Healthcare, medical care and social care

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The government has presented a budget that makes it possible for Sweden to rise. When our government took office three years ago, people's finances had deteriorated as a result of high taxes and skyrocketing food and fuel prices. Sweden had an inflation of almost 10 percent and low growth. What before the 2014 election was a Social Democratic promise of Europe's lowest unemployment had instead led to the fourth highest unemployment in the EU. Large-scale immigration and failed integration policy had led to social vulnerability and growing gang crime. The insecurity spread in tandem with youth robberies, and Sweden set records in shootings.

Of course, it takes time to reverse the development. Three years into the mandate period, we are far from finished, but some things are starting to move in the right direction. Inflation has been fought down. The shootings are decreasing, even though much more is required in the fight against crime. Sweden has the lowest asylum migration since 1985 and the lowest tax burden in 50 years. It is clear that everyday life becomes a little easier and that families' finances are strengthened when an ordinary working family gets an entire month's salary more in their wallet every year. We continue to equip both the police and the justice system as well as the social services' crime prevention work so that more children can grow up in safety. The Government has presented a budget that makes Sweden stronger.

Healthcare is particularly important for us in Kristdemokraterna. You should be able to rely on that care is there when you or someone in the family needs it, but far too many people wait far too long for the care they are entitled to. One is also not always met with equal care depending on where in the country one lives.

During the Social Democrats' eight years in power, the healthcare queues more than doubled. They were record-long even before the pandemic, and the queues for BUP tripled. S handed over a healthcare system with the lowest number of staffed healthcare beds per capita in all of Europe. The Christian Democrats' primary priorities during this mandate period have therefore been to rectify the injustices and inequality within healthcare by successively increasing state governance, so that regional differences decrease and more can receive a fair and equal healthcare.

Another priority has been to increase accessibility so that more people can receive care in a timely manner. I want to be clear that there is still a shortage of care beds. Far too many people have to wait for too long. We need to deal with the bureaucracy and the waste of taxpayers' money that the 21 self-governing regions entail.

Much work remains, but there is at the same time hope even for Swedish healthcare. The healthcare queues are now shorter, the shortage of healthcare beds is less, and more and more people are seeking careers in the healthcare profession.

We have established a national healthcare brokerage that allows those who do not receive care in time to be offered care in another part of the country or from a private healthcare provider. We have taken measures to tighten the healthcare guarantee and introduce sanction fees against regions that do not fulfill their mission to offer care in time, because we need to take further steps forward.

In the budget for 2026, we allocate 6.6 billion in performance-based measures to shorten the healthcare queues. This will be an additional 1 billion and more of national coordination to ramp up the work of shortening the healthcare queues. The appropriation to shorten the healthcare queues for certain specific diagnostic groups such as hernia, hip replacement, and cataracts is increased by 750 million, as that measure has had an effect and reduced the healthcare queues during the year that has passed.

Furthermore, historical investments in psychiatry are awaited. Mental ill-health is increasing among young people, and the despair is naturally very great among the families who do not receive the help they need. We therefore continue to allocate one billion SEK for BUP to increase accessibility and shorten the queues to child and adolescent psychiatry.

We are allocating 100 million specifically to shorten the queues for those suffering from eating disorders. We are allocating 300 million per year to suicide prevention. We are allocating half a billion to strengthen primary care's ability to provide care to children and young people in a timely manner. Not least, the investment in the national development teams, which aim for the regions to improve and streamline their psychiatry, continues, so that we can help more of the children and adolescents and also adults who are suffering today and are waiting to get in contact with either BUP or adult psychiatry. When the contribution to psychiatry increases by as much as 23 percent, it is important that the money is used in the right way.

There are many other initiatives in the budget that could be mentioned. During the mandate period, the Government has developed a new cancer strategy and tripled the investment in cancer care so that it amounts to a full 1.5 billion kronor next year. We continue the investment in maternal healthcare, childbirth care, and the health of girls and women, partly so that more women will have the opportunity to feel security before, during, and after their childbirth.

We also strengthen the victim's perspective. We do this not only through harsher penalties for crimes of violence and sexual offenses and by abolishing the volume discount for serial criminals, but we also do it by strengthening the care for those affected by sexual violence with 200 million kronor. We do this because the knowledge of sexual abuse, sexual violence, and the care and treatment required after such abuses needs to increase.

Let me also say something in conclusion about Sweden's elderly. That the elderly should be honored and treated with dignity and respect is not just a political goal for me. It is a fundamental value that my party, Kristdemokraterna, was once formed to defend. It is a value system that has historically built Sweden and the entire Western world strongly. I would like to say that it is a Swedish value that the elderly should be treated with respect. As a Christian Democrat, I would therefore like to highlight some of what is now happening in the field of elderly care.

We are strengthening and extending the Äldreomsorgslyftet, which facilitates staffing and creates better conditions for dignified care where there is time to talk and the elderly are treated with respect.

We have strengthened medical competence with medical assessment by nurses in special housing. We have introduced requirements for a medically responsible person for rehabilitation in the municipalities. We are now also introducing a permanent care contact in the country's elderly care homes, which paves the way for better quality.

I am particularly pleased that we are now strengthening the support for relatives for all husbands and wives who take such great responsibility for one another and for all sons and daughters who week in and week out strive to support their parents. This applies in particular in times like now, as Christmas approaches.

It is not possible to speak of security when the elderly cannot make themselves understood in their own language in their own country. It is not possible to speak of dignity if there is no opportunity to talk about life with the person who is assigned to manage one's care and nursing. Therefore, I am proud that we Christian Democrats, together with our coalition parties, are now introducing language requirements within elderly care. This applies across the entire country, and it will be introduced starting from July 1, 2026.

The government has presented a budget that strengthens people and families in everyday life, which strengthens healthcare and which improves elderly care. I move for approval of the government's budget and of the committee's proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker and members of the House! This matter regarding the elderly is something universal. It is not only Sweden that views the elderly as an extremely important issue. It would also be very good if you reviewed the things that are happening right now. Very many who work in elderly care risk being thrown out of Sweden, regardless of whether they speak perfect Swedish or not.

I also have something else I want to bring up. Performance-based funds are included in the budget. Not many within the profession are happy about it. For example, the chair of the Swedish Medical Association, Catharina Ihre Lundgren, says: "Care queues are not shortened through short-term performance requirements. To create a long-term sustainable healthcare with enough care beds, we must invest in competence supply and an expanded primary care." They are not exactly pleased.

Neither does Sineva Ribeiro of Vårdförbundet: ”Had performance-based funds worked, we would not have any healthcare queues. Shortening the queues must never occur at the expense of the work environment, quality, or patient safety. Long-term investments in staff and the conditions for healthcare were needed – that is the only thing that truly shortens the healthcare queues.”

I therefore wonder why you are again investing in performance-based funds when it does not seem to work in reality. It sounds very good that the regions should account for things and matters. Your strong mission seems to be to place all responsibility on the regions. One almost has to call Missing People regarding your own responsibility.

Those were my questions to the member.

(Applause)

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Of course, we must not shorten the queues at the expense of the staff or the conditions for the staff – on the contrary. A key to our being able to shorten the healthcare queues is to increase the number of staffed healthcare beds. To do that, we need better conditions for the staff. We must make it more attractive to seek employment in healthcare.

It is therefore positive that this government is the first to have produced a national plan for skills supply that identifies what needs to happen out in the regions to make it more attractive to work in healthcare. We are now seeing a trend break. More people are choosing to seek out the healthcare profession. Part of the government's policy is therefore that by improving the conditions for the staff, we can also create the conditions for shorter healthcare queues.

The second question was: Why don't we do as was always done under the left-wing government, that is, pour money into general grants and hope for the best? Well, because during the eight years the Social Democrats ruled the country, the healthcare queues more than doubled. Not a single time during the years when you were a support party to the Social Democrats did you succeed in reducing the healthcare queues. It can be compared to how it looked when the Alliance ruled. Then the healthcare queues were halved.

What happens now? Now we have more targeted state grants. We are focusing on increasing accessibility, and we see that the healthcare queues are now decreasing. Our policy is having an effect. The old Social Democratic left-wing solutions did not work. That is the whole reason why we are now conducting a different policy. Individual people who are ill should be able to receive the care they are entitled to, and they should be able to receive care in time.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker and Member! Now, the situation is that the healthcare queues are not decreasing drastically, and it is only in three regions that a decrease can be seen.

I am moving on to a completely different issue. It concerns the Swedish Work Environment Authority, which has inspected 437 workplaces within healthcare between 2022 and 2024. 73 percent were required to take measures. In the care departments of acute hospitals, the deficiencies were even greater. 80 percent did not meet the requirements of the Work Environment Act. In primary care, the corresponding figure was 69 percent. There were many figures here.

The underlying deficiency concerns unhealthy workloads, an imbalance between demands and resources. My one question is therefore: What do you say to the healthcare staff who see that the fields are not truly flourishing even under your regime?

I also have another question. I sat on the Care Responsibility Committee, and I think we did a great job. We landed on certain issues that were to be implemented. All parties were on board. It was about competence supply, which was to be managed nationally. Also medicines, vaccinations, screening, and forensic psychiatric care were to be managed nationally. That was the idea we had. But there was also much more.

I must ask what is happening now with the investigation, which was ongoing for over two years. It was a very good investigation with a fantastic secretariat. What have you done? What will you do with the proposals? Is this how it works nowadays? Investigations that one doesn't like to the core are put in a black box that one intends to take with them when they lose power in 2026. Is that how it works?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Let me emphasize that the healthcare queues have absolutely not decreased sufficiently – far from it. Despite that, we are now seeing a trend break. Such a trend break we could not see at any time during the eight years that the left ruled Sweden.

The reason why we now want to invest more in shortening the healthcare queues and do more things, for example sharpening the healthcare guarantee and ensuring that the work with the national healthcare brokerage is accelerated, is that we need to do much more so that people receive care in a timely manner.

It is a failing grade for the country's self-governing regions that they do not manage the working environment for the staff. The tasks that are reported are, of course, serious. The national plan for skills supply is a good guide for what creates a good working environment for the staff. It concerns many different things, such as being able to influence scheduling and, for example, when one is allowed to have time off. The Christian Democrats in Region Stockholm are pushing for that surpluses should be retained within the units so that we as staff will have greater influence over our own working environment. All of this will have an effect in the pursuit of an improved working environment and in ensuring that more people want to work within healthcare.

Regarding the Healthcare Responsibility Committee, it is no secret that the Christian Democrats are the party that most clearly insists that it is time to abolish the 21 self-governing regions and let the state take over the responsibility for healthcare so that we can offer people timely care and more equal care. We see the Healthcare Responsibility Committee's conclusions, which all parties agreed upon, as a very good first step towards our ultimate goal of abolishing the regions and letting the state take over the responsibility.

Both Minister for Health and Social Affairs Elisabet Lann and Minister for Social Affairs Jakob Forssmed are working to ensure that this can become a reality. Not least, the issue of pharmaceuticals will be prioritized. But there is also other.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member of Parliament Christian Carlsson, for the speech!

In the 2022 election campaign, the then-future Minister for Health stated that Sweden has criminally long queues for healthcare – illegally long queues to get a first healthcare visit and to receive surgery in accordance with the healthcare guarantee. The member himself stated in his speech that the primary priority for the Christian Democrats is to rectify the inequality and inaccessibility within healthcare. The inaccessibility within healthcare is, among other things, about precisely those illegally long healthcare queues that we had when the mandate period began.

The question to the member is, Mr. Speaker: Are there still illegally long healthcare queues in Sweden? There were when the Christian Democrats took over the responsibility for this. Since then, 22 billion have been spent on performance-based measures, including this year's budget. Those performance-based measures have not given the desired results. They can help when it comes to certain operations, in individual years – we certainly completely agree on that. But they have not led to the structural changes that are needed.

Just the other day, SKR's report on health and medical care was released, which showed that 40 percent waited longer than the care guarantee specifies. It is not reasonable.

My question is therefore: How is it that the Christian Democrats, despite the promises made during the election campaign and despite having held the position of Minister for Health and Care throughout this entire mandate period, have still not succeeded in addressing the Swedish healthcare queues?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It is still far too many people who are waiting too long for care, longer than the time within which they have a right to care according to the healthcare guarantee. Thus, they are waiting illegally long for care.

We are not satisfied with this. That is why we have allocated special funds specifically to shorten the healthcare queues and increase healthcare capacity across the country. We now see a trend break: the healthcare queues are decreasing. That is good. We are far from finished, but we will continue on the path we have set.

One of the problems is the dysfunctional healthcare organization. We have 21 self-governing regions that do not look out for the patient's best interests but instead put their own regional economy and their own regional politicians' priorities ahead of the patient's right to receive care in a timely manner, according to the law. It is a major problem. We have available healthcare capacity in other parts of the country for people who have waited too long for care.

That is why we identified anterior cruciate ligament tears, hip replacements, and cataracts as three diagnostic groups where the queues are long but available healthcare capacity exists in other regions and with private healthcare providers in the own region. We said: We pay every single krona that this costs, but you regions just let your patients receive the care they are entitled to. But have all regions acted that way, even though we provided all the money? No, that simply has not been done. It is a dysfunctional system.

We have established a national healthcare brokerage so that, in the long run, we can help the patient obtain the care they are entitled to and in this way bypass the regions' autonomy.

We have appointed an inquiry into tightening the healthcare guarantee, not because today's healthcare guarantee is being met, but so that the patient shall have the power to turn to another healthcare provider at an earlier stage. We are also prepared to introduce sanction fees to punish those regions that do not provide patients with the care they are entitled to, despite the fact that they could do so.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Whether it is a trend break when it comes to the care queues remains to be seen; it takes a bit longer to be able to state that. But what we can see today is that far too many people wait far too long. Just last month, there were 50,269 patients who had waited more than 90 days for a necessary operation.

The problem is not the self-governing regions themselves. No one should make me believe that this is solved by having Swedish healthcare, with 350,000 employees, governed by a director-general in Stockholm. On the other hand, much of the problem could be remedied if patients were given more power over their own care, including regarding specialist care.

Centerpartiet has throughout the entire mandate period pushed that we want to see a national comparison service via 1177, where one can see both how long the care queues are for different operations and how the operations have functioned according to quality indicators, so that one can from day one choose specialist care where one wants in the entire country. It resembles the healthcare brokerage initiative that the Tidö parties have now launched, but I note that it is a more bureaucratic model where it is still ultimately the doctors who own the decisions on where the patients end up. We believe that that power can actually be placed with the patients themselves. If they themselves are given the opportunity to choose, the care queues will structurally be able to decrease.

So, as has been said, it is not wrong to spend money on performance-based measures, but that is not how we solve the structural problems within Swedish healthcare.

I can state, looking in the rearview mirror, that the Christian Democrats have not succeeded over a period of three years in shortening the illegally long queues in Swedish healthcare.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I want to be very clear that our goal with the national healthcare coordination is that you, as a patient, should be able to see where in the country there is available healthcare capacity and that you should be able to get help from the national healthcare coordination to turn to a private actor or to another region to get the care you are entitled to. We therefore do not in any way think that the national healthcare coordination, as far as we have come now, is fully developed. But under a red-green government, no one wanted to start this work, but it is something that we have done now. After three years, we are simply not finished with that work, but it is something that we intend to complete.

Regarding the healthcare queues and that they are decreasing now, we have not only looked at a snapshot but also compared, since the healthcare queues fluctuate over the year. If one compares over a twelve-month period backwards and looks at the average number of patients who have waited too long for care, one sees that the healthcare queues in September were significantly smaller than they were when Magdalena Andersson lost the election in September 2022. Even in October, the healthcare queues continued to decrease.

This makes me feel confident in saying that we are currently seeing a positive trend break. Let us hope that it continues! But for it to continue, it is important that we continue to invest in directing funds so that the regions can increase their healthcare capacity and shorten the queues. It is important that we are prepared to strengthen patients' empowerment through a sharpened healthcare guarantee and by developing the national healthcare brokerage, but also by introducing sanction fees against those regions that can provide people with healthcare in time at someone else's place but prioritize their own finances over patients' right to care.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! Elderly care is in a situation where the staff is often insufficient, where the work environment is so tough that people leave the profession and where far too many elderly people do not receive the time or care they deserve.

During this year, we have seen a series of reports, audits, and revelations that point to the problems and challenges within elderly care. Nevertheless, the government, with the Christian Democrats as the primary responsible party, chooses not to make the investments that would make a difference.

We Social Democrats are allocating 2 billion to increased staffing within elderly care. The Christian Democrats are allocating nothing when it comes to staffing. It is difficult to see the logic in saying one protects the elderly but refuses to invest in what determines the quality: more colleagues and more time.

Mr. Speaker! An elderly care where the staff do not have time to see people is not worthy of a country like Sweden. My question to the member is: How is elderly care to become safer and more dignified when the Christian Democrats and the government refuse to invest in that which enables more employees within Swedish elderly care?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We are in complete agreement that the elderly deserve a dignified elderly care. One should be treated with respect. There must be time to see, confirm, and converse with the elderly within Swedish elderly care. It is also true that staffing within elderly care is a major challenge for the municipalities.

It is not true, however, that the government would not provide any money to facilitate things for the municipalities. We have the general state grants. We have a specific sector grant for elderly care. Not least, we have chosen to proceed with the Elderly Care Boost, which the Social Democrats introduced and which it has been very important for us Kristdemokrater to continue building upon. Therefore, we have increased the ambitions compared to the elderly care boost that the Socialdemokrater stood for. We have increased the amount and broadened the area of application.

These are initiatives to make it easier for the municipalities to recruit enough qualified staff to provide the elderly with good and dignified elderly care. We will continue to prioritize elderly care.

That we set requirements for care contact within the elderly care homes, which also sets requirements for language skills, will also improve the quality of elderly care. It will improve the quality for the elderly, and it will also feel more meaningful for the staff to work within the profession. Therefore, we have a very good policy precisely so that more people will apply to elderly care and so that we can improve the dignity and quality for the elderly.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! I think that dignity is not just a word one says. For us as politicians, dignity is about truly creating the conditions for things to get better.

It is very good that the Christian Democrats are building upon sector grants, elderly care initiatives, and the elderly care boost. It was a reality during the previous government that this government has chosen to continue. It is therefore why we broadly in this chamber support those parts.

But more needs to be done. It is clear that the investments we have today in the field of elderly care are insufficient. That is why we so clearly in our budget allocate an additional 2 billion to the area specifically to increase staffing.

The Christian Democrats say time and again that they want to protect the elderly. But the budget they are presenting here in the chamber shows something completely different.

No work environment issue in elderly care can be solved without more colleagues. Sure, you can adjust and improve. You can do a lot with leadership and work models. But fundamentally, Swedish elderly care is understaffed. There, politics also needs to make interventions at a national level. It is not possible to prioritize tax cuts and simultaneously invest in and prioritize welfare. The mathematics and reality do not align.

My final question is: Why should Sweden's elderly pay the price because the Christian Democrats prioritize tax cuts over staffing in elderly care?

(Applause)

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The tax cuts are important, because households are in a tough economic situation. This applies in particular to many of the elderly pensioners. I know that the Social Democrats want to take more of their money and in that way make them poorer. We do not want that. We want people to keep more of their money, so that they can stand stronger in their finances and feel a greater security.

I note that the Social Democrats in opposition have no problem with spending more money on staffing initiatives in elderly care. I am not saying that it is wrong in principle, but I note that the investments the Social Democrats made in elderly care when they were in power do not come close to what they are talking about now. Then I wonder why they could not do it when they had the opportunity.

The Social Democrats must also learn that not everything is about more money, but much is also about other things. Nothing in the long list of things I just enumerated – medical responsibility for rehabilitation, fixed nursing contact, language requirements in elderly care – did the Social Democrats choose to proceed with. These are measures that truly strengthen the quality of elderly care, improve safety, and make it more attractive to work within elderly care.

It would also have been desirable if the Social Democrats not only spent more money on social problems but could also see that how we govern also has a major effect on the quality we receive in the welfare system.

(Applause)

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin with the issue of skills supply.

One of the absolutely most important competence measures that can be taken within health and social care right now is to stop the deportations of healthcare staff that are occurring all over Sweden. I am pleased that the member mentioned that we see an increased interest in getting an education and working within health and social care. We must also note that a large part of that increase concerns people who are foreign-born. They therefore play an important role for us and our welfare.

I have participated in the debate regarding language requirements in elderly care many times. Of course, it is important that one can make oneself understood in their own language. But the absolute best way to ensure good Swedish is to invest in Swedish education for the healthcare staff that exists. The alternative, which is often forgotten, is that the elderly are left without a helping hand.

The fact is that we have very many foreign-born people who manage well in Swedish and do a fantastic job within elderly care and healthcare. They deserve our respect and our gratitude. But it is said all too rarely.

I just wanted to ask a short question regarding healthcare. This budget, after all, implies a reduction when it comes to investments in healthcare, even though the Christian Democrats have healthcare as their most important issue. I would therefore like to hear how the member views the financial conditions of healthcare specifically.

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It is important that we take advantage of the good forces who want to work within Swedish elderly care, regardless of where the individuals come from. We are, of course, completely in agreement on that. But we cannot view elderly care as some kind of integration measure where one is first supposed to start working and then obtain the competence that is needed. One must have sufficiently good language skills to be able to give the elderly the care and security that they deserve. It is a matter of security and well-being.

It is also a question of patient safety. We have seen frightening examples of this in the recent past, where an ambulance had to be called to a nursing home where the staff could not communicate fully with the ambulance personnel, which put the elderly person's life and health at risk. We will, of course, set requirements for language skills, and we will offer further education initiatives so that as many as possible get the chance to reach those requirements.

When it comes to investments in Swedish healthcare, I want to say that it is the regions that are responsible for the majority of Swedish healthcare funding. We are coming from economically tough times where the state has injected extra many funds to save the regions from the pension agreements they had entered into, because the regions had very large deficits due to inflation. At that time, we beefed up the state budget.

Now we see that the budgets of municipalities and regions appear to be going better moving forward. Then one can also adjust how much the state contributes and supports. The sector contribution for healthcare of a few billion kronor that has now disappeared was precisely to temporarily support the regions in the tough situation they were in. That is the explanation.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I reacted strongly to a specific expression that I have so often heard in the municipal council in Umeå. Back then, it was only the Sweden Democrats who said it, but now it has apparently made its way into the inner circle. It is said that elderly care should be an integration project. It has never been an integration project.

It has always been a situation where there has been an acute shortage of staff and one has been forced to bring in those they could. I just want this to be said. Elderly care has never been an integration project. We should be extremely grateful for those who have been prepared to do everything to help our Swedish elderly.

When it comes to healthcare, I just want to highlight a few things. I am thinking, for example, of Vårdförbundet, which states that this is a deprioritization of the Swedes' most important issue. Instead of strengthening healthcare, the government chooses to reduce it. Despite a historical reform space, the supplement to healthcare is meager. The sector contribution disappears. More money is allocated to one-off measures to cut queues.

SKR says clearly that the government's autumn budget was not a welfare budget. Despite a record-breaking reform space, the general state grants were not increased at all, and healthcare receives less money overall.

SKR and Läkarförbundet say that they stand together regarding the financing of healthcare. They want to see an end to short-term and erratic management and financing from the state's side. They say: An increased long-term perspective would give us better conditions to develop healthcare.

This is, therefore, quite obvious. I know that healthcare, at least during the election campaign, has been a prioritized issue for the Christian Democrats. Therefore, I wonder how the member feels that they did not receive greater hearing in the budget negotiations in the government.

(Applause)

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! That SKR is directing criticism at the government because requirements are being placed on what taxpayers' money is used for, I take with very much composure. We have, in fact, tried to pour money into the regions, and it has not had an effect. Not even when we from the state side have entered into agreements with SKR and said that we from the state side are prepared to lay out many billions so that we can manage a transition to good and close care and strengthen primary care, has SKR managed to keep its word. The money has not been made to reach the regions and to the floor within primary care. It is the patients who end up caught in the middle.

We have now chosen to sidestep SKR in several respects, because we cannot trust that it will have an effect when we cooperate with them. Now we have regulation-based state grants. We work directly with the regions, which is a much more efficient way.

I understand that SKR would like to have the right of withdrawal when it comes to the state's grants to the regions and would like to decide what they should be used for. But that is over. It does not work, and therefore we simply choose to have more targeted state grants.

As I said, we never managed to shorten the healthcare queues when the red-greens ruled the country. Now we have targeted state grants to shorten the healthcare queues. The healthcare queues are decreasing. Let us hope that trend continues.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! Let us begin with the reality that people are facing right now. Sweden is not functioning as it should. The healthcare queues are among the longest ever. Elderly care is being pushed to the limit. People are struggling to make ends meet, and children are growing up in a time where insecurity is creeping further down into the younger ages.

This is no coincidence. It is not bad luck. It is the result of three lost years with a government that has chosen completely wrong priorities.

Mr. Speaker! When households were pressured by skyrocketing prices and falling real wages, the Sweden Democrats and the government chose to lower taxes for the richest. When people worried that they would not be able to afford their medicines, the government and the Sweden Democrats made the high-cost protection worse. When young people needed help to go to the dentist, Kristersson and Åkesson made dental care more expensive. And when Sweden's economy needed support to get out of a recession, the government implemented a backward-looking policy that placed us in the swamp of Europe when it comes to growth – at the bottom of the European growth. At the same time, today there are 100,000 more people unemployed compared to when this government took office.

It has been three years since people have had to take the hit while the government and the Sverigedemokraterna have made political priorities that have worsened the problems.

Mr. Speaker! In such a time as we are living in, welfare should be strengthened. The Sweden Democrats and the government have done exactly the opposite. I have said it before here in this chamber and will say it many more times: Welfare is not something on the side. It is the heart of a secure society. It is a part of our total defense, and it is worth prioritizing.

But the government's policy has eroded the welfare year after year. The state grants are not being increased in line with the cost increases. The regions are forced into cuts. Staff are leaving elderly care and healthcare. And the new recruitment to crime continues without the social interventions being strengthened.

To understand the last three years, it is enough to ask a nurse, a nursing assistant, a social worker or a home care worker. It becomes harder to do a good job – even though the needs are increasing.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden needs a different path, and it begins with the financing of the welfare system. We Social Democrats propose that the state grants to municipalities and regions should be adjusted upwards with inflation every year. It is a foundation that provides long-term stability, which stops the cuts and which makes it possible to dare to hire instead of cutting back. It is not a luxury. It is a prerequisite for the welfare system to function.

Mr. Speaker! It is perhaps most clearly seen in healthcare. The government ended the Social Democrats' major staffing initiative. That was a mistake. For healthcare to function, the staff must be given reasonable conditions. We therefore allocate 2.4 billion more than the government on staff, education, and the work environment, and 600 million more for women's health and maternity and obstetric care. We restore what concerns the government's worsening of the high-cost protection for medicines and dental care for young people. No one should have to choose between food and medicine, and no one should be forced to forgo dental care because their wallet is not sufficient.

Mr. Speaker! A welfare worthy of the name must also provide the elderly with the care and dignity they deserve. Elderly care is one of the most pressured parts of Swedish welfare. The staff testify to a work environment that is not sustainable, of too few colleagues and an unreasonable stress. When staffing is too low, it affects both the staff and the elderly. We Social Democrats therefore choose in the budget we are debating today to invest almost 2 billion kronor on increased staffing within elderly care. It is money that means more colleagues, a better work environment and an elderly care where one has time to see the human being.

When others talk about dignity, we create the conditions to actually achieve it.

Mr. Speaker, welfare is also about making Sweden safer for the future. We cannot "police" our way out of everything. We cannot just react when the damage has already been done. We must act early. Therefore, we also propose a social services boost of 1.7 billion, so that social services can be present where children and young people are – early and for real.

I am completely convinced that Swedish politics would need to consolidate forces and join together to ensure that we as a society see the children before the gangs do.

Mr. Speaker! When you add all of this up, the differences between our budget options become very clear.

The government and the Sweden Democrats choose tax cuts for the richest. We Social Democrats choose a strong welfare for ordinary people. SD and the government make it more expensive to be sick – such as those with chronic illnesses, asthma, diabetes, and rheumatism. We make it safer to be human. The government lacks a plan for healthcare, for elderly care, and for security. We go to the election with the aim of presenting a new direction for Sweden with a focus on a healthcare system that works, an elderly care that is dignified, a social service that stops the recruitments, and a welfare that holds the country together.

After three lost years with the government and the Sweden Democrats, Sweden needs a change: a government that prioritizes welfare, not tax cuts for the richest.

I am completely convinced, Mr. Speaker, that Sweden can do better than this and that Sweden deserves better than this.

(Applause)

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Two years ago, the Sweden Democrats' group leader Linda Lindberg stood in the chamber in a debate on exactly this. She asked the Social Democrats why the healthcare queues increased during their time in power. Last year, I stood in the chamber and asked the same question during a debate on the same issue. Both times, the answer was missing.

The reason why I am asking the question again – there will be many chances for the Socialdemokraterna – is that the member from Socialdemokraterna in their statement implied that it is the so-called SD-government's fault that the healthcare queues are long. The term SD-government is, of course, flattering, but this is incorrect in two ways. The healthcare queues increased enormously during the Socialdemokraterna's time in power – they tripled. Now we can finally see a trend break that has been ongoing since the so-called SD-government came to power.

I want to give Fredrik Lundh Sammeli one more chance to answer the question. Why, if the left's policy is now the solution, could one not shorten the healthcare queues during the Socialdemokraternas time in power, but instead succeed in tripling them? That is my question.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! I believe I have said this before: It is quite clear that healthcare has faced challenges over time and will continue to do so in the future. The suit for Swedish healthcare is too tight. We would need to allocate more resources to healthcare.

I think it is strange that one seems to proudly represent a government that has not taken this challenge further. We did what we could during our years – with welfare billions during a pandemic – to strengthen the welfare and manage to take Sweden through the challenges.

Since then, however, we have had a national healthcare crisis because this government, when the cost crisis hit and all regions were brought to their knees, chose not to meet the needs of health and medical care. Instead, they have prioritized recurring tax cuts during the mandate period. We, unlike the government, have chosen to double the money for welfare in order to ensure in that way that we do not get longer queues.

During this mandate period, the queues have continued to grow. If one is critical of the fact that the healthcare queues were long before, why has one then not pursued a policy to shorten the queues? Why has one abdicated from this and prioritized tax cuts that have contributed to the regions being brought to their knees and to the queues during this year being the longest ever?

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the answer. Now there will be many chances to actually answer the question – here is a final one.

I think, first and foremost, it is quite funny that we heard in the report and even now that this is the government's fault. We were told that it is not a coincidence that the queues are among the longest ever. The queues are, however, not the longest ever, because they were longer when we took over after the Social Democrats. It is, however, interesting that it is a coincidence when this government rules, but it was not a coincidence during the Social Democrats.

I am still waiting for an answer. I believe that at this point, many are waiting for an answer along with me. What was it specifically that caused the queues to increase despite the Social Democrats' fantastic policy, and what is it that makes it so that, now under the Tidö government and the Sweden Democrats, it somehow does not count when we break this trend?

If the left's model had been so good and worked, there would have been no queues at all. We heard in a previous speech that we would not have had any queues if the right's model had worked, but the same can be said for the left side.

I think it is clear. We have made a proper change in politics. The Christian Democrats accounted in an exemplary manner for all initiatives and what effects they are expected to give. We now see the beginning of a trend break. Do not shout "hurrah" just yet – but it is clearly a positive indicator. It is at least better than what we could see before under the Social Democrats.

We will certainly have the opportunity to return to the details, but the questions remain. Why did the queues triple under the Socialdemokraterna? What would be different this time if the Socialdemokraterna were to be in power?

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Government pointed out in its own underlying documents this year, 2025, that the queues are the longest ever. It is not possible to back away from that. It does not make the matter any better that we have had long queues previously. The question is what we shall do to break that development.

I am completely convinced that a steering of details towards more performance will not create the long-term perspective that is needed. Therefore, we are allocating more money to personnel initiatives that can become long-lasting.

Why did the queues grow during our years? Well, among other things because we went through several years of pandemic, when everything else had to take a backseat so that we could manage to get through it. This is, however, something we need to continue to work on.

I am surprised that this government will soon have had four years in power and still does not prioritize welfare. Even though the Sverigedemokraterna said they would be the guarantor for welfare, that is not what has been shown budget after budget. The Prime Minister sat in prime TV time and said: We shall deliver a budget that ensures that no people are laid off within healthcare. Then they backed away from that, because it did not become a reality.

I think that Swedish health and medical care has many challenges. One is about creating long-term perspective, and politics needs to be able to do that. We need to prioritize more resources to health and medical care moving forward. Only the development we have – which is fantastic when it comes to new preparations and new methods – means that we will need to spend more money to achieve a well-functioning healthcare system with short queues. That must still be the goal for politics across the board.

(Applause)

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal for a decision in the Social Affairs Committee's report number 1, expenditure area 9 Health care, medical care and social care.

I see this expenditure area as further evidence that the Tidö cooperation is actually working. There is much positive that I and my colleagues want to highlight here today, but I see a particular need to focus on our elderly and on all the fantastic policy that we are highlighting for them. This policy is a thank you to those who have built Sweden and hopefully a hope for all those who will have the privilege of growing old right here in Sweden.

First and foremost, it is about the right to make oneself understood and actually feel at home. I will say something about language requirements. What perhaps harms healthcare more than anything else is to have staff who do not meet the patient's needs. This often happens due to language deficiencies. When a person is not understood, receives the wrong amount of medication or the wrong food, or when the staff cannot report to the ambulance – as I have heard in the news – there are serious problems that need to be addressed. Now, the Sverigedemokraterna can proudly say that we are finally on the right track to address this.

Thanks to the Sweden Democrats and the Tidö government, the language requirements are now becoming a reality within elderly care. It is something that raises the quality and makes elderly care more equal across the country. We have, therefore, had a completely unacceptable situation where our elderly have not been able to make themselves understood in Swedish in their own country, Sweden, and where the staff, for exactly the same reason, have had a worse working environment and an uneven distribution of work. Now we can finally do something about it.

The Social Services Act is being amended so that those who work in elderly care will need to have a relevant language level, in this case, CEFR B2. For those who did not know, CEFR stands for Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, and B2 is a fairly high level. This means that the person in question should be able to speak more or less fluently, that is, be independent in the language and be able to reason and reflect in Swedish. It is absolutely necessary.

We Sweden Democrats will, of course, continue to push for these demands and for them to be implemented even more strictly, but this is in any case a long-awaited first step on the way. It can be seen as part of the larger investment in elderly care, where we are now increasing the appropriation for the elderly care boost to 1.8 billion kronor per year during the next two years.

This combined with the long-awaited return migration policy means that we can give our elderly a dignified and secure existence within elderly care. Our elderly have for all too long been subjects of the failed Social Democratic integration experiment, and I can state with pleasure that that time is now finally over, Mr. Speaker.

(Applause)

Mr. Speaker! All of us who work within the Committee on Social Affairs have unfortunately been reached by news that our elderly are being subjected to crimes. It concerns everything from the "thinkable," such as thefts, to the completely unthinkable: violence and even sexual crimes against our elderly. Here I want to be clear: No society that tolerates this is worthy of being called a welfare state. It will therefore not be tolerated, but it will be stopped.

In this matter, I am convinced that we are all in complete agreement here, which is reassuring. I may not say what I would like to do with these criminals, but I can at least say that I am very grateful for the increased penalties that the Justice Committee is introducing.

Several municipalities have noted that the law is not sufficiently clear regarding background checks. From March 1, 2026, the municipalities will therefore have a clear legal basis to carry out background checks of those who are to work with our elderly, and this applies to both the criminal record register and the suspicion register.

To give an idea of what effect this could have, we can look at an example municipality. In Östhammar municipality alone, five people were denied jobs within home care services based on just background checks. This concerned only within home care in a municipality with just over 20,000 inhabitants, so one can understand how much unsuitable staff and potential crimes against the elderly can be avoided when this is implemented nationally.

The Sweden Democrats naturally want to make these controls mandatory, but in that specific question, we are still awaiting a current investigation. We will therefore likely have reason to return to this.

Mr. Speaker! A good political Christmas present for our elderly, which we no longer need to wait for, is the largest dental care reform in over 20 years. It concerns a new high-cost protection similar to that for other healthcare, which will make it significantly cheaper to go to the dentist for those who are 67 or older.

This is, of course, also one of the Sweden Democrats' core issues, so we are extra proud that this is now also becoming a reality. Last week we had a long debate about the details surrounding this, and we may have reason to return to it. I can, however, state that the Sweden Democrats clearly want to go even further in the future, but for us, this is a first realistic and fair step on the way toward completing this project.

It is the elderly who have built up our welfare system, and it is the elderly who today have the greatest needs within dental care. Therefore, this reform hits the mark perfectly. In short, Sweden's elderly receive a 90 percent discount on dental care. The price is regulated and predictable, and the same conditions apply regardless of whether you go to the public dental clinic or to a private clinic. It is very good.

Mr. Speaker! One cannot speak about this expenditure area without mentioning the investments being made to combat the healthcare queues. We are injecting an additional 1 billion kronor, with new performance requirements, to ramp up the work of shortening the healthcare queues.

It will not be like it was before, when money was scattered across the regions. Someone might remember last year's debate and that I then mentioned Region Skåne among many others that had engaged in regional waste of tax money. It is precisely priorities, like Skåne's cloned spruce for 8 million kronor, that perhaps must end now. That spruce also seems to have withered, which I think is quite symbolic for that kind of politics.

During this parliamentary term, we are allocating a total of approximately 18 billion kronor to health and medical care to shorten the care queues. This will amount to a total of 6.6 billion kronor in specifically performance-based funds to the regions in 2026. This, together with a national digital infrastructure, is absolutely crucial for shortening waiting times and achieving transparency and more equal care throughout the country.

The Sweden Democrats have also been proactive in the issue of national healthcare mediation, and now the eHealth Agency has developed a first version of a digital tool that healthcare mediators can use to search for a possible healthcare provider based on the patient's needs. This will make it easier to find a healthcare provider who can more quickly perform the care that a waiting patient needs and thereby fulfill the healthcare guarantee. We will, of course, also allocate funds for this.

I can also mention that the Minister for Health and Social Affairs will soon hold a press conference where new healthcare areas will be presented where targeted interventions are made to shorten the healthcare queues. As I mentioned earlier, we are already seeing a positive trend now. It is not true that the healthcare queues are longer than they have ever been. I do not know which statistics the left side is basing this on, but they may be somewhat outdated. My statistics are from November, and in those, the trend break is clearly visible.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I want to return to elderly care and perhaps primarily to the view on old age. People often speak of the autumn of life, which is an expression that suggests cold and that one is approaching some kind of end. I believe it is time to take all the important steps that need to be taken so that we can begin to speak of the spring of life – a time in life to look forward to and where one can feel secure that the entire society is on one's side. It is the Sweden Democrats' vision, and it is what we are now succeeding in achieving step by step.

I look forward to the upcoming exchanges of remarks.

(Applause)

In this speech, Jonas Andersson, Carita Boulwén, Chris Dahlqvist and Mona Olin (all SD) concurred.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! The member and I have different starting points, one could say – you say that everything is the immigrants' fault, Leonid Yurkovskiy, and we are talking about all people's equal value. So it is.

I intend to speak a little about healthcare instead of elderly care. It concerns the performance-based funds that you include in the budget and really rave about.

The Chair of the Swedish Medical Association, Catharina Ihre Lundgren, says as follows: ”Care queues are not shortened through short-term performance requirements. To create a long-term sustainable healthcare with enough care beds, we must invest in competence supply and an expanded primary care.” We are not quite there yet, Mr. Speaker.

Vårdförbundet, also part of the large collective of healthcare workers, says the following: "Had performance-based funds worked, we would not have any healthcare queues. Shortening the queues must never occur at the expense of the work environment, quality, or patient safety. Long-term investments in staff and the conditions for healthcare were needed – that is the only thing that truly shortens the healthcare queues." This is said by Sineva Ribeiro, chairperson of Vårdförbundet.

She further says that the government should instead have invested to secure healthcare. ”Our members uphold the care every day – but they cannot do it without resources and political accountability.”

Therefore, I ask the member: Why are performance-based funds so good? Are Svenska Läkaresällskapet and Vårdförbundet wrong?

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Karin Rågsjö for the question. I will divide it a little bit.

Let me first handle the part concerning performance-based funds. The general funds that were dealt with previously are a well-tried and failed strategy; we have seen it time and again. I do not know if I will need to account for all the waste of tax money that the regions engage in once again, but I may possibly do so in the next round here.

Regarding the second part of the question, which concerns staffing, there is simply no contradiction between what the member says and what the government is doing. There is a national competence supply plan. Billions have been invested in this already in previous years – so it is not just happening now. Specific investments of hundreds of millions have even been made to expand nursing programs and so on. This, combined with the work-stimulating political measures being taken by the government, leads to very good conditions for staffing.

I also, of course, want to ask the member what she meant by that the Sweden Democrats would say that everything is the immigrants' fault. I would be grateful for a concretization there.

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! In every debate and during every minute that the Sweden Democrats stand here in front, they immediately associate [something] with immigrants in one way or another. Blame them! Forgive me for speaking English, but that is how the Sweden Democrats in this SD-dependent government relate to this world. I say that it is SD-dependent, because if SD pulls out, the government collapses like a small house of cards.

Let me go back to the politics in another way. Vårdförbundet and Läkarförbundet have looked at this budget. Läkarförbundet says that there is a reduction of nearly 2 billion during 2026 compared to 2025. Is Läkarförbundet wrong?

Even if one counts with the government's figures, 3.5 billion appears insufficient, argues Svenska Läkaresällskapet, especially considering that healthcare is one of the voters' most important issues. They would, among other things, like to see more invested in primary care, as it is crucial. Very many in the large healthcare collective consider primary care to be the major problem.

I wonder, Mr. Speaker, what is the Sweden Democrats' signal to all healthcare workers out there in the regions who wonder where the state's responsibility has gone. What is SD's role in this other than to throw out as many as possible with an immigrant background within healthcare?

(Applause)

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

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

The message is clear and distinct: Those who work in healthcare can now look forward to the regions prioritizing healthcare, as the state grants are performance-based. They can be sure that these grants will not be wasted but will instead go to what they are actually intended for.

I move on to the issue of immigration. There is a bit of a difference between saying that everything is the immigrants' fault and stating facts regarding how immigration has affected different parts of society.

This will be a rhetorical question, but Karin Rågsjö may be able to return to it in her speech. To take a concrete example: Does Karin Rågsjö mean that it is not a problem if we have municipalities where a majority of the employees do not have Swedish as their mother tongue and as a result cannot communicate with the elderly? Does Karin Rågsjö mean that it is not a problem that we have had a disproportionately large proportion of immigrants who are in need of the welfare system but cannot contribute anything to it?

There is no doubt that all immigrants who contribute to the welfare system should receive a big thank you, but one can criticize the pursued migration policy and that it has been dysfunctional at all levels of society without pointing out immigrants themselves as a problem. It is actually the politicians who have driven this who have been a problem.

Some parties have understood these problems, have changed and done the right thing. On the left side, this has not been done.

(Applause)

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! During the election campaign, the Sweden Democrats spoke very much about the Swedish countryside and what investments would be made to make it lively, accessible, and equal. After the election, it boiled down to lowering the price of petrol and diesel – after that, the Sweden Democrat countryside policy ended.

Now, one has sat and steered this ship from the stern for three years, but still, welfare has not at any time been prioritized to be made accessible and equal throughout the entire country.

Last week, Mr. Speaker, we debated Swedish dental care and the largest healthcare investment during this parliamentary term with a new high-cost protection for the elderly. There was a proposal to make dental care more geographically equal by adding municipality-type supplements to our rural municipalities, but the government chose to opt out of this. It has been pushed into the future – maybe it will come, maybe it won't.

We can see that the accessibility in Swedish healthcare differs significantly between urban areas and the countryside. The access to a fixed doctor contact is 20 percent if you live in the Swedish countryside, while it is over 30 percent if you live in one of the metropolitan areas. This is not reasonable.

There has been opportunity upon opportunity for the Sweden Democrats to ensure that we get an equal welfare throughout Sweden with reasonable investments, but that has not been achieved. My impression is that one has not even had the ambition to succeed with that.

My question, Mr. Speaker, is: How is it that the Sweden Democrats have not been able to prioritize equal healthcare throughout the entire country?

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

I will let the voters review whether the Sweden Democrats and the government are doing enough for the countryside. They seem to be quite clear that they appreciate what we do; the opinion polls and the election result say that, among other things. I do not think that one should in any way underestimate what we have done for gasoline and diesel and for costs in society otherwise, including through tax cuts. There are a number of different things outside of just this expenditure area that help the countryside; it is very clearly noticeable.

With that said, some of the things the member says are completely correct, for example the one about the municipality type supplement. It is something that we from the Sweden Democrats are fundamentally positive about. As I have understood it, there were legal uncertainties that needed to be addressed, which meant that one could not proceed with this immediately. I can at least give the clear message that the Sweden Democrats are in favor of this and will continue to push for it.

It is also correct that there is a difference between city and country. This is a huge problem. I can only regret that we are still only two parties in Sweden that see the need to nationalize healthcare and give the state the ownership to be able to combat inequality. It feels quite unrealistic to expect every municipality and region, with varying resources, varying politicians, and varying quality of these, to succeed in delivering equal healthcare across the entire country. We have now also tested this system under different governments, but the problems seem to persist. Even the Center Party has had the opportunity to have influence here.

I note that we see these problems. We are already driving some of these issues. In some other issues, we need to get more support in the Riksdag.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I can state that rural policy is about priorities – about choosing to prioritize or not to prioritize. Regarding the dental care issue, the government could have prioritized clarifying that there was no conflict with the EU's state aid rules before the bill was submitted to the Riksdag, but they did not prioritize performing the legal analysis. Therefore, they postponed this until the future, and it is extremely regrettable.

After that, the answer from the Sweden Democrats was that a nationalization of healthcare would save Sweden's rural areas. No one should make me believe that a healthcare organization, after a gigantic reorganization chaos, governed by a director-general in Stockholm, will lead to the Swedish healthcare functioning out in the capillaries of our rural areas. On the contrary, one can probably expect that the closures of Swedish hospitals will go like a shockwave through the country after the bureaucrats in Stockholm have seized hold of what is a rational and efficient Swedish hospital. That is the Sweden Democrat rural policy. It will not help the rural areas, but it will ruin the rural areas.

What is needed is to enable healthcare to be available everywhere. Centerpartiet therefore presents a proposal that we call rural doctors. In practice, general practitioners shall be given the opportunity to operate small doctor-led healthcare units out into the capillaries to fill the gaps in rural areas where health centers are lacking.

Everyone in the whole country should have the right to accessible and equal care. The Sweden Democrats have not succeeded with this during their three years in power – and we must hope that there will not be more.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I wish that the Centre Party had the same critical view on centralization and supranationality when it comes to the European Union. Then, at least, one would have been consistent. But since one is not, it becomes a bit difficult to take this criticism seriously.

Sweden is a relatively small, albeit elongated country with about 10 million inhabitants. This corresponds to a medium-sized Asian city. To then divide the organization into 21 different healthcare systems with their own budgets, priorities, waiting times, and medical record systems results in unequal care. With 10 million people, it is not possible to justify such a fragmented healthcare structure.

There are clear advantages to not doing what Sweden has done and failed at for all these years. The distribution of resources becomes significantly better if we can manage it at a national level. It is actually the only way I see that one can achieve equal healthcare across the entire country.

I still have not received any concrete proposal from the Center Party regarding the adjustment of the equality parameter. How are common medical record systems and digital systems to be solved without a nationalization? This also concerns double work and administration – and ultimately also long-term planning, which is now also completely fragmented.

For us, it is clear that there are great advantages that strongly outweigh that one official or another in Stockholm gets to work a little overtime.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! Reality is the proof that the Tidö cooperation works. So, approximately, the member began their speech. Yes, I thank you, I do. The reality is that the Sweden Democrats' and the government's deterioration of the high-cost protection makes it more expensive to be sick in Sweden. It is people with chronic diseases and disabilities and elderly people with multiple illnesses and great care needs who take the hit. The Sweden Democrats claim to stand on the side of ordinary people but have contributed to making this deterioration possible.

I believe that the SD member—I mean, I know that even before the deterioration of the high-cost protection, there were people who were forced to forgo their medicines because it was too expensive, and now the Sweden Democrats and the government have raised the costs even further. It is not security, but a betrayal of those who have the greatest need.

We Social Democrats are putting a lot of money in our budget to reverse this deterioration, because we think that this is a poor proposal that hits those who have it the toughest the hardest.

But the Sweden Democrats want to make it more expensive. My question is therefore: How do you explain that people who are ill should pay more for their medicine while at the same time you push through large tax cuts for the very richest in our society?

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I share the frustration to some extent, but what the member omits is the background of increased prices. It is about market forces that neither the Social Democrats nor the government can control. Over ten years, the prices of pharmaceuticals have increased by approximately 30 percent, and they are expected to increase even more. This is an enormous expense for all taxpayers. It is reasonable that the state continues to bear the largest share of the cost, but the state's cost is also increasing in view of the price increase that has occurred. That this should not in any way be reflected for the patients is unrealistic, especially in the long run if we want to continue to have a functioning system.

The result is, however, not at all as Fredrik Lundh Sammeli describes, i.e., that those who are most ill cannot afford it. Those who are most ill reach the high-cost protection and thus have their medicines financed. Instead, it is possibly those who are less ill or ill sometimes who have to pay more. But the state still covers the largest part of the cost, and so it shall continue to be. But that market prices can go up by any amount without it affecting patients in Sweden at all is not sustainable in the long run.

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Mr. Speaker! One cannot, as a party, say that one stands on the side of ordinary people and at the same time, reform after reform and priority after priority, make things worse for ordinary people. This is a clear example. You have agreed to worsen the high-cost protection, which is truly intended so that those with the toughest circumstances should have the same access to medicine as everyone else.

It is clear that the costs for medicine are increasing exponentially, and that needs to be managed. But the government has not done that. You have not done any work to tame the market and increase coordination to press down the costs. Instead, the Sverigedemokraterna have proposed a worsening of the high-cost protection which unilaterally hits those who have it toughest. It hits pensioners, the multi-morbid, and those with chronic conditions. The member says that these are not affected, but they are because they have to pay more before the high-cost protection kicks in. Already now, reports are coming in that people are refraining from their medicines to an even greater extent.

The high-cost protection is a safety net reform, and the Sweden Democrats have made it weaker. For me, it is obvious that no one should have to divide their medication or refrain from medication to make the finances work. My question is: Where is the limit for the Sweden Democrats? How sick must one be for you not to increase the costs for one's medicine?

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

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

There is a fundamental problem in our exchange of remarks, and it is that the Social Democrats ignore everything I have said and everything the Christian Democrats have said, probably even all the interpellation debates and all the press conferences where we have presented fantastic welfare reforms for everyone in Sweden. As an opposition party, one can obviously have views on priorities; there is nothing strange about that. But it is very strange to say that we are making deteriorations point by point.

Back to the high-cost protection for pharmaceuticals, where one can still say that the deterioration is a consequence of market prices. What we are doing is to secure the system's long-term sustainability. If perhaps the largest cost in the entire expenditure area grows by any amount for the state, the system will not be sustainable. Our measure, in combination with pharmaceuticals that are becoming better and better so that one does not need as much medication to cure diseases, still provides an acceptable development.

With this said, we do not ignore market developments, and here the EU is actually not completely worthless. The Sweden Democrats are for increased pharmaceutical production in Europe so that one obtains increased control over production and supply. This shall be combined with issues concerning patents, generics, etcetera.

All of this taken together is a step in the right direction regarding pharmaceuticals.

Again: the Sweden Democrats are for the system remaining because it is important, and we are now ensuring that it can remain for a long time to come.

(Applause)

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! When I receive help and care from my assistants, it is clear that it is an advantage if we can understand each other, but most of all, I want someone who is there. Many times, that is the choice that many within elderly care face all around Sweden.

In the report I am holding, it states that among the people who have come to Sweden during the last ten years, there are nearly 4,000 doctors, 2,000 nurses, and more than 33,000 nursing assistants and healthcare assistants working in Swedish municipalities and regions.

I have traveled around and seen that it is not only I who has lost an assistant due to the abolition of the residence permit for work. In Jörn and Norsjö, I met families facing deportation. Entire regions are incredibly upset and worried because they are losing invaluable employees – people who are there to take care of their elderly. When they disappear, there is no alternative. In Harads, 25 percent of the elderly care staff have been deported, and they are in a desperate situation.

My question to the member, who desires a spring of aging, is naturally: Do you see the problem that exists all around Sweden when thousands who work in healthcare are now being deported?

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for a very relevant question.

That statistic is not correct, judging by everything. In 2023, which is the latest year I could find, 249 work permits were granted concerning all forms of healthcare personnel – everything from dental hygienists to nursing assistants and doctors. That corresponds to barely 1 percent of the labor migration. This should be put into relation to Socialstyrelsen's figures: 44,000 employed doctors, 128,000 nurses and at least 180,000 qualified nursing assistants. It therefore concerns a very small part of the total workforce.

One must remember that track-switching is not just a convenient function to strengthen the workforce in Sweden, but it has fundamentally been a dysfunctional system. It has not only contributed to the fact that certain people – a small proportion, judging by everything – may now work within healthcare and are affected by this, but it has also led to an enormous proportion of people burdening our welfare system. It is part of the exclusion that is created in Sweden and all other problems linked to integration that are now generally recognized within Swedish politics.

The question one can ask oneself as an MP for the Green Party is how we managed healthcare in the 50s and 60s. How did all countries manage their healthcare and assistance without mass immigration? We have very many who educate themselves within the healthcare professions, but it is not enough of them who want to work with patients. It is that question that needs to be solved. Dysfunctional shift-replacement systems are not needed.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I hope that the Sverigedemokraterna member does not hope and wish that we should go back to the care we had in the 40s, 50s, and 60s.

Something that is typical when one plays with numbers and looks at small details and that one perhaps forgets, but which I am aware of because I have personal assistants from all over the world working for me, is that this concerns, for example, people who have come here as asylum seekers from the war in Syria, who have temporary residence permits and who work in the meantime because they do not want to live on benefits.

They are performing an invaluable work, but what happens now? There is a great risk that they will not be granted an extended residence permit. This applies to 18-year-olds who, when they turn 18, suddenly, because the parents only have temporary residence permits, must have their own grounds to receive a permit. It is almost impossible for an 18-year-old to get a job that provides an income of 30,000 kronor per month.

We are talking about many different cases. It does not only concern those who have work permits, but it is a reality that exists. I understand that the Sweden Democrats do not want to see it, but there is data and figures. I have been out and visited these people – Swedish residents who were born here and who have lived here for generations. It is pure Swedes in Norsjö, Malå, Vindeln, Harads and Jokkmokk who are desperate because they lack people who can take care of them.

My question remains: Does the member see this problem, and what does one intend to do to ensure that we retain the healthcare personnel that we need in Sweden?

(Applause)

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Mr. Speaker! What I still hear from Miljöpartiet is a defense of "track-switching" as a concept. What is wanted then is to have a welfare state that is fundamentally built on illegitimate immigration. These are people who have come to the country and received a "no" regarding the grounds on which they came here. Then they stay anyway by changing the reason why they came to Sweden.

I do not deny that some of them have received important jobs. That is a direct answer to the question. There are cases where problems will now arise. But fundamentally, it is about having built up parts of the welfare state on illegitimate immigration, not about us now addressing the problems that the illegitimate immigration has created. Then one must also include all other parts of society where this also plays a role, and one must also include the total cost.

The Leader of the Opposition talks about getting bogged down in details. Yes, in the grand scheme of things, this becomes a small detail when it comes to immigration, but one can count all the costs that immigration has entailed in everything from crime policy to welfare crime and crime-free welfare burden. If we had taken a fraction of those resources to ensure that the supply of skills is functioning, we would not have the problem we have today.

(Applause)

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Mr. Speaker! Next year is the election. It is then that we shall choose the direction for Sweden. We do not want it to continue to go downhill for very many while it becomes a feast for those who are already very rich.

We have 9 percent unemployment, and youth unemployment stands at 24 percent. We are soon topping the EU league. 700,000 poor – that is the current situation in Sweden right now. When inequality increases, school results, life expectancy, social mobility, mental illness, drug use, and crime tend to develop negatively. But you in the government do not care. You have only increased the pace towards a more unequal society, even health-wise.

I will give an example. On July 1, 2025, the high-cost protection for pharmaceuticals was changed so that patients now pay a higher co-payment. The increase occurs at a time when very many Swedish households are extremely pressured by the economic crisis they are still living in. The government refuses to handle it in any other way than by worsening the inequalities in society.

The poorest parts of the population, which have grown exponentially, shall now also have to pay for their medicines, a little more so. The Sverigedemokraterna and the government's policy makes people even poorer through austerity measures of the social assistance and scaled-back cash benefits. They shall now not have the means to buy their own medicines. This is fundamentally due to the government prioritizing lowering the income tax by over 50 billion kronor during this mandate period.

The shrimp crackers are spinning around at the Government Offices, like SD rats in the background. The Left Party's proposal is to withdraw the increase of the high-cost protection for medicines. Just over 2 billion kronor go to that.

Mr. Speaker! The Left is entering with 8 billion more in state grants than the government, 50 percent to the regions. It is important that one can shoulder the burden in healthcare, both for the patients and for the staff, because for four years we have heard that everything is the regions' fault. That is what this government says. Own responsibility is not on the map. It is blown away. Then it requires political will to cover for rising wages and demographic changes. We want to see powerfully increased and indexed state grants based on the welfare's real costs.

The National Board of Health and Welfare established in 2025 that there is a shortage of care beds in all regions except three. Within intensive care, it remains very difficult. 10 percent more beds are needed. In order to continue directing the state support to healthcare where the needs are greatest, Vänsterpartiet proposes an extension of the sector grant to health and medical care. We want to provide 5 billion kronor for 2026 and continue the extension with 5 billion also for 2027 and 2028.

Mr. Speaker! We have talked about primary care. We all love the concept of local care. But there is a lack of a clear direction for local care. It is something that everyone wants, but it is far away. Primary care must be reinforced. Accessibility – that we can call the health and medical services, our health center, in the morning and get an appointment – must become better.

The target value for how many inhabitants a doctor should be responsible for within primary care is 1,100. Läkarförbundet looked at this just recently, and it turned out to be an average of 1,750 inhabitants per doctor. It is something that is not working as it should. The local care feels, as said, far away.

It is also the case that healthcare will always be more costly in rural areas and, for example, on Gotland. Therefore, we have included a general state grant of 1 billion to cover for that if possible – a rural supplement.

The Government and SD lowered the age limit for free dental care from 23 to 19 years and abolished the double dental care allowance for persons between 23 and 29 years. We discussed that question last week.

Now it turns out that 60 percent fewer in this group go to the region's dentists. When the issue was discussed in Godmorgon världen, all the editorialists from right to left who sit in that panel agreed that it is capital destruction to do this. Please listen to that segment!

The Left Party's proposal is that dental care should be equated with healthcare. In this budget, we are allocating 1 billion kronor more than the government to restore dental care costs for young people. We will also ensure that there is a real dental care reform.

In healthcare in Stockholm, 25 percent of all employees have an immigrant background. In healthcare and elderly care nationally, 15 percent are immigrants. They are indispensable for healthcare and also for elderly care. But you are sending them out as well.

It is utterly deplorable that the Tidö parties' signal policy is now hitting with full force against people who work within Swedish healthcare. People who contribute, who pay taxes, who learn Swedish and who were called heroes during the pandemic are being thrown out of the country, and then the possibility to apply for a work permit through track switching without transitional rules has been removed. For example, in Stockholm, people are now in a situation where people they work with, their colleagues, are going to leave the country. It is a rather dark contemporary time we live in.

In this racist marinade, nothing good can grow – not within healthcare, not within elderly care, and not at all socially. We must instead invest in things that make people feel trust and hope. It must surely be our mission, one could think.

During the years 2022–2024, the Work Environment Authority inspected workplaces within healthcare. 73 percent were required to take measures. In the care departments of acute hospitals, the deficiencies were huge – 80 percent did not meet the requirements of the Work Environment Act. In primary care, the corresponding figure was 69 percent.

What was observed? Yes, the most pervasive deficiency concerned unhealthy workload for the healthcare collective, an imbalance between demands and resources, which has existed for a long time in healthcare. The healthcare crisis is about the bleeding that has occurred for a long time, not only during the Tidö Government but also earlier.

We must do something aimed at strengthening the staff's conditions, because it is about a shortage of care beds. It is about the regions not succeeding in solving the staffing crisis. Higher wages, more employees, and better working hours are required, for example, reduced working hours for those who work at night. It is needed that the state takes responsibility for education within all healthcare professions. National economic steering within healthcare is required. Regulation of the entire healthcare market is needed so that, for example, the online doctors cannot profit at the region's expense. We must also fight the mafia within welfare, that is to say those who today profit within elderly care, within LSS housing, you name it, everywhere.

The staff within the healthcare system must see that the investments being made are not short-term but long-term. There must be long-term planning for the entire healthcare system. A national plan is needed, and an analysis of the number of care beds required and what should be done about this in the long term. We are not talking about tomorrow, next year, or in four years, but about a longer plan where one knows what to do in the long term.

A long-term national economic plan is also needed that is responsible for basic education, further education, and continuing education for healthcare personnel, for example, that nurses are offered the opportunity for paid specialist training on equal terms throughout Sweden.

A broader healthcare preparedness is needed. We cannot sit and patch and repair, but we must have a better view of this moving forward and do something for real.

(Applause)

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Mr. Speaker! Expenditure area 9, which we are debating here today, is a large and important part of the state budget. It is expenditures for what I would like to say makes Sweden just Sweden: healthcare and social care.

Let me begin with health and medical care. Of course, much is working very well within Swedish health and medical care; it may be worth reminding. Few countries invest as much tax money in care as Sweden does. We have well-educated staff who do a fantastic job every day. We have modern technology and world-class medical results. We Swedes live longer and healthier lives than ever before. This, of course, we shall safeguard and be proud of.

At the same time, Mr. Speaker, all too many experience that it is difficult to get the help they need when they need it. The queues are too long and the regional differences too great. Women's health has long been sidelined, and more and more young people are suffering mentally.

It is unreasonable to have to wait for months for care. It is unreasonable to be sent around between healthcare providers without anyone taking overall responsibility. We know that our shared resources can be used more smartly. It is about taking responsibility but also about consideration.

I am thinking about people I have met through the years.

I am thinking of Karin, who had pain in her hip. She had waited for her operation for over seven months. She has worked her whole life, paid tax and done right by others. When she needed the care, the queue was too long.

I am thinking of Abdi, 14 years old. He is suffering mentally. The anxiety keeps him awake at night, and he is still waiting to meet BUP in Stockholm. For him, every day feels like an eternity.

And I am thinking of my friend Malin, who for years has fought against the pain. The average is probably 8 or 9 years, but for her it took 13 years to get the diagnosis of endometriosis – 13 years when no one took her seriously and the doctors refused to listen. Today she fights so that more young girls will receive care in time.

These are all the people who deserve better, and there are significantly more of them out in the country.

This budget is a budget for hard-working people. You who contribute and do the right thing should know that we safeguard your tax money. The Moderates are the primary guarantor that the money will benefit the patients.

We also deliver concrete reforms.

Firstly, we are intensifying the work to shorten the healthcare queues.

The previous government left behind record-long healthcare queues. They doubled during their eight years. In addition to supporting the welfare state through the cost crisis that followed the high inflation, we have now begun the work of shortening the queues, and we now see a small but hopeful result in the measurements.

There are of course exceptions, Mr. Speaker. In Uppsala, the left-wing government seems to prefer to put patients in a queue rather than take advantage of the state grants that the government offers for hip replacements and hernia operations. This can be read about in the newspapers.

In many regions, however, we see how targeted state grants make a difference, and we are therefore investing an additional 1 billion kronor to clear the queues here and now. This means more operations of hip prostheses, cataracts and anterior cruciate ligament tears. We have also established a national coordinator to shorten the queues and take overall responsibility, and we are ramping up the work with a new national healthcare brokerage by increasing the incentives for the regions to join the healthcare search system. We want to give you as a patient the right to seek care in another region if it is faster there – a reform with great potential to ensure that you receive care where it is available and when you need it.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we see to it that more people prioritize the health of women and girls and take their issues most seriously.

Malin is not alone. Endometriosis affects up to one in ten women. Women with heart attacks still receive incorrect diagnoses because the research has not been adapted to women's symptoms. It is not only unfair; it is also life-threatening.

We ensure that women's health receives the attention it deserves. We are investing 1 billion kronor in 2026 and an additional 1 billion in 2027 to strengthen care for girls' and women's health. In total, we have spent almost 6 billion on this important area during the parliamentary term, which is more than any previous government has spent. Among other things, investments against endometriosis and menopausal issues are included. We are investing in strengthened maternity care with midwife teams. The entire care chain shall be connected from maternal care to aftercare. The implementation of the national maternity plan is also being prepared.

We have given Socialstyrelsen a long-term mandate to nationally coordinate this work. For our part, this is not a temporary initiative that we boast about when we are in opposition but never implement in a majority. This is what we do when we govern – a systematic change in how Swedish healthcare views women's health.

Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, we face the mental ill-health among young and adults with force.

Under the previous government, the queues to BUP tripled. We have presented a long-term national strategy for mental health and suicide prevention, the first of its kind, which 28 agencies shall work with. We are investing 1 billion kronor, the BUP billion, to shorten the queues to child and adolescent psychiatry.

In moderately-ruled Skåne, the queues are short, and in social democratically-ruled Stockholm, the queues are long. Never before have so many children waited for a first visit as right now in Stockholm. It is 8 percent who have received a first visit, to compare with Skåne, where it normally fluctuates between 60 and 70 percent.

Just for 2026, a total of 5.4 billion is being invested in the work within the area. I must say it again: Never before has any government been anywhere near investing as much on mental health and psychiatry as the Moderate-led government is doing right now.

We are also implementing some systemic changes. We are removing confidentiality barriers so that school, social services, and BUP can cooperate regarding the child. We are strengthening school health. We are introducing home visit programs early through child healthcare. We know that it is better to prevent than to repair.

Mr. Speaker! I see that I will exceed my registered speaking time. This is my first debate in this committee on this budget area, so I hope for indulgence.

For the fourth, we strengthen children's rights and the preventive work.

Too many children in our country live in vulnerability – children who grow up in homes with violence, substance abuse or crime, children who risk being placed or are already placed outside of their families.

The Government proposes in the budget for 2026 a package of almost 1 billion kronor to prevent children and young people from suffering harm or being drawn into gangs. We are expanding and developing family centers, especially in vulnerable areas, so that families with children can receive support from child healthcare, open preschool, and social services under the same roof at an early stage.

We are strengthening the school social teams. We know that a high school qualification is the best safeguard against crime and exclusion.

At the same time, we are giving the social services, in addition to the new Social Services Act which is intended to be preventive, more tools when consent is lacking so that one can begin working with a family earlier, before or perhaps instead of a child needing to be taken into care.

For the children and young people who have been drawn into gang crime, we are strengthening the support so that those who want to leave this crime receive early, coordinated interventions from social services and the police in order to actually be able to free themselves. Every child deserves a secure upbringing, Mr. Speaker.

I am leafing through my papers to shorten my speech. As you can see, these are issues that are very close to my heart.

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates are implementing important initiatives and historical reforms that truly move Swedish healthcare and social care forward. A vote for the Moderates is a vote for a healthcare system that functions better, a social service that prevents and supports, and an elderly care that is dignified.

I vote in favor of the committee's budget proposal.

(Applause)

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Member Noria Manouchi to one of the exchanges that we traditionally have in the Social Affairs Committee.

Among the Moderaternas areas of responsibility during this mandate period is the policy on functional impairments. The Minister for Social Services we have, Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, is a Moderate by party affiliation. Accordingly, it can be assumed that it has also been a prioritized area for the Moderaterna during the mandate period.

However, that has not been seen in the results regarding the disability policy. If one were to speak of a lost parliamentary term, I would say it is in that area – an area where investigation has been piled upon investigation but where the results have remained out.

We have an investigation into converting the responsibility for personal assistance to a state primary responsibility. Nothing has happened there. The prerequisite for doing that is an investigation on needs assessments. It has not even been appointed yet. There is an investigation on how the transport service can be improved. It has not led to any changes from the government. There is an investigation on escort services which shows that new legislation needs to be created. In that case, we in the majority have become so upset that we have even given the government a notice, but nothing has happened.

The last thing that should be investigated but has not been investigated is an indexing of the standard rate within personal assistance. My question to the member is: When will the indexing of the standard rate for personal assistance occur?

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the questions.

It is true that this policy area has not been reformed for a long time and that much needs to be done. We share that opinion. Therefore, the government has commissioned a number of inquiries, just as the member describes from the rostrum.

If an investigation does not reach the quality level that the government expects or does not produce satisfactory material, questions can take longer to work on. It is important for us that when we present reforms, propositions and various proposals that are to improve an operation, they shall be well-thought-out and thoroughly worked out, not rushed.

Regarding when indexing shall take place, I would like to present an argument to the member regarding the problems we have in the area with criminal actors exploiting the welfare system. It is clear that there is an ambition to ensure that money arrives and that an indexing shall take place. This has been pointed out by many on several occasions. But we also cannot have a system that implies that money does not reach those in need but is embezzled by criminal actors. That type of proposal does not provide the good effects we want them to have in these areas.

It is my hope that we can do this during this parliamentary term – or at least during the next. But we also need to address a good deal of the problems that exist in the area.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Now I believe the member is mixing up different things a bit. We all in the chamber agree that we should have a functioning system for oversight within personal assistance. When it comes to the connection to the calculation of the flat-rate for personal assistance, the risk instead is that a too low calculation, which among others Vårdföretagarna has emphasized several times, will lead to the serious companies being driven out of the industry. What remains may be criminal actors or those who have a bad intention in the activities they are to conduct.

My question concerns when an indexing will occur. At the press conference held in connection with the presentation of the previous budget, it was stated that an indexing would be investigated for implementation in 2026. When this budget then approached, it was discovered that there was no completed investigation. Instead, the PowerPoint presentation at that time was changed, and it was stated that an investigation would take place but that it was not known when it would occur.

The pressure has been strong from the disability rights movement. I have noted that members from Kristdemokraterna, Liberalerna, and Sverigedemokraterna have said that they want to see an indexing presented in connection with the spring budget. The only party that has not responded is the party that holds the responsibility via the ministerial post for disability policy.

Will the other parties in the Tidö cooperation get their way, that is to say, will there be a presentation of an indexation in connection with the spring budget? Or will the Moderates block it?

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Madam Speaker! Just as the member knows, the government's ambition is to drive the criminal actors out of the welfare system. It is a priority across the entire political landscape to get rid of those who exploit parts of our society, those who unfortunately do not have the types of protective mechanisms that should be in place.

Regarding the member's question about the indexation, my hope is that such occurs within the near future.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Madam Speaker! A warm welcome, Member Manouchi, to the budget debate on this incredibly important area: the welfare area.

It is in a tough time that the member of Parliament steps in as the first name for the Moderates. Growth is at the bottom of Europe. Ten years of real wage increases have been washed away. Poverty and social vulnerability have almost doubled in recent years, and youth unemployment is at nearly 25 percent – on par with Greece, if I am not mistaken.

In this situation, the Moderaterna decide to make dental care more expensive for young people. It is something that hits directly those who are already struggling financially. The Moderaterna lowered the age for the right to free dental care from 23 to 19. The Moderaterna removed the double dental care subsidy for all young people up to 29 years of age. The consequences are simple, namely that more young people will forgo dental care and more will face more expensive problems later in life. We know that dental health is a class issue from young to old, and we know that young people are already postponing dental visits for economic reasons. In this situation, the government and Sverigedemokraterna make the situation worse, while choosing to spend the money on lowering taxes for those who are doing the very best.

As I said in my speech, we Social Democrats want to restore the support. The Moderates choose to worsen it. I just want to hear how the member justifies that young people should pay more for dental care while you are implementing tax cuts for high-income earners.

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Madam Speaker! After eight years of Social Democratic rule, we had the answer key in hand. The Bupkötas tripled, the healthcare queues doubled, the shootings tripled, inflation rose over 10 percent, a liter of diesel cost 28 kronor, and the tax was so high that people with lower wages could not make it through the month.

This is the Sweden we have inherited. Then the Social Democratic member, a representative of the so-called workers' party, has the nerve to stand in the rostrum and lie about youth unemployment. I do not know how many times journalists will have to write that youth unemployment and the figures that Magdalena Andersson and her party representatives use are false, because they include full-time studying youth.

Is it really an honest way to use the statistics to paint Sweden as a country where no young person goes to work because they are studying full-time? Is it the Social Democrats' opinion that they should not do that? What is the signal the workers' party is trying to send to our population when that is how statistics are treated?

Bluff and deception – it is quite embarrassing.

Dental care is fully funded up to adulthood. Children and young people under 19 years of age have been taught how to take care of their teeth, and when they have not done so fully, they have been helped to fix them. That is how it should be, and that is how we want it.

When we take responsibility for a budget and do not manipulate the figures, we ensure that those who have the greatest need are the ones who receive the most help. In our country, it is older people who have the most broken teeth and suffer from them. We are now providing a remedy for that.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Lundh Sammeli (S)

Madam Speaker! No young person should have to choose between the dentist and the rent. I think we clearly show that we do not need a policy that pits the young against the old. It is a pure and simple prioritization that the Moderaterna choose tax cuts over maintaining the dental care supports that exist, with the free dental care up to age 23 and the doubled dental care support up to age 29. Poor dental health costs more in the long run, both for the individual and for society.

Refraining from dental care is already common among young people, and the Moderaterna are making it even more common. Yesterday, we learned that the specialist dentists in Örebro County point out that several young people have declined treatment because they cannot pay a part of the treatment, which they now need to do, in order to regulate the teeth.

Why does one want to create this injustice? Why does one want to do something here and now that the individual and society will have to pay for in the long run? Years-long queues for orthodontic treatment and long treatment times are now leading to the fact that some young people must start paying because previous free treatments have not had time to be completed.

In this situation, the government, including the Moderaterna and the Sverigedemokraterna, needs to stand by their prioritization. My question is how the Moderaterna view the consequence that more young people now risk abstaining from dental care for economic reasons. Do you consider it a reasonable development for Sweden?

(Applause)

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Madam Speaker! Ordinarily, the Social Democrats promise everything to everyone when they are in opposition. I understand that it feels healthy for the Social Democrats to be in opposition sometimes. Then you can spread these promises around and continue your deceitful behavior towards the voters, Fredrik Lundh Sammeli.

But when we look at your shadow budget, we find large holes, actually billion-dollar holes. These are investments that are not financed. You do not finance your labor market policy, and funding for your construction subsidies is missing. Not least, funding for your intended indexing of the state grants to the regions is missing. Everything for everyone ends with nothing for anyone.

During your years in power, the thousands of elderly people who are without teeth and who have so much pain in their mouths that they choose liquids instead of solid food have become more numerous. It is the result of Social Democratic policy, of refusing to protect those who have worked hard, suffered, and behaved correctly throughout their lives. They have built this country. You have refused to prioritize them.

We are now making a prioritization where all children and young people receive free dental care up to adult age. But we also ensure that those who are older and have very great needs now receive the help they deserve. We are, after all, a party that protects those who have the greatest needs.

That is what the Swedish people get when the Moderaterna rule.

(Applause)

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Madam Speaker! Welcome to the tough days we have here, members of the House!

The chairman mentioned Stockholm, my region. In that case, I will of course mention Skåne. We see, after all, that things are not going particularly well there. It is you Moderates who govern there together with the Christian Democrats and the Liberals, with SD as support. I see that there is a deficit of 8.5 billion. That can be measured directly in healthcare. Savings plans have succeeded one another. Care beds are being closed, and the staff are forced to spend more time looking for savings than on providing care to patients.

In September this year – there may have been fantastic improvements, but I have not studied it exactly – almost half of the patients in Skåne waiting for surgery had waited longer than the healthcare guarantee states. That is more than in both Stockholm and Västra Götaland. Elisabet Lann, the Minister for Health and Social Affairs who comes from KD, says that she does not believe that more resources would solve the problems. When the staff are on their knees, KD argues that the solution is that they should efficiency their way out of the crisis.

I would like to hear some comments regarding the failed healthcare in Skåne. Surely you needed a larger budget from the government?

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Madam Speaker! Within Skåne healthcare, during this parliamentary term, several thousand more employees have been hired, shorter care queues have been achieved, and one of the shortest queues in the country to BUP. It is the result of a moderate Skåne government.

At the same time, we read about the member's Stockholm, where girls take to the media in desperate attempts to gain access to care for their eating disorders. And of those who stand in line at BUP, 8 percent meet someone from BUP. These are the worst figures ever recorded. That is the result in the member's Stockholm.

Madam Speaker! In any case, I do not want to live in a region or a country where children need to go out into the media and testify that they have been belted on incorrect grounds and that they are neglected in such a way within the eating disorder care that they, in pure desperation, choose to go out with names and pictures, even though they think it is terribly difficult. But that is what they are forced to do under the Social Democratic government. That is the result.

If the Swedish people want to know what it means when the Social Democrats govern with the support of left-wing parties, they can look towards Stockholm. Here we have the result, in contrast to Skåne where they hire more people, shorten the queues, and make a fantastic difference for the people of Skåne. I thank Carl Johan Sonesson, who governs in Skåne!

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

Karin Rågsjö (V)

Madam Speaker! Here is the situation: Within the eating disorder care in Stockholm, the waiting times have improved incredibly since the takeover of power. A red-green government initiated this and removed the cheating company. Even Jakob Forssmed has admitted that the waiting times are heading in the right direction.

In Stockholm, there are now 2,300 more employees in healthcare because the temporary employees have been removed. There have been 10 percent more inpatient beds and shorter waiting times at the emergency departments. Even more surgeries are being performed. That more people have been hired is extremely important. And the waiting times are decreasing in virtually all areas. The waiting times at the emergency departments, which during the Moderaternas 16-year reign grew to be the longest in the country, have decreased every year since 2022.

We no longer see any uprisings among the healthcare staff. There were very many demonstrations in the Stockholm region. Midwives, doctors and patients were furious at the poorly managed, moderately-led healthcare in the Stockholm region.

I really hope that we will be standing there with a red-green law again.

When it comes to Skåne, I believe the member should speak with the employees in Skåne, Madam Speaker. We are going backwards by 8.5 billion. What kind of care does that provide? That is what I really wonder. Will it be fantastic? Have waiting times been shortened? What has happened at IVA? You name it.

I see Skåne as a prime example of mismanaged economy. If I were responsible in Skåne, I would tell the government: We must have more funds to manage this, because healthcare has become more expensive. We cannot say no to more patients in the Skåne region due to an incredibly poorly balanced budget from the government.

(Applause)

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Madam Speaker! The Member from Vänsterpartiet hopes for continued red-green rule in Stockholm. But some who do not are the poor, terribly ill girls who witness how the left-wing rule in Stockholm slaughters the healthcare institutions that they are in such great need of. They do not hope for any continued red-green rule. They turn desperately to the media to testify about your mismanagement in the hope of getting help from somewhere else, Karin Rågsjö. They do not hope, and I do not hope.

Vänsterpartiet claims that there is no crisis in Stockholm, despite the fact that the queues to child and adolescent psychiatry are longer than ever and despite the fact that healthcare clinics are being slaughtered, just as public transport is being slaughtered in that regard. Furthermore, they are raising taxes.

I wonder: What are the Social Democrats and the left-wing parties in Stockholm actually doing with all the money? Obviously, they are not investing it in healthcare, given that the result is the type of testimony that we have all been forced to witness.

When these young girls reach out to me, they wonder what they should do, because the doors to the eating disorder care in Stockholm that previously have been open are now closed and locked by the left-wing alternative. You can hope that you get to continue governing, the member, but no one else hopes that.

(Applause)

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Sweden needs a welfare that is accessible and equal throughout the country. We do not have that today – not within the school system and not within healthcare. Unfortunately, the inequality is great between our regions and sometimes even within the same region.

From the Center Party's side, we can never accept that one can expect poorer dental status or more protracted disease courses if one lives in the countryside compared to in the large cities. Children should not have to be born on the roadside because one didn't make it to the hospital. Young people should not have to become suicidal because one cannot get in contact with BUP. People should not have to die in treatable conditions because one does not receive care in time. But we see these inequalities today, and the Center Party wants to solve them through investments in Sweden's countryside, through increased national responsibility where it is needed, through flexible solutions, and through increased empowerment.

Swedish health and medical care is struggling with many challenges. It is primarily about access to care and about the supply of competence. We can see that today there are unreasonable inequalities across the country. To a large extent, it is about the difference between densely populated and sparsely populated regions, but it is not only about that. The state needs to take greater responsibility in certain areas but also release control a little bit in other areas.

Unfortunately, the government has wasted a large part of this mandate period investigating a nationalization of healthcare. It was a dead proposal from the beginning, partly because there is nowhere near a political majority for such a reform, and partly because nothing will become better by having 350,000 healthcare employees managed by a director-general in Stockholm. Whoever believes that even a single hospital threatened with closure in Sweden would be saved once the bureaucrats in such an organization started calculating what is required for an efficient and rational hospital and what patient base such a hospital needs, can raise their hand. The wave of closures of both health centers and hospitals that would follow such a reform would end with horror.

Now that question was dismissed by the Healthcare Responsibility Committee. What is the problem then? Yes, the problem is that there are other areas that actually need more national governance and that the committee could have focused on from the beginning if it hadn't had to work with the overarching issue of state ownership. From the Center Party's side, we indeed share the conclusion that a stronger national control of pharmaceuticals, vaccinations, screening, airborne transport, and a couple more areas were needed. But now these areas must be investigated again so that constitutional amendments can be reached.

At the same time, this does not solve the issue of access to healthcare throughout the country. For that reason, we from Centerpartiet present a sharp proposal regarding rural doctors with 2 billion kronor in the budget. For those who live in Stockholm, accessibility to primary care is not a major problem, but for those who are in our rural areas, it can be very far between the health centers. Therefore, we want to enable small doctor-run practices that can fill in where today's health centers have difficulty reaching out and in that way increase accessibility to healthcare.

Now, the Center Party's proposal does not help either if there is no staff available in our rural areas. Therefore, we want to reintroduce the basic service year within the dental education, and we allocate 900 million for more positions as ST-doctors across the country. A completely fresh report from SKR also shows that half of Sweden's dentists and a third of Sweden's doctors within the regions are foreign-born. Swedish dental care and healthcare thus rest to an enormous extent on our immigrated population, who deserve a great praise in these times when the Tidö parties and the Social Democrats compete to make immigrants feel as unwelcome as possible in our country.

Another major problem in Swedish healthcare concerns waiting times and care queues. The Tidö parties had as a goal when the mandate period began to cut the queues, but reality has shown something else. Despite flowery promises and billions of kronor in performance-based grants, the results have not been what was desired. At the same time, we see that efficiency varies across the country.

We mean that the best way to utilize the capacity in the system and reward those who are efficient, whether it is public or private care, is to let the patients themselves choose the provider even within specialist care from day one. Through 1177, one should be able to see both waiting times and quality indicators in order to then be able to make a conscious choice. With such a system, the queues will decrease while the power falls to the patients.

Another problem within Swedish health and medical care is women's related care, such as maternal health care, maternity care, and menopause care. Centerpartiet allocates 600 million kronor more than the government in that area. Sweden does not just need equal care. Sweden also needs gender-equal care.

Within the Social Affairs Committee's area of responsibility lies another of the mandate period's great disappointments, namely the disability policy. The beautiful words have been piled high in debates and panel discussions, but the results have remained out. The pile of reports on the Government Offices' table has grown ever larger during the mandate period, but the necessary reforms have not been implemented.

We are still waiting for proposals on a changed contracting authority for personal assistance, but above all, we are waiting for the necessary investigation to ensure the needs assessments, so that the contracting authority can be moved at all. We are still waiting for proposals to reinstate the transport service based on the report that Trafikanalys has submitted. We are still waiting for new legislation on escort services after the Riksdag's announcement one and a half years ago. We are still waiting for an indexing of the flat-rate for personal assistance after last year's broken promise. The question remains whether a proposal for an index will arrive before the election.

From the Center Party's side, we are also not satisfied with the government's low increase of the formula for 2026 by 1.5 percent. We mark this by increasing it to 2 percent and adding 135 million kronor to the personal assistance.

Norwegian elderly care would neither function without our immigrants. About one-third of the staff have a foreign background. Collectively, they do a fantastic job, but often there are far too small margins and weak leadership. According to the National Board of Health and Welfare, there are 50 employees per manager. To strengthen the leadership, the Center Party wants to see a mandatory leadership training for those who receive managerial positions within elderly care, similar to the principal training. At the same time, the workload of the staff is described as having increased in recent years, and the sickness absence rates are far too high.

The problem is greatest in northern Sweden, and in some places, the staff shortage has also been exacerbated by the government's decision on unreasonable wage floors for labor migration. What is good, however, is the continued investment in Äldreomsorgslyftet to secure the competence of the staff.

Lastly, I must also comment on the government's work for children and young people. Despite a new Social Services Act that emphasizes preventive work, it appears as if the entire policy is about repression instead of prevention.

Throughout the entire parliamentary term, the Center Party has demanded that we must resolve the problems at the care homes of the State Institution Board (LSU) and secure the care at our HVB homes. We fully support transferring the LSU care from Sis to the Prison and Probation Service (Kriminalvården), but until then, the operations for this group must also continue to be developed.

The government's announcement that they now want to put 13-year-olds in prison, however, we completely distance ourselves from. Has the government completely given up on children and young people? Children under 15 years old should not be in prison but receive care and help at state institutions to get out of the criminal identity.

It is the adults who are exploiting these children who are to be punished. At the same time, we must ensure that the new recruitment stops. That is where the preventive work comes in and the new Social Services Act.

It concerns both the social services, the school, and civil society. Children and young people must, above all, see that there is a better path to choose in life.

Madam Speaker! The Centre Party strives for a healthcare and care system that is available to everyone and that is based on the individual's needs. The right to self-determination and influence over the healthcare and care that is provided must apply to everyone.

Regardless of whether it concerns elderly care, disability rights, social interventions or health and medical care, one should be able to expect it to be both equitable and accessible, regardless of where in the country one lives.

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by warmly expressing my support for the government's and the committee's proposal.

This area of Swedish politics is immensely important for sick, frail, and vulnerable people and, of course, also for the relatives of all these people. They too will receive better support with the budget that we are now debating.

I want to briefly mention the relatives specifically. I am very pleased that we are strengthening the national support for support lines for relatives in order to be able to support them better.

That initiative complements very well the larger relatives' reform that the government is in the process of implementing to strengthen just relatives' contacts and interventions for more people. This also applies, for example, to siblings, who have previously been forgotten in the legislation and in their everyday lives.

Then I want to devote a lot of time to young people. Here, the government is investing 200 million for better student health for all children across the country. Additionally, the reform that the Liberal Party has fought for for a long time is finally being implemented: Parents of certain children must be able to take parental leave for meetings at school. It can be children with disabilities or children with diabetes – the school needs to know what the child needs in order to have a safe school day.

Previously, these children have somehow magically recovered on their way to school and been regarded as completely healthy. Parents have had to take leave of absence or take vacation days for meetings with the school regarding the child's illness or the child's needs. Now it is finally over. That makes me very happy.

Madam Speaker! Mental ill-health among young people is one of the great concerns of our time. Therefore, we have invested a record amount in child and adolescent psychiatry. We are now further strengthening and extending those investments. We are also investing half a billion in primary care to provide children and young people with interventions in a timely manner.

Madam Speaker! Some children who need support do not necessarily need care. In the social sector, strength and security are truly needed throughout the entire chain.

Madam Speaker! I want to devote my speaking time today to the most vulnerable children, those who are sometimes almost invisible.

An important part of what we do there is that we strengthen the work against homelessness. We do this, of course, through Housing First for adults, but we also do a lot for families with children. It is a matter of, to the greatest possible extent, preventing that families with children are ever evicted.

Children's homes are naturally the foundation for almost everything in their world. Children who are doing poorly must receive better support throughout their daily lives earlier than they have received previously.

I am very happy about this, both big and small. I am happy that parents will now also be able to take parental leave for meetings with the social services in order to be part of earlier interventions that can support their children.

I am pleased with the so-called intermediate step that we are now introducing. Parents who are not quite managing to be parents, which may be the reason why the children are suffering, should be able to be forced into interventions even if it is against their will. The children's rights must take precedence over the parents' rights.

Madam Speaker! We are also passing a national strategy to combat violence against children. We must, as a society, take our responsibility for these children. We must help them with exactly what they need. We shall not take any other matters into consideration; the children must be those we look after.

Despite the fact that the municipalities' support is of course absolutely crucial, it happens today that it is the municipality's finances that determine if a child receives support and what kind of support, if a child is taken into care, when the child is taken into care, and what happens next. This is deeply saddening, and it makes me furious.

The liberal bourgeois government is now allocating money so that children will receive the help that is best for them and nothing else. It is not about what is best for the municipality's economy.

Now I am speaking about the most vulnerable children. They are the ones who grow up to become our country's most broken people, and sometimes also the most dangerous people.

Naturally, ideally no child should need Sis, the State Board of Institutions. But for those children who do, we are now allocating half a billion, 500 million kronor on average, per year for more places at Sis, with more security, more competence, and care that actually makes a difference.

Sis also receives clearer powers to stop drugs, weapons, and threatening situations before they even arise. The government's initiative makes everyday life safer for the staff, but above all for the young people who have been placed at Sis to get a new direction in their lives and a new chance. They should not continue to suffer when society has taken over the responsibility for them.

As you have heard, the government is now rolling up its sleeves to prevent and to ensure that children are never left without a chance, that they are never left without support for long, and that they are never drawn into crime.

No child should feel that their life is worth less than all other children's, or perhaps in the worst case that it is not worth anything. At the same time, we know that it is not enough. Sometimes they will still end up on the wrong track. This applies especially to those who have not received the preventive work that was needed in time.

That is why we invest in exit programs. It should never be too late. Those who want to leave crime behind must be given a real chance to do so. Society's support must stand firm for those who have decided to try to break away from the gangs. Society's support cannot be given too early, but it must also never be too late.

Madam Speaker! I could tell you in the same way about many other policy areas. In the same way that I have now spoken about children, I could speak about our focus on dental care. There, the principle of need finally comes into play. Those with the very greatest needs shall now receive the very greatest billion-kronor investments.

I could speak in the same way about psychiatry, where we are also making major investments for adults. This also applies to the investments in timely care. No one should have to wait in a care queue. One should, naturally, receive help when one becomes ill.

Regardless of which area we choose, the focus for the Liberals and for this government must be that the most vulnerable shall receive the greatest reforms, the greatest improvements, and the very best support.

That is why I am so proud of this budget, because it is precisely what we do. This applies to healthcare, to our healthcare policy, for the relatives, for those who have previously been invisible, and absolutely for the children who must never feel that they are forgotten in one of the world's best countries.

There must be strength and security, Madam Speaker, throughout the entire chain, regardless of whether we are children or elderly or if we in some way suffer ill during our lives. So, Madam Speaker, let us build a society that we can believe in.

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg (M) agreed.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Lina Nordquist, for the speech!

One of the major problems and one of the major challenges within Swedish healthcare is the supply of competence, and this applies not only within healthcare but also within elderly care in the welfare sector.

Let us look at the staff within health and care today. A third of the nursing assistants have a foreign background, and the same applies to half of the dentists and a third of the doctors. According to a previous statement from the Sverigedemokraterna, these people were not needed in Swedish healthcare, and the best thing would be if they left the country so that it would be as we had it in the 50s and 60s, whatever that might mean.

Today we can unfortunately see that both the brain drain and the loss of competence from Sweden are significant. People who today have positions within the welfare sector are leaving the country. One of the reasons is the state wage floor of 90 percent of the median wage that has been introduced. It is 33,390 kronor, which can be compared with the starting salary for a healthcare assistant, which lies somewhere between 24,000 and 27,000, or the starting salary for a nursing assistant, which lies somewhere between 27,000 and 30,000.

At the same time, the government is spending enormous sums on return grants to get people to leave Sweden.

My question, Madam Speaker, is: Why is it so important to get people to leave Sweden instead of letting them work within the welfare system where we so much need them?

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Madam Speaker and members! Let me begin by speaking about how Sweden was built strong. It is a fact that we have always needed immigration, ever since the time of the Walloons with their forges and ironworks and later during industrialization and during Sweden's process of becoming a strong and wealthy country. Also the times we have not known that we needed the immigration, it has always made Sweden stronger. So it is.

In recent years, we have had great concerns regarding a very low wage floor, which has caused people to suffer in Sweden. In a rich country with a in many ways fantastic labor market, people who work with changing tires have, in the worst cases, been forced to sleep at the tire company, and others have been exploited at nail salons. We have held the view that all employers are kind, but that has not been true.

I am therefore glad that we no longer allow wage dumping. At the same time, it is incredibly important to me as a liberal that the government, when raising the wage floor and saying that people should have a good wage when they come to Sweden as labor migrants, also says that there are occupations that do not have the high wage that the government has now negotiated between different parties.

That means we need an exception list. There are many shortage occupations, likely over a hundred, where we must make exceptions. The important contributions that people from other countries make for us here should be able to continue. I think that is absolutely crucial.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Labor immigration is by no means the big issue for Swedish welfare, but we have seen examples from northern Sweden where operations within elderly care have had to be shut down because it has not functioned when it has been necessary to deport labor immigrants.

The floor of 90 percent means that one cannot employ either nursing assistants or healthcare assistants within Swedish welfare, as one does not reach this.

When it comes to the exception list, which the member is talking about, according to what I have heard from the negotiations currently taking place between your parties, it will not become such a list, but it will be these 90 percent. But that remains to be seen. I can only see the bureaucracy ahead when it comes to agreeing on which professions should be exempted from the wage floor. The best thing would be to let the parties handle that part.

It was not only when we had immigration to Sweden back in the day that we became dependent on immigrated labor, but it applies especially to the last ten years. Sometimes it sounds as if it is only about the problematic asylum immigration and that people have ended up in unemployment during the last ten years.

SKR shows, however, in a report released the other day, that 4,000 doctors, 2,000 nurses and 33,000 nursing assistants and healthcare assistants with a foreign background have been employed in Swedish municipalities and regions during the last ten years. We are, therefore, completely dependent on these people.

It does not sound like the Sweden Democrats and the Liberals are on the same line, but one is in the same boat. What policy is it actually that applies from the government's side – is it good for Swedish welfare with all those immigrants who work there, or is it bad?

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

Lina Nordquist (L)

Madam Speaker! I shall try to refrain from laughing, but it will be very interesting if the Center Party is to sit in the same boat as its ally and try to think the same thing as the Left Party, think the same thing as the Social Democrats and think the same thing as the Green Party.

I believe that the member is also aware that the fact that one cooperates and agrees on issues to make Sweden stronger does not mean that parties begin to think alike in all issues. So it is naturally not.

The Liberals' view is that even when it is difficult, liberal politics are needed to build Sweden stronger. We will never stand and say: We only intend to cooperate with ourselves, because we are not interested in trying to compromise, move forward and try to gain traction with the inhabitants for our politics!

We will never say no to cooperation. We believe that Sweden, in easy times and in difficult times, needs more liberal politics. And that is not words from a rostrum, but it is real reforms that help in people's lives.

I cannot help but conclude by asking a question. Since the member is so interested in the wages and conditions for people in care, why does the Center Party spend almost half a billion less than the government on this expenditure area? Despite all these investments, your sum is more than 400 million less than what we invest. Isn't that a bit strange?

(Applause)

(cont. § 18)

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