The National Audit Office's report on Samhäll's social mission

ANN-CHRISTINE FROHM UTTERSTEDT (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I will devote a part of the speech to background facts about the state's ward of sorrow, Samhall AB, for this is not so easy to either understand or keep track of.

Samhall AB is one of the country's largest companies with nearly 24,000 employees in approximately 600 different locations. The social mission for Samhall is clear: Samhall shall produce demanded goods and services and, through this, create meaningful and developing jobs for persons with disabilities who have reduced work capacity and who cannot obtain other work or support through other measures. The additional cost compensations that the Riksdag has specifically decided that Samhall shall bear amount to approximately 7.6 billion kronor.

Samhall was established in 1980 with the aim of providing meaningful and developing jobs to persons with disabilities. In 1992, Samhall was converted into a limited company, which meant that the operations were to be conducted on commercial grounds and eventually with a profit motive.

The company is now participating and competing with other companies on the market for the customers who create job opportunities, which means that Samhall must win tenders and make a profit. In connection with this, the physical requirements for the labor now being requested are raised. A gap is created for the individuals who actually should have had a place under Samhall's umbrella. Instead of the umbrella functioning as a protective barrier and keeping individuals dry and safe, they are ruthlessly cast out into the driving rain and become soaked and betrayed.

When it concerns many of the individuals who have been affected by this marginalization, individual municipalities have made efforts to catch those with disabilities. It is serious and unacceptable that individuals who are already so vulnerable should be sidelined in this way, and it simply must not continue like this.

Mr. Speaker! The Government is responsible for the management of Sweden's authorities and state-owned companies. The Social Democrats, who have held a government position and been responsible for Samhall during 31 of the 44 years that Samhall has existed, commissioned a review of Samhall in 2016 to identify the problems that they themselves have, to the highest degree, been involved in creating. The Social Democrats have, in fact, used Samhall AB as an integration measure.

The cooperation and information exchange between Arbetsförmedlingen and Samhall has been rightly questioned. It is somewhat complicated – getting employment at Samhall works in such a way that Arbetsförmedlingen codes a person as someone who is judged to meet the criteria to be assigned to Samhall and offered work. However, it has turned out that the coding itself is a major problem, as the different codings are of an overall nature and do not show what specific needs a particular individual has. When Samhall receives an assigned person, they therefore do not know exactly what special needs that specific individual has.

When one hears this, it is not particularly difficult to understand that the operation is not functioning as intended. The overall coding has apparently also meant that there has been room for interpretation of the criteria so that even language barriers and poor education could constitute a basis for assigning foreign-born individuals to Samhall, even though neither of those is a disability, naturally. Already in 2018, more than half of the employees at Samhall were foreign-born.

Once again, it is the headless migration policy that Sweden's governance has engaged in since Samhall started, and which has escalated over the last decade, that is the villain in the drama. A completely uncontrolled immigration has indeed created problems in most - if not all - areas in Sweden. The biggest problem has perhaps been the question of what we should do with all the newly arrived residents who cannot manage to provide for themselves. And yes, one of the solutions to this gigantic problem has thus been to place them in Samhall.

Mr. Speaker! What began in 1980 as an important and absolutely necessary social initiative was thus developed over time into something completely different - including a profit-driven integration measure. But that is how we are used to seeing the Social Democrats' governance of our country: First, they demolish and destroy something, for example Samhall, and when the situation becomes completely untenable, they want to look at what actually went wrong - just as they themselves stand completely without responsibility for this. Just like ostriches, they bury their heads in the sand until the storm has blown over. Then they walk on proudly as if nothing at all has happened, and most often they also blame their failure on someone else. But thank goodness the Social Democrats are no longer in power.

The criticism against Samhall AB and suspicions that the company is not fulfilling its mission have escalated. We have been alerted to this, among other things, by the fact that the deficiencies have been made public in the program Uppdrag granskning and by the employees themselves. The TV program, which was broadcast in 2021, could show that people with disabilities have been left outside the state's protection. Scathing criticism was voiced by several employees and managers.

The Sweden Democrats have long pointed out that the operations are substandard, and it was high time that the operations were properly scrutinized. The National Audit Office's results are also clear: Samhall no longer fulfills its social mission.

Mr. Speaker! The National Audit Office's report has thus confirmed that parts of Samhall's operations have deficiencies and are in need of change. The audit shows exactly what my party has long noted. This has resulted in the government now conducting a proper review of the company, which the Sverigedemokraterna naturally welcomes. We are therefore content to assume that the review results in the government taking the measures needed to get Samhall in order, and Sverigedemokraterna will push on in the matter. We owe it to all the individuals who have been left out over the years.

I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision but wish to draw the attention of the Speaker to the fact that the Sweden Democrats have a specific statement on the matter.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! It was exciting to listen to this speech after actually having read the matter. We are now discussing the audit where the Swedish National Audit Office, among other things, states that it is seen that Arbetsförmedlingen primarily assigns persons from the correct target group to Samhall, and that was not quite the picture one got from the speech.

As usual when Sverigedemokraterna stand at the rostrum, everything is exactly the fault of immigration. One can blame poor integration for everything and blame the people involved in the operation rather than looking at what the Riksrevisionen actually says, namely that it is about the management, the corporate form, and other things. The member may have read a completely different audit - who knows? But I can at least state that not much from this audit came out in the motion.

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

ANN-CHRISTINE FROHM UTTERSTEDT (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Patrik Lundqvist for the question.

I do not blame the people who have immigrated to our country at all; I blame the Social Democrats.

In opposition, the Socialdemokrater certainly have all the answers and all the solutions to all kinds of problems. But when the Socialdemokrater are in power, the answers and solutions are not there. It is simply not credible. For eight years, the former Socialdemocrat-led government sat in power without succeeding in fixing anything at all that needed to be fixed at Samhall. On the contrary, they worsened the problems.

I think this is unfortunate, and I think the Social Democrats are actually indebted to those people who have been left behind for an apology. It concerns people who have been left without any help from the state at all, even though it was the intention that they should receive help. Instead, individual municipalities have had to step in and help these people into employment and a meaningful everyday life.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! Again: There are big leaps but not particularly much substance. Where does the member find these ideas that Samhall would have functioned as an integration project and that the previous government would have carried out something such during its eight years? That is just taken out of thin air. It is pure fabrication, but it is still somewhere there that the member lands in their reasoning.

Furthermore, it seems as if Samhall were to be the only instrument available to give people a sensible occupation and a place in the Swedish labor market. That is not the case. The municipalities also have a responsibility, and there are other agencies that target different people. Samhall has a mandate to give a group of people the opportunity to get a place in the Swedish labor market - a supportive and developmental work - but not everyone.

One can have views on this; one might think that Samhall should have a mandate to help everyone who needs support and help. But that has never been the case, and I do not believe that the current government will land there either, regardless of what the Sverigedemokraterna think.

Some integration project Samhall is actually not either.

(Applause)

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

ANN-CHRISTINE FROHM UTTERSTEDT (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is clear that the member and I do not agree on the issue.

I am, in any case, glad that this government, which took office at the end of 2022 and thus has not had eight years to rectify anything, is already carrying out a proper review of Samhall. I have great confidence in that, and I am glad that this measure is being taken.

The chairman and I may be a bit different. I choose to see reality. I have sat in the Committee on Employment and have listened to presentations from Arbetsförmedlingen and Samhall countless times. There, it has been clearly stated how it goes, for example, regarding the coding from Arbetsförmedlingen, and that the problems with language barriers were so great that this became one of the criteria for being assigned to Samhall.

It was also so serious and bad that employees at Arbetsförmedlingen themselves acted as some kind of psychologists and diagnosed those who were supposed to work. That is not really how it is supposed to work. It could take half a year before one managed to figure out what the problem was, and by then the person had already worked for half a year at Samhall.

It was not quite as it was intended. When one arrives at Arbetsförmedlingen, one often has a ready-made diagnosis which perhaps shows that one needs to be assigned to Samhall to get a job and a meaningful everyday life.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! The National Audit Office has directed stinging criticism at Samhall and the government for the management of the company. I would, however, like to start at the other end and talk a bit about what is good about Samhall's operations.

Samhall gives people a place in the labor market where one otherwise would not have obviously existed. This means a lot for many and everything for some. People who have injured themselves or been born with a disability and who have reduced work capacity are given a chance at Samhall to work and develop on their own terms and according to their needs, while simultaneously contributing and being a part of the Swedish labor market.

Samhall shows that you have something to give, regardless of who you are, as long as work life and society provide the right conditions. At Samhall, people get a chance to show and prove on the regular labor market – in open competition – that they can contribute, and they receive support to be able to move on to other companies if it is possible.

Society is equality, participation and solidarity packaged in a company. It is part of the finest our society has – the part where we look out for one another and take care of each other, where we let people grow, give what they can and take responsibility according to their circumstances, and where we let people do their duty and demand their right to livelihood and participation. Society is simply a place where opportunities, hope and faith in the future are created for people.

So it should be, at least. It might sound a bit high-flown, Mr. Speaker, and it might not be true in all cases. But this is the goal of the activity – it exists for the people who need it.

It is not only the Samhall that I described that exists – if that were the case, we would hardly be here tonight, Mr. Speaker. Then the Riksrevisionen's report, which we are basing our discussion on today, would not look the way it does, and we would have no reason to debate it.

The National Audit Office notes that there has been too much focus on the market-oriented development of Samhall and too little focus on the individuals for whom Samhall exists. People do not receive the support and adaptation they would need to a sufficiently large extent.

The National Audit Office points out two things in particular as problematic, Mr. Speaker. One is the corporate form. Samhall is organized as a limited company, and with this come profit requirements that are paramount over most things. The other is the overhead compensation, which has not followed the economic development. Because it has remained stagnant, it has instead been part of forcing Samhall to increase other revenues and implement savings.

Against that background, it is quite remarkable that the government chooses to review everything else regarding the management of the company but asserts that Samhall shall also continue to be a state-owned company, and that in its analysis it highlights that in order to remedy Samhall's problems, increased revenues and greater business acumen are required.

Enough that the government has announced that the additional cost compensation shall be increased, which is naturally good, that the investigation shall consider increased individualization and that several other parts shall be investigated, but it is not enough. The problems that the Swedish National Audit Office highlights now are unfortunately not the novelty they should be. We heard earlier that investigations have been conducted before, which is true, and that this has also emerged then.

In addition to the two major issues - the organizational form and the additional cost compensation - there are more problems that have been raised several times, including the company's transformation from having its base in its own production in its own workshops to today primarily being a service company that delivers, for example, cleaning to others.

The support that exists has decreased, and the working groups have become larger and larger. The number of officials available for support and management has more than halved, even though the workforce at Samhall is the same size today as it was previously.

The jobs offered do not meet the requirements for being developmental. The limitation of the areas Samhall operates within also means that everyone who, according to the social mission, should be assigned to Samhall cannot get that opportunity, because there are no jobs at Samhall.

These problems, as said, have been known for quite a long time, but the political interest has been rather small. Other issues have taken precedence. Sometimes it may have been right – priorities must, after all, always be made, and everything cannot be done at the same time. But when an investigation is now being carried out of the management and several of these parts – instructions, support measures, target group and so on – are included, it is unreasonable for the government to set the limit for what should be investigated at precisely the organizational form.

Mr. Speaker! I am not entirely convinced that it is wrong to run Samhall in this form, but there are several reasons why it may need to be looked at. The National Audit Office also highlights this in its report.

There are also reasons to continue having it as it is today. There is, for example, a meaningfulness in being employed in a limited company that plays by the same rules as others. But if individuals are not allowed to prioritize their development and their opportunities to move forward to a sufficiently large extent, and if it is due to this, one must still be able to look at that question.

The National Audit Office is very clear that it sees the organizational form as one of the major problems. In that case, it is very difficult to accept the government's limitations in an otherwise quite good investigation, Mr. Speaker.

I vote in favor of reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

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

I was a bit quick to press the button for a reply when the member began to speak about the corporate form, something that he then elaborated on. I was quite surprised. I have nevertheless perceived that it has been the Social Democrats' policy for a long time to continue Samhall in corporate form.

I myself am more skeptical about whether the state should act as a company when it does not do so under the same conditions. However, I can state that when I have been out and visited Samhälls and the employees there, I have seen that the corporate form has been very much appreciated by them.

Now the member continued to develop the reasoning, and I was a bit quick to press the button. Could the member imagine continuing the reasoning? Is it the member's reflections, or have the Social Democrats changed their opinion on the form in which Samhall should be operated?

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question!

I have not landed on any specific form, and neither has the party. Our view is that when the Swedish National Audit Office says what it says, one needs to take it seriously. That is what we want to be done.

Thus, it is not said that the investigation will show that a change in the form of organization must take place. But one needs to look at it and see if there are alternatives that could be better. One must at least demonstrate the alternatives that exist so that one can choose afterwards and ensure that it is driven in the best way for everyone.

One can also imagine a multitude of other things. Now I am speculating freely according to my own head. One might keep Samhall as it is and adjust slightly in other parts based on what emerges in the investigation. One might also create a new activity that suits other target groups and that can give them a similar place in the Swedish labor market, but in a different organizational form that suits certain individuals better.

There I am speculating completely freely according to my own head, and I do not know if I have my comrades with me. I naturally hope so, but that is a different question than the one we are discussing today.

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Patrik Lundqvist, for the answer!

I thought it was a good clarification that you have not landed on anything. At the same time, it is important from our side to say that you have previously strongly asserted that you stand behind the corporate form.

I have been more skeptical about the state not being allowed to run companies to do what others can perform. It becomes a bit like playing at being a company.

I think the member developed it well. I look forward to the result of the investigation that is on the table. It will be interesting to see what is concluded.

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

Patrik Lundqvist (S)

Mr. Speaker! I actually have nothing to say about that. Thank you for the question and the brief chat here! I will not take any more of the evening from everyone.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal in the report.

Thank you - so I must express myself regarding Samhall and the decision that our government is now conducting a thorough review of Samhall's very important assignments. During this past parliamentary term, two motions were also submitted to the previous government where we pointed out the great need for a review of Samhall's activities. It is therefore pleasing that it is finally happening now.

Samhall AB is a state-owned company with the social mission to produce in-demand goods and services and, through that, create meaningful and developing jobs for persons with a disability that results in reduced work capacity.

The National Audit Office emphasizes in its review that Samhall is indeed a labor market policy initiative but at the same time is also a business-oriented company that is subject to the same laws and regulations as other state-owned limited companies.

Several government investigations and audits, including those by the Swedish National Audit Office, have pointed to a conflict of objectives in Samhall's mandate to operate on market terms and simultaneously design the operations according to the employees' conditions and needs. Against the background of recurring criticism and the demonstration of deficiencies in the operations – we particularly remember SVT's Uppdrag granskning – the Swedish National Audit Office considered that there were further reasons to once again audit just Samhall.

The Swedish National Audit Office has asked the following questions: Is Samhall's work to create meaningful and developing jobs for its employees purposefully designed? Is Arbetsförmedlingen's work to refer job seekers to Samhall purposefully designed? Does the government steer Samhall so that the public mission can be ensured?

Regarding the question of whether Samhall's work to create meaningful and developing jobs for its employees is purposefully designed, the Swedish National Audit Office makes the summary assessment that Samhall offers meaningful work but falls short when it comes to ensuring that the work is developing for the employees.

Samhall's concentration of customer assignments in certain industries and professional roles and the company's staffing does not provide the conditions to meet employees' needs for adaptations, follow-up, and support. The National Audit Office notes, among other things, that Samhall's personnel management managers are few and that the staff turnover among officials is high.

Regarding the question of whether the Arbetsförmedlingen's work with referring job seekers to Samhall is purposefully designed, the Swedish National Audit Office makes the summary assessment that Arbetsförmedlingen largely refers from the intended target group to Samhall. Almost all have a documented disability and also belong to the groups that are prioritized for employment at Samhall.

The review shows, however, that there are several challenges in Arbetsförmedlingen's referral process, which largely are due to the agency's new digital and case-based methods of working. According to the Swedish National Audit Office, there are also challenges in the cooperation between Arbetsförmedlingen and Samhall. This applies in particular to the exchange of information.

Regarding the question of the government's governance of Samhall, the Swedish National Audit Office makes the summary assessment that the governance has been too one-sided and to a too small extent steered towards the collective social mandate. According to the Swedish National Audit Office, previous and current governments' governance has primarily been aimed at the company's volume and economic goals and focused too little on those parts of the social mandate that concern how the company works to support and develop the employees.

Overall, the Swedish National Audit Office's observations lead to the assessment that both the government's management and Samhall's management and organization have, to an all too high degree, prioritized commercial development over the development of the employees' work capacity. The Swedish National Audit Office's overall conclusion is therefore that Samhall does not fulfill its entire social mandate.

What does the government express regarding the National Audit Office's communication? The government, of course, welcomes the National Audit Office's audit. In its assessment of the National Audit Office's observations, the government refers to the fact that during the 30 years that have passed since Samhall was reorganized into a limited company, significant changes have occurred in both Samhall's operations and conditions as well as the target group's needs. This, together with the deficiencies that appear in both the National Audit Office's report and previous investigations, gives the government, according to the government, reason to consider whether there is a need for changes in the overall governance of the company.

Regarding the government's measures in light of the Swedish National Audit Office's observations, the government states that it now intends to conduct a thorough review of Samhälls' mandate, activities, and conditions. A decision on this was made on 1 January 2024, and the review shall be reported by 24 March 2025 at the latest.

I want to briefly mention which parts are to be investigated. A mapping will be carried out by target group and support needs. It will be analyzed whether Samhall offers meaningful and developing jobs. It will be reviewed: assignment, selection, additional support, if this is needed, the roles of non-profit organizations as well as transparency and control, i.e., the additional cost compensation. The state's overall governance shall also be reviewed.

In conclusion, I also want to emphasize that I too look forward to taking part in the government's review.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving to approve reservation 4.

Since its start in 1980, Samhall has played an important role for many people with different types of disabilities. Through Samhall, they have received employment, a social context, and their own livelihood. During the last 20 years, however, Samhall has truly changed fundamentally, from a state-owned company with social responsibility to a staffing company operating according to market principles. The manufacturing of goods has largely been replaced by the production of services such as cleaning, laundry, and property management. Requirements for profitability, customer focus, and business acumen have been introduced, and ever higher demands are placed on the employees. Samhall's main mission, to create developing jobs for people with disabilities and in this way give them a place in the ordinary labor market, seems to have been completely lost.

It is Arbetsförmedlingen that assigns persons to employment at Samhall. The majority have a so-called employment for sheltered work. Persons who, as a result of a disability, are not suitable for any other work and who have needs that cannot be met through other interventions may be assigned to sheltered work.

According to a report from Arbetsförmedlingen, however, four out of ten employment officers state that it is not the people who have the greatest need of the intervention who get employment through sheltered work at Samhall. Criticism has also been voiced for a long time that Samhall's operations are not adapted to the target group's circumstances. A number of audits have additionally shown extensive deficiencies in the work environment and working conditions, with high sickness rates and many accidents as a result.

Mr. Speaker! According to the Swedish National Audit Office, Samhall fails to provide adapted and developing work for its employees. The overall conclusion is therefore that Samhall does not actually fulfill its entire social mission. This is due, according to the Swedish National Audit Office, primarily to the fact that the government's governance has been very strongly focused on the company's business orientation and economic development. Too little attention has been paid to the quality of the employment offered. Even Samhall's internal governance and organization have been too focused on business orientation.

The National Audit Office recommends that the government investigate which organizational form best fulfills the Riksdag's goals for the activity. The investigation should proceed from the premise that it shall continue to be a state actor that is responsible for and carries out the assignment to provide meaningful and developing work for persons with disabilities as designated by Arbetsförmedlingen.

Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet has for a long time criticized the development of Samhälls. We believe that the fundamental problem is the requirement for business-mindedness. It drives up the pace, raises the demands on the employees, and filters out those who do not measure up. We consider it completely absurd that the requirement for business-mindedness must be removed, for it cannot be reconciled with the core mission.

In the debate on Samhall, demands have even been put forward that the company should be wound down. Vänsterpartiet does not share that view. We believe, on the contrary, that Samhall should be developed. There are good opportunities to just develop Samhall in the right direction, so that the operation works for the target group for which it was created. The development of Samhall should, of course, take place in close cooperation with the disability rights movement, which represents just Samhall's target group.

Funktionsrätt Sverige has presented a number of proposals on how Samhall should be developed. Those proposals coincide, as if by chance, very well with the Left Party's view. I will now highlight some of them.

One should increase the influence and participation for those whom Samhall's activities are for. One should give the disability rights movement as well as experts and researchers within working life and disability representation in Samhall's board.

One should abolish or at least lower the requirement for business-mindedness for the operation and give Samhall a clear mandate and the conditions to broaden its activities so that the purpose of receiving and providing support to people who are furthest from the labor market can truly be fulfilled.

One should also change the ownership directives, so that the original mandate to be the "gatekeeper against early retirement" is strengthened and the original target group receives adequate work-oriented rehabilitation.

Competence development initiatives should also be carried out within the field of functional disabilities for all managers within Samhall, and the functional disability movement should, of course, be involved in this assignment. The induction training aimed at every new employee at Samhall should also be strengthened.

Mr. Speaker! Recently, the government appointed an inquiry to review Samhall's mandate, operations, and conditions. That is very good. I note, however, that the government does not task the inquiry with investigating Samhall's organizational form and thus also not the profit requirement, despite this being a clear recommendation from the National Audit Office. According to the government's directive, it seems that Samhall shall continue to be a state-owned company with requirements for profitability.

For Vänsterpartiet, it is obvious that the organizational form itself is the fundamental problem. That the government chooses not to investigate this is remarkable but not particularly surprising. It seems that for the right, it is more important to play business with a state-owned company than to contribute to a dignified and developing labor market for persons with disabilities.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I sat in the Riksdag from 1998-2002, and even then we discussed society's problems with efficiency, meaningful workplaces, disloyal competition, and displacement effects.

It has now been just over 20 years since I first sat in the Riksdag, and now yet another audit report has arrived. In it, the Swedish National Audit Office states, among other things, that Samhall does not fulfill its entire social mission and that the government's and Samhall's governance and organization have, to an all too high degree, prioritized commercial development over the development of the employees' work capacity.

The National Audit Office notes that Samhall fails when it comes to providing developing work to its employees, that Samhall does not organize its operations in such a way that the work offered can be said to be developing or meet the employees' needs, and that the company does not work systematically with following up the employees' professional development.

The National Audit Office points out that it has been over 30 years since Samhall was reorganized into a limited company, that Samhall has been investigated several times since then, and that several of the deficiencies that the National Audit Office has now identified have also been noted by previous investigations and thus have been known for a long time.

Mr. Speaker! It is devastating criticism that the National Audit Office directs towards Samhall. Unfortunately, it is not the first time that this criticism has been directed.

Mr. Speaker! We, who represent the government and the Tidö agreement, share the Swedish National Audit Office's view. The government has therefore taken the initiative for an investigation that shall conduct a thorough review of Samhälls' mandate, activities, and conditions.

The investigation shall, among other things,

map out Samhäll's target group

analyze whether Samhäll's activities offer meaningful and developing jobs

Analyze the processes at Arbetsförmedlingen and Samhall that lead to selection, assignment, and employment at Samhall

analyze whether there is a need for additional support measures for the individual before, alongside, or as part of an employment with Samhall and whether non-profit actors can play a larger role in this regard

analyze the transparency in how Samhall uses the state cost-overrun compensation

where necessary, submit proposals for changes to the state's collective management of Samhälls' activities.

Mr. Speaker! In my opinion, it is good that the government is taking action regarding Samhall and reviewing how this activity can be managed. As a Christian Democrat, I would, however, like us to be able to have a broader conversation about how we should work so that persons with reduced work capacity get a job and enter society.

Work is not just about social utility; work is also a part of our well-being. All people have a need to feel needed. That is why it is important that the work is also relevant and that there are conditions to develop at the workplace.

The idea of Samhall itself is that the state takes responsibility and gives individuals the opportunity to get a job. It is a good idea, but it can also become exclusionary. Today, Samhall wins procurements from other companies where Samhall's staff work together with regular staff but with different work clothes, which shows that they are not part of the regular staff. Even if we all mean well, this still leads to a form of exclusion that we should try to avoid. In many cases, these companies could probably also have employed this staff themselves if there had been other conditions for this.

Mr. Speaker! Some of us visited Japan some time ago. There, these issues are handled in a different way. There is a legal requirement there that companies with more than 100 employees shall employ at least 2 percent with some form of reduced work capacity, which ensures that these persons become a part of the regular company.

In Sweden, we also work with different forms of wage subsidies. In my opinion, more people should be able to receive support via wage subsidies. The wage subsidy has the advantage that the individual enters into a community. Unfortunately, it is often quite complicated for the employer, and today's model implies that, in practice, one must talk down the individual person's development if one is to retain the compensation received from the state. Today's rules are also very rigid.

When we review Samhall, we should also ask ourselves if there are other ways to facilitate for those with reduced work capacity to enter the labor market and become part of the community that exists in a workplace. I am therefore pleased that we have included that the investigation shall analyze how the transparency in and the control of how Samhall uses the state's additional cost compensation can be developed. This includes considering the pros and cons of a more individual-based compensation model, for example, wage subsidies.

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats are pushing to strengthen social enterprises and purpose-driven actors. These are incredibly important as an alternative to Samhall and must be able to compete with Samhall on equal terms, but that is not the case today. That Samhall receives more support per month and employee than a social enterprise can receive through the wage subsidy system has the effect that the social enterprises are pushed out of some markets – for example within cleaning, where it becomes extremely difficult to compete with Samhall. It is pleasing that the investigation directives include that the investigator shall look at exactly this and how purpose-driven actors can play a larger role.

Mr. Speaker! Samhall receives 6.6 billion per year, and in the 2024 budget, the government made an additional supplement of 1 billion kronor. The supplement was made to solve the company's short-term economic challenges pending a review. Samhall has, despite an extensive budget, significant economic problems due to large cost increases in combination with declining demand for the company's services.

Samhall thus has a budget of 7.6 billion - that is a lot of money. When we are now investigating Samhall, we should also ask ourselves whether we could have gotten more out of this money through other companies, civil society, and other forms of support.

Mr. Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposed decision in the report, while at the same time I hope that we will continue to discuss how we can facilitate for everyone who has extra needs to enter the labor market and in that way get an opportunity to become a part of the working community.

(Applause)

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

Camilla Mårtensen (L)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to start by expressing my support for the committee's proposal.

Everyone who can work shall work. It is a mantra that has been heard from the rostrum here in the chamber from most parties. We should also add that everyone who wants to work shall be helped into a job based on their circumstances, and there Samhall plays a major role.

When I was at Samhall in Lund, I met Niklas. His job was to pack small miniature bottles of the Scanian drink Absolut Vodka – you know those packages with different spice infusions that you can try at Midsummer and which are manufactured from grain grown on the Scanian fields.

When I asked Niklas what was best about his job, he quickly mentioned the break room, his colleagues, and that he cycled to his workplace in the morning.

When I spoke with the employer, he told me that the employees from Samhall did not only solve a work task but also added a higher value to the workplace, a greater purpose and a social commitment for the rest of the staff, which everyone was very proud of.

Niklas has many colleagues with the same experience of Samhall. We should be proud of that and not forget it in the discussion about everything that is not working.

During the more than 30 years that have passed since Samhall was reorganized into a limited company, major changes have occurred in Samhall's operations and conditions. The needs of the individuals who may be considered for employment at Samhall have also changed.

Mr. Speaker! There is a large group of job seekers who, for various reasons, cannot obtain employment at Samhall. In that case, Samhall must be changed, or there must be other alternatives. Above all, our large administrative giants must be able to manage individual solutions and tailor support for every individual regardless of work barriers. Everyone should be able to participate in the labor market. Thus, we create freedom for the least free.

The state-owned company Samhall needs to become better at offering meaningful and developing jobs to people with disabilities. We have seen this in numerous reports over the years. The management must improve, we must reach the right target groups, and we must change Arbetsförmedlingen's and Samhall's processes for faster and better placement of services. It shall be analyzed whether there is a need for additional support measures for the individual before, alongside, or as part of the employment at Samhall, and whether non-profit actors can play a larger role in this regard.

Only non-profit actors can play a major role. It is far from the case that all people with disabilities function in society's larger, collectivistic solution. The social enterprises can offer individual solutions, and there must also be sensible support systems.

It is good that our government takes the problems seriously. These are problems that have been discussed over several parliamentary terms and regardless of the leadership in the government. Now, a thorough review is being conducted and the largest investigation since Samhall was formed in its current form has been commissioned. And it shall take place under the leadership of an absolutely excellent special investigator. I look forward very much to the result, which will be reported during 2025. I hope that we can continue to work with it.

(Applause)

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! The debate is about Samhall, but in reality, it is about people. We shall give each person the opportunity to have a meaningful existence based on their abilities and knowledge. The starting point is that everyone who can should have an occupation. It is good for society, and it is good for the individual.

When we talk about those who stand a bit away from the labor market, municipalities, regions, the private business sector and civil society play a large and important role. But the state also needs to take its responsibility. Here, Samhall is an important player.

I appreciate the great consensus that nevertheless exists in politics and in the committee that the state, via Samhall, is not today doing its utmost so that more people can get good and meaningful employment. As an opposition politician, it is of course often easy to say that everything is bad. But that is not actually the case. It is very good that the government has appointed an inquiry into Samhall, furthermore with a competent investigator at the head.

The investigation has several important tasks. I really want to emphasize that. However, we in the Center Party have a remark. When it comes to the starting point for the appointed investigation, we do not share the government's assessment that the state's overall governance is sufficiently good. The government thinks that Samhall should also continue to be a state-owned company whose mandate shall include the production and offering of in-demand goods and services.

For Centerpartiet, it is obvious that the organizational form, that is, a limited company with return requirements, is a fundamental problem. The National Audit Office makes the same assessment. We therefore believe that the government should ensure that the mandate for the recently appointed investigation of Samhall's mission, operations, and conditions, in accordance with the National Audit Office's recommendation, also includes which organizational form best fulfills the goal for Samhall.

Today, Samhall competes with entrepreneurs who struggle and twist and turn every single krona. It is not reasonable that the state should compete out actors who want to establish themselves in, for example, local care. That Samhall pushes prices through procurement and takes over unreasonably large market shares is a problem that the government should prioritize solving within the framework of the investigation.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I would like to move for approval of reservation number 3.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 6 March.)

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