(cont.) Response to interpellations 2024/25:307 and 322 on the timeline for the Occupational Injury Inquiry's proposal
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that the government is working systematically to strengthen the education and work line, that work should be paid more 1 and that the government shows great awareness of challenges for a sustainable working life through investments in social outcome contracts, more flexible rules for occupational pensions and dimensioning of upper secondary education. M emphasizes that reforms require caution 2 and that the government has a high reform pace to increase the labor supply 3. S believes that the government is doing nothing with completed proposals 4, lacks decisiveness regarding the work injury investigation 5 and does not invest enough money to improve conditions for pregnant women and those on sick leave 6. S wants to lower the ceiling for quarantine deductions 4.
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 Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! We live in a complex time, where over a million people in Sweden are not self-sufficient. At the same time, society is slowly but surely recovering from an economic recession and also from a global pandemic.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, Madam Speaker, a great deal is happening within different parts of the government to achieve an increased labor supply. It is about creating measures through an expansive state budget and more measures for support and assistance for returning to work. The government has implemented and continues to systematically implement what was the government's approach from day one, that is, to strengthen the education and work line and ensure that work pays off more, as well as to reduce the large extent of exclusion.
Some of the proposals found in the investigations mentioned in the interpellations concern increasing the labor supply, while other proposals are aimed at other areas. I would like to speak a little about the investigation on the work injury insurance that one of the interpellants has highlighted, Madam Speaker.
Here, the government has chosen to act in parallel tracks. The government considers that there is a need for complementary analyses, which ISF has been commissioned to carry out. In addition, the government sees that measures are required to improve the situation for workers and those with work-related injuries in the near term and has therefore, in the respective agencies' regulatory letters for 2025, given Arbetsmiljöverket and the Swedish Council for Medical and Social Evaluation, SBU, assignments that shall contribute to exactly this.
Today, one must be able to show that one's ability to earn an income through work is impaired for at least one year in order to be eligible for a lifelong pension. The investigation proposes lowering this requirement to six months in line with what applies for the rehabilitation chain of the sickness insurance. This is intended to contribute to more people being able to receive a lifelong pension. At the same time, the investigation considers that it would then be required that a waiting period of six months be introduced in the occupational injury insurance. Today, there is no such waiting period. It surprises me a little that the Social Democrats wanted to move forward so quickly with just such a proposal, as it would likely have quite large consequences.
The Government assesses that the report lacks analyses showing that the implementation of these proposals was needed to contribute to the occupational injury insurance better fulfilling its function. Therefore, the Government has tasked ISF with analyzing the connection between the granting of life annuities and the functioning of the labor market over time. The assignment also includes an analysis of how the workforce moves between different parts of the labor market as well as the relationship between the sickness insurance and the occupational injury insurance over time. This assignment is to be reported in October 2026.
The government, however, sees a need for measures that in the near term contribute to improving the situation for workers who risk being affected by a work-related injury. The best protection for vulnerable groups in the labor market is precisely to improve their work environment and reduce the risk of work-related injuries occurring in the first place.
Here, the Occupational Injury Inquiry points to sanction fees, something that other authorities also highlight. We have landed on proceeding with precisely these proposals and looking at how sanction fees can both improve the work environment and prevent occupational injuries from occurring in the first place.
We have more proposals concerning the investigation, but we will have to come back to that a bit later.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister and I have completely different views on what "very much" is. With the seven investigations with completed proposals that were supposed to improve things for very many people in our security systems, absolutely nothing is happening, and I cannot consider that to be "very much." But the Minister seems satisfied.
One of the investigations that the Minister himself has commissioned is the departmental investigation that replaced the large, broad investigation that we Social Democrats commissioned regarding making the care deduction more fair. As I said earlier, Madam Speaker, the Minister is very good at saying nice things about what the government wants to do when we debate here—about sick leaves, about Finsam and other things. But the only time we notice that real work is being done is when it concerns lowering taxes for the richest or worsening things for ordinary people.
What is happening with the completed proposals that the minister's own department's investigation on sick leave came up with? We Social Democrats said immediately when it was presented that it does not solve the problem, but that it is still small steps along the way. We say yes to lowering the maximum ceiling for the number of sick leave deductions that can be made over a twelve-month period and a simpler set of rules for those people who have repeated illnesses. There is, therefore, a majority in the Riksdag for this if the government chooses to present these completed proposals. Why is that not being done, I wonder.
Another question is the investigation into SIG, the sickness benefit-generating income, which is very urgent for several groups. There are also finished proposals that the government could present to the Riksdag. Last Thursday, I was called by the Swedish Sports Confederation, who wondered what is happening with the investigation. Elite athletes, in fact, have major problems and wonder what the government is doing so that they too can be given the opportunity for good sickness insurance coverage. There are finished proposals, they said from the Swedish Sports Confederation. Why is the government not doing anything?
This is what I promised to present in today's debate.
Madam Speaker! There are many good proposals in many of these seven investigations. One proposal from the Investigation on the significance of the medical certificate in sickness benefit cases is that a national competence center for insurance medicine should be established, for it is very clear both in this investigation and when speaking with experts that the knowledge within insurance medicine in some areas is frighteningly low. It would therefore facilitate things for many sick people if the knowledge of insurance medicine were better within health and medical care so that we, just as the Minister says, can get more people back to work faster. But we have also seen nothing of these proposals from the government.
That is why it is difficult to understand what the Minister actually wants. Anna Tenje speaks beautifully, but we get no concrete proposals that can make a real difference.
When will the Minister for Social Insurance lay a concrete proposal on the table of the Riksdag that truly improves working life? Please give me and everyone else here in the chamber who is listening an answer: When will something concrete come from the government?
Jessica Rodén (S)
Madam Speaker! Unemployment is rising, food prices are skyrocketing, and many who work full-time still find it difficult to make ends meet. At the same time, those who have already exhausted themselves in their jobs are left without the support they should be entitled to.
The occupational injury investigation proposed, among other things, to remove the unfair exceptions in the insurance so that more people who are injured at work would actually be able to receive compensation. When the investigation was presented, I got the impression that the Moderaterna were positive towards several of the proposals, but now they seem to have changed their minds. Why?
Madam Speaker! We often talk about the occupational groups that have the most demanding jobs and work in healthcare and elderly care and on construction sites. But of course, we must not forget all the civil servants and academics who are also affected by an inadequate occupational injury insurance. Nurses, social workers and teachers work under great pressure with high demands and often lacking resources. Stress-related ill health, exhaustion syndrome and long-covid are real problems in these occupational groups. But despite the fact that these illnesses are directly linked to the work environment, one often has to fight, due to an uncertain insurance, to receive the compensation one should be entitled to.
The Minister says that more analyses are required to adapt the occupational injury insurance to the sickness insurance, but several referral bodies argue that the investigation's proposals would, on the contrary, improve the coordination between the systems and ensure that more people receive the right support in time. When will the proposals arrive?
Arber Gashi (S)
Madam Speaker! Sweden needs a secure and modern social insurance protection for pregnant women. I would like our minister to say something about that. We have known this for a long time, and that was precisely why the Social Democratic-led government commissioned the inquiry *A more modern social insurance protection for pregnant women*. It has been completed for a long time and contains concrete proposals on how we can create better conditions for pregnant women to maintain their health and their finances during pregnancy. But what has happened since then? Nothing.
I want to remind Member Högström that it has been a little more than a month since that investigation was submitted. You have had it on your desk for nearly one and a half years. This is not the first time we have seen this pattern with investigations that gather dust and well-founded proposals that do not lead to any political action whatsoever. In the meantime, pregnant women continue to suffer from economic insecurity and health risks.
Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats have a clear policy to improve the situation for pregnant women. We believe that all pregnant women should have the right to maternity benefits during the last week before the expected date of birth and until their actual date of birth without having to present a lot of certificates. Furthermore, we want to increase the compensation so that more people have a secure economy during the end of their pregnancy. These are proposals that would give women the increased security they deserve, but instead, we see a government that chooses to do nothing.
Madam Speaker! Sweden deserves better. Sweden's women deserve better. The government has the power to act, but it is obvious that they choose not to do so. I find that to be regrettable.
Sanne Lennström (S)
Madam Speaker! I intended to continue on the thread regarding the investigation on VAB, Rätt och lätt – an improved regulatory framework for VAB. But before I delve into that, I want to address Member Högströms' claim that we Social Democrats are doing nothing despite all the investigations. We are, of course, conducting a policy where we review what we want to do the next time we are in a government position. But right now, Sweden has a right-conservative government that holds the power over crowns and öres and to investigate proposals and create government bills. That power obligates them not to let investigations with good proposals lie and gather dust.
I also want to point out that the investigation I am referring to has been on the government's desk for three years and not for one month.
We could, of course, absolutely talk about how many kronor one can spend on this, but it is the government that holds the power and could actually implement it. It is the government that can give these parents the support they need. We cannot do that right now, but I naturally hope that we make that change if the government does not make the decisions during this mandate period.
In connection with this investigation, I would also like to highlight another group. Mental ill-health among children and young people is a major public health issue in our time. Many children and young people need support from their parents to be able to get to psychologists and psychiatrists, but many testify that it is very difficult today to get a certificate from their health center so that one can receive compensation for having taken their child to, for example, a psychologist. A change is needed here. When the child turns 16, the rules become even stricter, and then compensation can only be obtained if the child is seriously ill or covered by LSS.
I wonder if the government intends to proceed with the proposal from the Vabu investigation and ensure that families with children with mental illness get a more reasonable everyday life, just like children who have diabetes.
Caroline Högström (M)
Madam Speaker! I would like to continue to urge some restraint from the Social Democratic members in this debate. This interpellation is based on an investigation that submitted its final report on September 17.
Earlier, I pointed out that none of the proposals highlighted in the debate are funded in the respective budget motions. If I remember correctly, there were 15 open investigations in a drawer at Rosenbad from the Social Democratic ministers, which they have had nearly seven years to do something about but have not done so. I therefore do not know what to say about the tone.
Madam Speaker! I can perhaps bluntly state that there is higher confidence in and higher demands for a Moderate minister than for one's own ministers. It is known that the Moderates deliver. It is known that when the Moderates are in government, we deliver on our election promises. We deliver politics for Sweden.
In conclusion, I want to say that these are important areas that require caution and precision. We have seen what hasty and sloppy reforms do to our social insurance system, and therefore it is important to look at the whole and act cautiously when reforming. The need for, for example, workplace-based rehabilitation is important, and we need to strive to ensure that people are not hidden and forgotten in the social insurance and that there is a way back to the labor market. We know, of course, that it makes a difference for the individual and for society as a whole.
Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! The debate is very interesting and like a mixed bag where various proposals and investigations are being addressed. For those who may have joined a bit late, I can say that we are talking about investigations that are on my desk and are currently being prepared, and about certain measures that we have already taken.
When it comes to the Office for Sustainable Working Life, they submitted a final report and no finished legislative proposals, Madam Speaker. But the office writes that they have identified various potential interventions and measures that can contribute to achieving a longer and more sustainable working life. Good enough.
Among the proposals presented, several have been implemented during the time that the Office for Sustainable Working Life has existed. It shows a great awareness of the challenges linked to a longer and more sustainable working life. One can contribute in different ways to solving them together. This applies, for example, to the initiative on social outcome contracts, which is completed. It also applies to more flexible rules for the withdrawal of occupational pensions. In the issue of more support for young people who neither work nor study, the labor market's needs shall be weighed in when planning and dimensioning certain educations at the upper secondary level. We have also moved forward with that proposal.
Madam Speaker! In this context, I can also state that the single largest reform related to the Office for Sustainable Working Life is about making it easier for more people to work longer and thus receive a higher pension. That decision was made here in the Riksdag in 2022, when the new system with the target age and subsequent changes in the surrounding security systems was also made.
If I am to mention some of the proposals that we have moved forward with and implemented regarding the investigation into the correct conditions for sick leave, which has been raised here today, it involved, among other things, a mandate on digital information and certificates. It is a mandate that has been given to E-hälsomyndigheten.
In the budget bill for 2025, we proposed that the possibility of work trials with maintained sickness allowance should be reviewed. It is also about national follow-up of the healthcare's efforts in the sick leave and rehabilitation process. We have given that assignment to the National Board of Health and Welfare.
In October last year, the government gave ISF and the Agency for Health and Social Care Analysis the assignment to follow up on the law on coordination efforts. This has been done.
In October last year, the government tasked Socialstyrelsen with supporting and developing the healthcare system's work with sick leave in rehabilitation. This is a response to the question regarding a national competence center posed by one of the members. As recently as last week, the government made a decision to task Karolinska Institutet with preparing the incorporation of the task to monitor and promote occupational health care regarding the competence supply.
Let us move on to A strengthened and united protection of the welfare systems. The Ministry of Health and Social Affairs has commissioned a letter investigation on a more efficient arrangement to combat benefit fraud, which among other things shall look at proposals for administrative sanction fees and a benefit ban. It will arrive soon. By giving Försäkringskassan and Pensionsmyndigheten a mandate to plan for administrative sanctions in social insurance, the government has taken the next step for administrative sanction fees and a benefit ban and has thus prepared the work.
Legislative work is underway in the Government Offices to produce a bill to be submitted to the Riksdag in May 2025, and it concerns a better tool for control in order to strengthen information gathering within the social insurance system.
I can move on to the investigation on vab. We have been given the opportunity to use income data in the employer declaration for the control of, among other things, temporary parental leave. The Government has also, in accordance with the investigation's proposal, tasked the Public Health Agency with revising the knowledge overview. In the budget bill for 2025, the Government also announces that it will return with a proposal for a shortened period for application for temporary parental leave.
These were 15-20 proposals that I managed to account for during only this short time. I could stand even longer and provide evidence of the government's capacity for action.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! I must admit that a lot is happening on the sidelines. The Minister listed an impressive number of measures, but she did not say a word about the Karen Investigation. When will its proposals arrive? She also did not say a word about when parents of children with diabetes and parents of children with mental illness will get a better opportunity to take parental leave. She did not say a word to Member Arber Gashi about a more modern social insurance protection for pregnant women. When will that come? We are still waiting for the big, real changes. The Minister owes us an answer.
When does one intend to invest in this? It is about money. When does one intend to invest heavily with money to improve the conditions for pregnant women, those who are working, and those who are on sick leave?
We know that Sweden can do much better than this. There are completed, concrete proposals, but now propositions and money are needed. The Minister boasts with 100 million in his response, but it is actually quite embarrassing. It is not enough anywhere.
We know what is required to create a health insurance that one can rely on. We know what is required to prevent stress-related ill health. And we know what is required to get those on sick leave back to work faster than today. It is the government's responsibility to implement the reforms and provide the funds required for the sake of all those people who today suffer because Sweden does not have a sustainable working life and a sufficiently good health insurance.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Madam Speaker! I hear what the Minister says, but I still see no decisiveness when it comes to the occupational injury investigation.
To Member of Parliament Högström, I would like to say that the Occupational Injury Inquiry's report was issued in September 2023. I believe that was when it was submitted to the Minister's desk. The Moderates were, as mentioned, positive towards the proposals when we worked together in the reference group. What has happened along the way? What has changed? Have the Moderates changed their minds? In the meantime, people continue to be affected.
Madam Speaker! Working should not be a risk; it should be a path to security and self-sufficiency. Thank you for the debate!
Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! Many thanks to the members who have participated in the debate and raised these important issues tonight! The questions were somewhat diverse but quite important. We were given an opportunity here to discuss what measures the government is taking to increase the labor supply and handle the Occupational Injury Inquiry's proposals.
I also think it became a good opportunity to inform the members, the chamber, and any listeners about many of the good proposals from the concluded investigations that the government is taking forward in various parts. It is important that issues are investigated and then debated so that we can get a better and more well-functioning system and rectify the injustices that may exist, but also with such things as are inefficient and not accurate. This was needed, not least, in order to be able to increase the labor supply.
At the same time, I believe that both Member Åsa Eriksson and Member Jessica Rodén are aware that it is not always as simple as just taking an investigation and then carrying it out. I believe that the Social Democrats are also highly aware of this.
As Member Högström pointed out from the rostrum, there were 12 or 15 open investigations within the social insurance area on my desk when I took office. These investigations were completed between 2015 and 2022, and they were not fully processed. It became very clear then and there what power and what reform pace this government maintains compared to the previous one.
To all who share my and the members' great commitment to issues regarding the labor supply and other issues within the social insurance, it should be a pleasing announcement that so much is happening in the area. Furthermore, dear friends, the parliamentary term is far from over. We will be able to do much, much more, and there will also be many proposals in the area during the spring. Many thanks for the debate!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.