a digital file where one can see all the reports of concern that have been made for a specific child.

Despite the fact that the original investigation stated that this should not cost any money and therefore not be ambition-raising, this government has much higher ambitions with the new Social Services Act. We will therefore spend almost 10 billion over the coming years to implement and to support the transition this entails.

This is intimately connected with several other pieces of legislation - it is about confidentiality and the possibility of transferring the right information between, for example, social services, school, and the police, which is an important part of a whole to achieve the effect we are striving for. Today, it is not possible for social services, the police, and the school to sit around one and the same table and share the information that is necessary. One can get far with consent, but one cannot go all the way.

This becomes even clearer when we see that almost every other guardian in Sweden chooses to decline interventions according to the Social Services Act. As you know, interventions according to the Social Services Act are completely voluntary, so one can decline. What risks happening if things escalate is that society must resort to the most intrusive part of Swedish legislation and make decisions according to LVU, i.e., regarding a placement. This is what we want to avoid at all costs.

We know that we must work with a number of prevention factors; the research is clear.

It is about strengthening families. That is why we are allocating large resources to, among other things, parenting support, and now we are allocating additional resources to ensure that this truly reaches the families and the parents who need it.

The second prevention factor is a well-functioning school. That children, not least those in vulnerable situations, leave school with passing grades and a completed education is one of the most important prevention factors we can provide them with.

The third part is, of course, to have a well-functioning leisure time, and that is why the government is working with the leisure card.

The vast majority of parents, of course, do everything they can to support their children. But for those who do not have all the prerequisites, it is important that we have developed parenting support, and therefore this is an incredibly important part of the preventive work.

But between the Social Services Act and LVU there is a vacuum, and therefore a proposal for a new law has also been presented. We will discuss it here in the chamber during the coming year; it is currently out for consultation. It is referred to as LIV by the investigator, and the investigation is known as the intermediate coercion investigation. It concerns the fact that as many as every second guardian refuses interventions, which means that some of the most vulnerable children risk not receiving the support they need.

We provide extensive support for various preventive measures. School social teams have become such a success that the government is now allocating an extra 50 million, as more and more municipalities are requesting to be able to introduce this. As a former teacher, I can say that I believe it would have been immensely valuable to have had this function in place for a long time – that the social services can work side by side with the teachers in the school.

We are also working to ensure that we get reinforced family rights and a violence-preventing family counseling on site and have also allocated resources for this in our budget. Reinforced state grants to the children's rights organizations are also part of this.

I also want to briefly mention the independent children's ombudsmen, which are part of the Inquiry into children and young people in society's care, with the investigator Carina Ohlsson. It is about children in very vulnerable situations being able to receive support that lies outside the social services, so that the voices of vulnerable children can be taken into account and so that they can be represented and supported in various ways in vulnerable situations.

I also want to mention that we are making a major investment in child and adolescent psychiatry. It is worrying for all of us that the mental ill-health of children and young people continues to increase. I particularly want to highlight the fact that, for the first time, there is a targeted investment in first-line psychiatry. It is naturally not at BUP, which offers specialist psychiatry, where most of our children will have to wait in a queue, but it is where one ends up when support is not received in time. Therefore, I believe very much in first-line psychiatry.

We also see an increase in ambition when it comes to issues regarding functional disabilities. A national knowledge center for intellectual disabilities is in demand and very much needed. The halved parental deduction is, of course, an important step on the way when it comes to finding a level that allows more children to receive assistance. It is about a national function for the coordination of interpreting services and, as has been mentioned here, an increase of the hourly rate by 3 percent regarding the assistance allowance. But the most welcome news linked to this, I believe, is that we are finally looking at an indexing and have as a goal to be able to present this for the next budget. We have also allocated a sum of 20 million to the functional disability organizations, as their work is incredibly important.

My friends and Mr. Speaker, who is also my friend! Sweden is fundamentally a fantastic country. For generations, it has been a pleasant, safe, and secure country, with low crime and a safety net that has been there when people have needed it. The budget that we are now presenting is therefore an offensive budget that shows an increased focus on social issues and disability issues, where we now see that there has been a deficiency for a long time.

The reforms we present in this budget are another step on the way to making Sweden safer and providing greater confidence in the future. Children who are five years old today should dream of education and jobs - they should not dream of becoming professional criminals. In our Sweden, children and young people do not go to sleep with a lump in their stomachs, but with butterflies and hope for a bright future.

Step by step and reform by reform, we are now restoring the citizens' security, the future of children and young people, and our free and open society.

(Applause)

I also want to extend a wish for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to the Speaker and the Social Affairs Committee.

In this speech, Johan Hultberg (M), Christian Carlsson (KD) and Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD) agreed.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! When I looked at the chamber app this morning, I saw that the Minister had registered for the debate, which is always appreciated. Since the Minister is now also staying until this late hour, I would like to take the opportunity to request a reply to raise two perspectives.

Looking at the recent years, I think one can clearly see that the difference between the government's budget and the budget alternative from us Social Democrats is not least about the resource supplement to municipalities and regions. In addition to general funds, we Social Democrats have specifically advocated for investments in targeted interventions for young people entering crime. We allocated half a billion already before the 2023 budget year. Last year, we increased it to 1.5 billion for Sweden's social services for interventions aimed at youth entering gang crime.

We have kept it in our budget alternative and have pointed out that it is something we see as incredibly important. It is successful, but it also requires resources. It would have been valuable if the government had met this with a similar investment or even more, because I think, to borrow the Prime Minister's own words in the autumn government statement, there must be an end to the practice where the one who wants to do the least sets the pace.

My question is therefore short and sweet: Why do the government and the Council of State not increase the pace and resources in this area specifically to mark a point for children and young people? This is an effort that is needed. There are good proposals, and I welcome that the government wants to do more. But I do not see clearly enough in the budget that one supports the social services in this important work here and now.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Fredrik Lundh Sammeli very much for the question.

I may have to start by humbly pointing out that Fredrik Lundh Sammeli's own party was not prepared to invest a single krona in a new social services act, while we are now allocating almost 10 billion in the budget for it. There, Fredrik Lundh Sammeli will see that there is a pinpointing of young people who are heading downhill, but also of other people who find themselves in vulnerable situations.

What Fredrik Lundh Sammeli's party was unable to achieve in a government position, we are doing now. It is not just about resources, as I believe the member is very well aware of, because if the social services cannot pinpoint because they do not have the right knowledge and information, the law needs to be changed. That is what we are also doing now.

We ensure that the police, the school, and social services can work together to, from different angles, pinpoint and work with young people who are heading in the wrong direction.

We also ensure that the social services receive some of the many requested tools, i.e., an expanded toolbox when it comes to being able to pinpoint together with the parents, because if one does not have the parents with them, we all know that there is a much greater risk of losing the young person.

We do all these things, and we also allocate resources to all these parts. It is very good if Fredrik Lundh Sammeli reads the budget and all the proposals that we are now presenting. We meet with what you suggest and a little more.

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

FÖRSTE VICE TALMANNEN

I must remind that we do not use the form of address "du" in the chamber, but that will surely be corrected.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for—no, there was no answer to the question. My question was: Why is the government not allocating money here and now to mark the spots of young people on the move? We have had it in our budget proposal in recent years.

It is very good that we are getting the Social Services Act in place. It will be much needed, and I am completely convinced that we, hopefully in broad agreement, can adopt the new law. It is also good that the government sees the need to provide funds, because if the new Social Services Act is really to have an effect, resources are needed.

The Minister can be reassured. The Social Democrats will also support the investments in the social services. It is an absolutely crucial prerequisite for them to become a reality. But here and now, without the new Social Services Act and the major investments ahead, the question remains: Why does the government not allocate funds to specifically target youth in the budget that we now have to take a position on?

We know that the identification of young people is incredibly important. It requires resources, and it is a debate. The other one concerns placed children. Sweden is in an acute crisis with escalating gang violence that creates fear and anxiety among people. At the same time, the gangs are taking tax money directly out of our welfare systems, and we cannot have that.

Criminal actors are running HVB homes. It is good that the government is strengthening Ivo. We ourselves have that policy and believe it is important. But what other powerful measures does the government intend to take so that criminals cannot run HVB homes? And how do you rectify this market failure? Is the Minister prepared to take measures?

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member very much for the follow-up question.

Yes, it is naturally completely unacceptable that we have a child and youth care system where there are criminal actors who, in addition to enriching themselves financially from it, exploit these young people, who, instead of receiving care and treatment, are drawn into crime. It is also for that reason that the government is acting forcefully.

What the government is doing, among other things, is that we are now drafting the constitutional proposals that Ivo submitted to the previous, Social Democratic government. But the Social Democratic government chose to ignore the proposals and essentially put them in the filing cabinet.

Now we will go through proposal by proposal to strengthen Ivo's muscles and opportunities to strike against the criminal actors. We have also, during the year, reinforced Ivo's budget with a total of 30 million and given more assignments. The latest assignment was a specifically targeted assignment in September regarding HVB. We have also been able to state that through that assignment, which also included cooperating with the Economic Crime Authority, the Swedish Police Authority, and now also the Swedish Tax Agency, Ivo has so far this year shut down 16 criminal actors. I foresee that this work will continue.

With this mandate and with new conditions in the constitution, I see that we will be able to strike against the criminal actors. I assume that we have a common goal that we shall have a safe child and youth care in Sweden.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the speech and for the kind Christmas greetings. It is just as well that I begin by replying to it and wishing our Minister for Social Services the same.

There are actually quite a few issues that I would like to raise here. They concern the interpretation services investigation, escort services, transport services, and state ownership for personal assistance. But time is limited in an exchange of remarks, so I will instead dive into the issue of the parental deduction, which I also debated with Lina Nordquist from the Liberals.

That there are problems with the parental allowance after the new legislation came into force is something we agree on and have been able to see in a number of reports. It was in Försäkringskassan's report in October 2023 and in ISF's report in January 2024 that it was established that it is a problem, and in the subsequent report from Försäkringskassan in September this autumn, it was once again established that it is a problem.

In the extra debate we had in the Riksdag's Social Affairs Committee regarding the issue, two things were highlighted. One was that there was a department investigation underway under the Social Minister's responsibility and that it would be finished, it sounded like in the chamber, before the Försäkringskassan report arrived in September. Then I wonder: Where is the report?

Then we heard earlier from Lina Nordquist that new legislation is underway. That was news to me, so I would very much like to hear the Minister's comment on the fact that there is also new legislation underway.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Christofer Bergenblock very much for the question.

For me, it is extremely important that we have an assistance system that works, so that those people who are in need of special support from society also receive it.

Both of our parties were part of the government that once upon a time launched LSS.

We are all very proud that the reform has been able to mean so much positive for so many people for such a long time. On the other hand, I am concerned that we see it being interpreted differently by different municipalities in a number of areas and that we also see tendencies that certain parts of it do not live up to what they are supposed to.

The parental deduction was a reform implemented by the previous government. Warnings were issued that there could be consequences, but we also know from experience that when one introduces these kinds of new reforms, it can sometimes take up to three or four years before they take full effect. Therefore, it has naturally been for us to now make an adjustment and see what consequence it has. This is thus a first step in halving the flat rate to see if it produces the effect that I perceive we collectively in all parties in this chamber want to see, namely that more children should be entitled to assistance.

We will therefore evaluate this and see what happens after January 1, 2025. We are, of course, prepared to do more if that is required.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! Should I interpret it as that the department investigation no longer exists or as that it is ongoing, which it has been referred to as previously?

I also wonder about the claim that came from the Liberals that work is underway on new legislation. Is such work underway, or is it not? I would like to know that.

The picture we in Centerpartiet have is that a halving of the flat rate in the parental deduction is not enough. We believe that it should be minimized or zeroed out. Therefore, we also add money in the budget to do this.

When I raised that question, the Liberals responded that they do not have a sole majority within the Tidö cooperation. I interpret that as the Liberals having pushed for it to be reset, but that the Moderates, Christian Democrats, and Sweden Democrats have opposed this. The question remains, however, why they have not chosen to step in and reset the parental scale to completely move away from the problems that it has actually caused.

Then one can observe that it states in the legislation that there shall be a parental template. This assumes that the legislation will also be changed in the long run.

My questions are still: Is a departmental inquiry ongoing? Is new legislation in the works? And why has one settled for halving the parental template instead of resetting it?

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! First, I would advise the member not to draw any hasty conclusions in the way he chose to do. There is, in fact, no reason to do so.

The purpose of the parental template is to reduce the scope for subjective judgment. There should be a fixed number of hours for what is to be considered the normal parental responsibility when it concerns children with disabilities.

Let us now wait and see what the effects of the halving will be and then continue to discuss this.

I do not think we have had any specific debate on this. I believe there has been a discussion in the Social Affairs Committee. It is important to say this, so that no one starts looking for that specific debate, because it took place inside the Social Affairs Committee's session hall. It was there that we discussed this, and it was a good and productive discussion.

When it comes to the specific work with special legislation, I assume that Member Lina Nordquist meant the work that is currently taking place regarding the nationalization of assistance, i.e., the change that involves moving from municipal assistance to state assistance. That work is ongoing right now.

Regarding the question of a government inquiry, I can say that we in the Ministry of Social Affairs have an analysis group that I tasked with looking into this. That analysis group is working. But at the same time, it was too short a period for a long-term analysis to be possible. That group will be set to work once more time has passed.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! Merry Christmas, Minister! I begin by saying that.

It is very good to have a new Social Services Act that becomes more active, so to speak. I have personally worked as a field assistant in Solna. We were 16 field assistants in all of Solna. In 1990 we had an economic crisis, and the social services have still not recovered from it. People have gotten stuck behind desks, I think.

I do not think the parties should bark at each other about who has said or done what, rather this is a collective responsibility for very many in this chamber – it is becoming fewer and fewer who are here, in itself.

Many of the government's proposals have been repressive rather than preventive, I must say. One of my questions is: What does the Minister consider to be preventive measures, actually?

You have looked at Denmark and brought along the repressive proposals. The successful examples from Denmark are about the fact that they worked preventatively very intensively in a completely different way than we will do in Sweden.

I am also thinking about the school. There are several areas involved in this, and the school has an extreme impact on children early on. I do not think the SD-dependent government has succeeded in capturing that. One needs to start very early. One needs to have preschool with staff who cover the requirements and not just the absolute bare minimum. I also don't think one really sees where you are headed there.

I believe that it is very few five-year-old children who dream of becoming gang criminals. I believe that children who are five years old dream that their parents will have money to buy food for the next day. So that is how it can look in Sweden today.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Karin Rågsjö, for the questions and the contributions!

I travel very much around the country, and I have probably never witnessed a law that is as long-awaited and in demand as the new Social Services Act. The old law is from the 1980s. It is quite a long time ago. It has led to the social services being able to react to things when the worst has already happened.

The old law has been voluntary. That is, there has been an opportunity to decline interventions. What has happened is that something terrible has occurred, an intervention is proposed, and then it must be investigated. Three months later, one declines. An enormous amount of resources, time, and effort is lost with the old law. The new law will mean that we will have different conditions.

I also share the view that the preschools and schools are extremely important in this. As a former junior high school teacher, I know what it means when there are no specific resources and opportunities to support the children and young people who really need it at a very formative age. Therefore, we are looking, among other things, at new conditions in a new social worker education, and the new teacher education was proposed just a few days ago. These are reforms demanded by those on the ground, because they do not see that the education always meets the needs that exist in the profession when one enters reality.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! I am also thinking about placed children. Sis we perhaps should not talk about - it will become an extreme debate - but HVB homes, which are a stain, I think. Children from the municipalities who need it the most are placed, and they get something completely different.

This is a mega-problem. It is not about gang crime. It is about a Swedish mafia that we have. By that, I mean that one probably has to take slightly sharper measures than just strengthening Ivo. Other measures are required.

I would wish that the municipalities were given a greater responsibility, that they should take back these homes and receive money for them. They would then, so to speak, have resources available from the HVB homes, which cost very much. It costs very much to have children placed. Then the children should get the best. Now they do not get it. They get nothing, it feels like.

I do not know if there is a requirement in the new Social Services Act for the social services to visit the child and speak with the child. This is also extremely important. This has been overlooked for a very long time in very many municipalities.

Then there is this matter of supporting parents. It is of course super important. I wonder if one really supports parents by having a penalty order if they do not go in and work with their children and so on. It is about trust. How do you build trust? Well, you do it by communicating with parents. I don't think it can be very complicated. I don't think one can threaten parents to do a job, so to speak, for their children. Most parents want very well for their children. But one must also understand what context they live in. If it is social workers who stand there with some kind of [penalty], I don't think it will become good cooperation.

I wonder what the government's thoughts are on this.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! One of the things that I am extremely pleased about in the new Social Services Act - there we have made a change compared to the original investigation - is that there is a clear child perspective. The voices of children and young people shall be listened to. Their perspectives shall be weighed in.

I can say that it runs as a red thread through all this legislation. It can be about protected housing, where there are now specific rights for children. It can be about extended travel bans. It can be about the new LVU that we are working on, i.e., the new lex Lilla hjärtat. All these legislations are characterized by the red thread, which is about children's voices. Safer homes for children is also such an example.

I am at least as upset as the member that these criminal actors have reached all the way into the capillaries of the welfare system.

Let me just state something. Almost 80 percent of our HVB homes are currently run by private actors - there is no prohibition for a municipality to start an HVB. But as a municipality, one has an enormous responsibility to ensure quality when making decisions to place a child in an HVB home. I share the member's view insofar as an enormous responsibility falls on our municipalities.

But I also want to highlight all the fantastic actors that exist, because there are very many good and serious actors out there right now who are making great efforts for children and young people. They are being smeared by the criminal actors who carry this out for completely different and wrong reasons.

Then it concerns Denmark. One has the opportunity to collect money in Denmark, which the member surely knows. One collects housing benefits. One collects child benefits and other supports. Here, the investigation – I really want to emphasize that it is only an investigation for now – has chosen to look at fines based on the parents' wallets instead. The parents are incredibly important. If we are to succeed in turning this around, we must have more parents with us.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for participating in this discussion.

I want to link to some of the questions that Christofer Bergenblock asked earlier. I believe that Christofer Bergenblock, with the designation special debate, was referring to a rather strange debate that we had in the Social Affairs Committee, where some motions had been singled out that specifically concerned this with parental deduction. It was like an occasion here where we only talked about it, which made us think that perhaps there would be some quick handling of this. But that has not really happened.

But I am actually most interested in what I understand to be a rather large challenge for the government. It is about making personal assistance state-run - the proposal from the ownership investigation. The challenge is that the question of the needs assessments - how basic needs should be defined and assessed - is not quite settled.

Several people wanted to see a supplementary directive for the investigation while it was still working. That did not happen. The question then is what the way forward looks like. Does the Minister judge that another investigation will be needed, or can this be resolved in some other way? What is the approximate timeline regarding addressing these challenges?

Several assistance organizations have raised concerns. It can be summarized as that they see a development of practice that is not favorable for people who are in need of personal assistance. They simply raise the concern that many people will lose their assistance if a new structure for how the assessments should be made is not established, but instead it is left to Försäkringskassan.

I am curious and would like to hear some thoughts on this from the Minister.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Ulrika Westerlund, for the question!

Yes, we are working on a nationalization of the assistance. It is also part of the Tidö Agreement. The decision was made in this chamber following a committee initiative by Vänsterpartiet, Kristdemokraterna, and Moderaterna. We got several parties on board. On the other hand, Miljöpartiet and Socialdemokraterna did not join in that situation. We are now pleased that the Socialdemokraterna, as the last man on the boat, jumped on this a few months ago at a press conference.

I believe it is good that we are now in complete agreement that we need to move towards state ownership. There is a broad consensus in this chamber regarding that measure.

We are now preparing this in the Government Offices. It is also about ensuring a secure transfer of the approximately 5,000 assistance decisions that exist in the municipalities. Our work plan – I want to emphasize that it is a direction – regarding achieving that goal is that we shall have this in place by January 1, 2027. That is the direction we have. It may be shifted by a few months, but this is the working hypothesis that we have right now.

Part of this is about anchoring the decision. It is about working, among other things, with the disability organizations, which I am very pleased about. I am pleased with a good cooperation with the Social Affairs Committee and with the dialogue we have, but I am also very pleased that the disability organizations and the government have a good dialogue.

So it is partly about a process of anchoring and about a discussion on in what way we do this best and most securely.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister very much for the answer.

I am aware of how the different alliances have shifted and of the different parties' different grounds for movement at different points in time when it comes to taking or not taking different measures.

I interpret it as there being a rather long time perspective. I didn't quite feel that I received any answer to the question of how we best proceed. It is something that also matters for how the opposition, so to speak, tries to drive the issue. It is about it becoming as clear as possible for everyone and comprehensible for the persons concerned, so that we do not pull in different directions when we actually want the same thing.

My wonder remains: What assessment does the Minister make regarding the need for a new investigation concerning precisely this issue of needs assessments? Since the supplementary directive was not given to the investigation, which was then working, that question is somewhat hanging. There are also different perceptions. Many organizations that work with assistance have jointly tried to speak out and be clear. At the same time, we have heard that, for example, different private care companies working with personal assistance do not see exactly the same fears.

This is truly a tricky situation, I think, for the government. How should one proceed in the best possible way, so that one captures all the potential uncertainties that exist when one does not quite know what effect different decisions will have?

My wonder then is still whether the Minister believes that a larger investigation will be needed to move forward in the matter or if it will be possible to solve this in another way.

Then I also, of course, wish to wish a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and so on.

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

Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the follow-up question.

I really want to emphasize that it is incredibly important for me to listen to the organizations consisting of users and relatives, as well as the organizations that in different ways work with these issues. They are the ones who know best and who are affected by this in everyday life, so they will continue to be at the top of my list when it comes to anchoring and further discussing these issues.

What is being prepared in the Government Offices is also what has preparatory material. The investigation concerning state assistance, and the proposals contained therein, are thus the starting point for what we are now preparing and will submit proposals on in a hopefully near future.

Once again, I want to say thank you to everyone who is staying here until seven in the evening - we have been here since one o'clock. A very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year to you all! Many thanks for the debate.

(Applause)

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

Maj Karlsson (V)

Mr. Speaker! This government likes to talk about the importance of working preventatively to prevent children and young people from falling into vulnerability and crime. It is, however, difficult to understand what they actually mean that they are doing for a preventative purpose. The tougher measures are all well and good, but few can answer how they will actually lead to a positive social development in the long term. The Tidö government's own role model, Denmark, has just proven that trimmed social safety nets lead to crime, but they do not want to talk about that.

We should all be able to agree that a good education, a job to go to, and incomes that can be lived on are three central prerequisites for having a good life and for reducing the risks of both vulnerability and crime.

What is the government doing in these three areas then? Well, the school and welfare shall continue to go on a starvation diet and the market school shall run wild. The chaos-privatization of Arbetsförmedlingen shall push on. Otherwise, nothing seems to be happening within the labor market policy, while at the same time we have a historically high and increasing unemployment. Sweden has the third highest unemployment in the EU. Only Spain and Greece are worse off. The number of unemployed in construction and civil engineering has increased by 59 percent during the last two years. Also, the number of long-term unemployed has increased during the same period, but the government stands with its arms crossed.

The most vulnerable households have had their housing allowance reduced by the government, while over 200,000 people have become poor since 2021. Between 2022 and 2024, housing costs have increased by 26 percent and food prices by 25 percent, according to SCB. During the same period, wages have increased by 12 percent for white-collar workers and 9 percent for manual workers. No investments are being made to seriously compensate for the cost increases that hit the most vulnerable households in recent years. This is how you create problems instead of solving them.

The Left Party's policy, on the other hand, involves real preventive work. We want to introduce a recovery support for the welfare sector. We propose 20 billion kronor to compensate for the cuts that have occurred every year since 2011. The recovery support should remain until we have created a stable and long-term financing of the municipal sector. We also want to lower the costs for childcare so that more people can afford preschool and after-school activities.

We want to stop the chaotic privatization of Arbetsförmedlingen and ensure that the agency has a presence throughout the entire country. We are allocating funds to hire 1,200 new employment officers and so that 30,000 job seekers can receive labor market training. We want to see increased investments in labor market policy programs and measures. Additionally, we want to invest 3 billion kronor in Sverigejobb 2025.

Vänsterpartiet will spend a total of 45 billion kronor next year on improving conditions for households through, for example, increased pensions and health insurance, abolished earnings deductions, and increased child allowances. Being economically secure is, in fact, a fundamental prerequisite for creating a good life.

Mr. Speaker! More and more people are falling through what should be a safety net and end up with the social services instead. Therefore, the cracks in the welfare system must be sewn up so that the social services can carry out their mission for those it was intended for. The truly preventive work requires, in fact, a very strong social service that people feel they can be helped by. Vänsterpartiet therefore allocates 1 billion more than the government to strengthen the work with, for example, children.

We also know that men's violence against women is often a common thread among children and young people who later themselves become violent. Therefore, we are strengthening the work against men's violence against women with 350 million per year. No woman should be subjected to violence, and no child should be a witness to the crime.

However, we go even further than that. To seriously strengthen safety in society and in politically neglected areas, we want to introduce safety zones instead of visitation zones. In a safety zone, schools, social services, police and other authorities, as well as civil organizations, shall receive extra resources over a longer period. The purpose is to strengthen crime prevention work through increased presence and increased social engagement. In this way, we want to build local trust together with, and for, people in the area. Our total investment amounts to 500 million kronor for 2025.

Last but certainly not least: The work with society's most vulnerable children must never be left in the hands of criminals. We therefore allocate 60 million to Ivo annually until 2027. With such a reinforcement, we want Ivo to be able to carry out more and safer inspections so that unsuitable operations are shut down.

Thus, Madam Speaker, is how one works if one truly wants to prevent exclusion and crime. I would also like to wish Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to those members of the committee who remain.

(Applause)

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Madam Speaker! The LSS Act was introduced 30 years ago by a unanimous Riksdag. The purpose of the law is that persons with extensive functional impairments shall be assured good living conditions through LSS interventions. Activities according to LSS shall promote equality in living conditions and full participation in social life for those covered by the law, and the goal shall be that the individual is given the opportunity to live like everyone else.

The legislation has, however, long been eroded, as the cost perspective rather than the rights perspective has dominated. Various court decisions, which sometimes are not even precedential, have had an influence such that municipalities rule differently. This creates enormous legal uncertainty and, above all, enormous insecurity for those entitled to assistance. This means that the goals of the LSS legislation are not being followed in Sweden. This affects people with disabilities and their living conditions.

The LSS legislation is being eroded, and this is occurring within virtually all ten special LSS interventions. The number of people with the intervention of counseling and support has decreased significantly. The number of people who receive personal assistance has decreased as a result of more restrictive assessments by Försäkringskassan and municipalities, despite the fact that the reform on strengthened rights was intended to mean that more people would receive assistance. It has also been shown that Försäkringskassan and municipalities make completely different assessments in the same cases. The interventions companion and contact person have also decreased in recent years.

Three common problems regarding LSS housing are long waiting times, high rents, and an increasingly institutional character. There is also very much to react to regarding daily activities: everything from the poor provision and lack of differentiation to the missing right to daily activities.

There is simply much left to do to fulfill the LSS legislation's goals of equality, full participation, continuity, and the ability to live like everyone else.

It is good that the Minister for Social Services, Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, has participated in today's budget debate. It is a self-evident matter that the government has the responsibility to ensure that the good goals in LSS become a reality.

The government must, through greater clarity in the laws and by fulfilling its information mandate as prescribed by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ensure that municipalities and administrative courts do not misinterpret LSS and hinder progress. The cost perspective must also not be prioritized over the rights perspective, something we have had to keep in mind in today's budget debate when we have spoken about the LSS legislation.

I think, Madam Speaker, however, that it is very unfortunate that the Minister for Older Care, Anna Tenje, is not participating in today's budget debate, given that elderly care is currently undergoing enormous savings and cuts because the government and the Sweden Democrats are prioritizing tax cuts for the very richest and providing subsidies for the rich's house cleaning and tiling of bathrooms.

Madam Speaker! For the assistance allowance, the government proposes in the budget bill that the hourly rate be increased by 3 percent, which is a clear improvement compared to recent years. Neither assistance users nor organizers will be satisfied, however, because even 3 percent is less than the wage increases.

In order to enable skills development, good working conditions and contractually compliant wage increases for the qualified work that personal assistance is, Vänsterpartiet wants to annually raise the level of the template for the hourly rate in accordance with wage developments.

The government will also look into the possibilities of indexing the assistance allowance, which is positive. Here, it is important to ensure that the indexing does not start at an all-too-low level.

Madam Speaker! The parental deduction was introduced in 2023 with the aim that more children should be entitled to assistance. It became a failure, however, and in many cases it has become more difficult for children to receive assistance. The disability organizations and we in the opposition have demanded measures since the spring of 2023, but the government has moved slowly. From January 2025, however, the parental deduction will be halved, which can be seen as a minor victory for Sweden's families with disabilities. Vänsterpartiet would rather have seen the parental deduction reset to ensure that all children with disabilities receive the assistance they are entitled to.

Försäkringskassan considers that other measures are also required to strengthen children's right to assistance, for example, changing the rules for basic needs.

Supervision fulfills an important function to ensure that serious quality deficiencies, neglect, abuse, and other conditions of poor treatment within LSS activities are scrutinized. This was particularly evident in Ivo's targeted supervision of 90 group homes, which showed that illegal coercive and restrictive measures were used in two-thirds of the inspected group homes.

Ivo is also not obliged to investigate reports from private individuals, which should be changed.

The authority also has difficulty obtaining specialized expertise, as Ivo's mandate covers large areas of activity, such as health and medical care, aesthetic surgery and injections, LSS and SoL activities, as well as protected housing. It is evident that the supervision need for LSS activities exceeds Ivo's capacity to conduct a comprehensive supervision within the area.

Vänsterpartiet believes that LSS competence needs to be increased within Ivo, but also that more resources should be added to Ivo. Therefore, we have budgeted 60 million kronor more than the government has done.

Finally, Madam Speaker, the government has still not given any information regarding what is planned in terms of state ownership and needs assessments for personal assistance. Promptly ensuring that all basic needs are considered to be of a privacy-related nature and thus be basis for assistance in their entirety is an important step to restore the intention of LSS. It must not be broken down into small, time-limited parts as it is today. The more interpretations Försäkringskassan makes of court decisions, the smaller a portion of a toilet visit or a shower is counted as a basic need.

In summary, Vänsterpartiet wants state ownership but only once the needs assessment has been addressed. This is what I wanted to ask Minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, but according to the chamber's rules, I was not allowed to do so. But I will return to that.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all who remain in the chamber!

Health care, medical care and social care

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 11 December.)

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