The National Audit Office's report on track changes in the migration process - controls and follow-up

Magnus Resare (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is good that we have a new, proper government in place, a government that has support in the Riksdag and which wants to tackle the major societal problems. With such a government, it feels a bit safer, at least, when one reads a report like the one that the National Audit Office has now written. That report, Mr. Speaker, is in large parts a truly frightening read.

When one reads it, one can observe that a quarter of the asylum seekers come from five countries that actually account for 6 percent of all asylum seekers and that half of the ten most common countries from which asylum seekers come have a rejection rate of 90 percent.

To take an example, Mongolia is one of the most common countries that asylum seekers come from, and there the rejection rate for asylum applications is as high as 95 percent. Case officers at the Swedish Migration Agency testify in the report that in their work they encounter asylum seekers who are completely open about the fact that they are not actually seeking asylum but are here because they want to work.

The Swedish National Audit Office's report on the change of track in the migration process - controls and follow-up

In the report, one can also read that there are pure travel agencies whose sole purpose is to help people apply for asylum in Sweden so that they can then perform a track change. These people, therefore, have no asylum grounds whatsoever, and the only purpose is to deceive the Swedish system to gain access to our country. So we cannot have that, Mr. Speaker.

It is time for Sweden to stop conflating all forms of migration into some kind of immigration mush. Labor migration is not the same thing as asylum migration, and if we are to maintain any form of legitimacy or seriousness in either of the systems, it must not become that. We simply have to realize that today's system, as it is currently designed, does not hold. We cannot have a disguised labor migration orchestrated by more or less criminal travel agencies whose only motive is to deceive the Swedish system.

It also does not feel any better when one reads in the report that Migrationsverket's controls are often non-existent or insufficient. It even states straight out in the report that Migrationsverket's follow-up controls have not been carried out at all for a couple of years. One must ask how that is possible, Mr. Speaker. How can the agency that handles perhaps the hottest political issue of the last 15 years have been allowed to continue in this manner? I understand why the Social Democrats do not seem to be participating in today's debate, because this is something that has escalated under their rule.

It is also eyebrow-raising that the Swedish Migration Agency only now seems to have concluded that one should start requesting original passports to allow someone to work in Sweden during their asylum process. According to the report, a photocopy has sufficed previously. I wonder how that is possible. How could the previous government even have allowed such a shrug-of-the-shoulders attitude in such an important matter? It is terrifying, Mr. Speaker.

The report also states that the Swedish Migration Agency completely lacks control regarding whether actual work truly takes place after someone has changed tracks. There is no knowledge of whether individuals are forced to pay back the wages to the boss. It also appears that there has been a concern from the very beginning that the system could lead to human trafficking. Nevertheless, no one has done anything about this or even thought it was important to have any form of control.

Considering all the risks associated with the system, the Swedish National Audit Office assesses that the government should have followed up on the system, but this has not occurred.

Mr. Speaker! When people are allowed to abuse the right of asylum because they want a work permit, the process is complicated for those who truly have grounds for asylum. It is not fair. At the same time, a fast track is created that makes one go ahead of all those who apply for a work permit in the normal way in this country. That is not fair either.

So this is about people who jump the queue and abuse our systems, and I do not think we should protect that type of person.

Mr. Speaker! It is therefore good to know that we can now submit this report to the archives. We now have a government that will most certainly take action and hopefully ensure that today's system of track switching is significantly reformed or completely abolished.

Labor migration and asylum migration are two different things and shall remain so. I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! What the Moderaterna did not want to say now was that over half are not granted a track change. It is not the case that everyone is granted to change tracks when they apply for asylum.

The National Audit Office issues a number of recommendations to the government and the Swedish Migration Agency to rectify the deficiencies that exist in the system of track switching. I nevertheless want to be clear that none of these recommendations aim to abolish the possibility of track switching. It is not a conclusion that the National Audit Office draws, but it is the government and the Sweden Democrats who want to proceed with abolishing the system of track switching. I do not, of course, share that assessment.

A more reasonable assessment would be to follow the National Audit Office's recommendations and rectify the deficiencies that exist in the system of track change – not to want to abolish the system itself. The system itself and the possibility of track change for those who have been denied their asylum application should remain so that one can instead apply for a residence permit for work, this not least because people are needed here in Sweden and because the strict asylum policy that we have today is not legally secure but creates many individual misjudgments.

That, as the government wants, completely abolishing the possibility of switching tracks is completely the wrong way to go. It means that the person who has been forced to wait a long time to have their asylum application decided and in the meantime obtained a job and entered society will not be given the opportunity to stay in the country.

Staying in Sweden through a change of status benefits both the asylum seeker and society. One already has a job and is usually established. One is self-sufficient and does not need to work illegally or hide upon a rejection. It benefits no one if an asylum seeker who already has a job is rejected and loses everything they have. We have already tried that system – a system with very long processing times, tightening of, among other things, the LMA legislation, and legally secure deportation decisions that cannot even be executed.

This has only expanded the shadow society that the parties here in the chamber of the Riksdag say they want to combat. People live undocumented, are not allowed to work, and can also not be deported. It is an unnecessary suffering that risks increasing even further with this government's policy, and it affects both the individual and society.

The points that the National Audit Office identifies can be addressed in other ways. But then one must look at what is lacking in the system. As the previous speaker pointed out, it is, for example, about a lack of control from the Swedish Migration Agency, something that is partly rooted in a lack of resources for the Swedish Migration Agency.

The previous government is likely very well aware of these deficiencies, as they gutted the Swedish Migration Agency and allowed it to undergo the largest dismantling of a state agency in modern times. This has caused routines and control activities at the Swedish Migration Agency to fail in several parts. This applies primarily to the fact that the agency does not always, through a reconciliation against the Swedish Tax Agency's data, check whether the applicant has worked prior to the asylum application.

The National Audit Office also notes that the Swedish Migration Agency, due to a lack of resources during recent years, has not even carried out follow-up controls of granted track changes, which means that there is a risk that errors or misuse of the regulatory framework are not detected until the person eventually applies to extend the work permit. The consequences of the lack of control activities are, naturally, the risk of wage dumping, that sham placements are not detected, that vulnerable people are exploited on the labor market, and that persons who do not meet the conditions for track change are nevertheless granted residence and work permits.

I believe, just as the National Audit Office does, that the Swedish Migration Agency should prioritize and strengthen the work with controls of granted residence permit changes, which presupposes that the Swedish Migration Agency receives these tasks and resources to carry out the work.

Vänsterpartiet has repeatedly raised the issue of the excessively rapid reduction of Migrationsverket's resources from 2017 onwards, the consequences it has caused and the suffering it has created. We also see this in the report that we are debating today.

One can still say that politicians in this chamber have caused people from other countries to be exploited on the labor market, not least due to the previous Aliens Act which puts the asylum seeker in a disadvantaged position and a vulnerable position on the labor market. It is also about a deeply unfair system for labor migration that the previous government did not rectify, even though they had eight years to fix this.

The only thing this government is moving forward with now, and which the Social Democrats of course accept after eight years of failure on the issue, is a wage requirement that does not solve the problem or address the problems we have with labor immigration.

It should be the needs of the labor market that govern labor migration, not the right-wing nationalists' or the Social Democrats' desire to reduce immigration to Sweden. If the government seriously intends to want to address these problems, completely different measures are required. A first step would be to introduce a fair system for labor migration, a system where those who come to Sweden to work are not exploited by unscrupulous employers and are not used to dump wage and working conditions on the Swedish labor market. Such a system presupposes reintroduced labor market screening, background checks of employers, strengthened rights for labor migrants who come forward and report about poor conditions at an employer, harsh penalties for employers who exploit labor migrants, compensation to the person affected, as well as the possibility of what we are debating today, namely switching tracks.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Resare (M)

Mr. Speaker! The member has read the report where it appears that a risk of human trafficking was seen from the very beginning, that is to say a system that is grossly abused. Does the member then mean that there are no problems with today's regulations on temporary agency work, other than that unscrupulous employers should be forced to pay damages in those cases where they abuse the regulations?

Does the individual have no responsibility whatsoever? One comes to Sweden, seeks asylum and burdens our asylum system, which is intended to help those people who have it absolutely hardest in the entire world and who cannot remain in their home countries. One comes from a safe country, enters the asylum system and burdens it so that other people are forced to wait longer to have their cases reviewed. Does the member mean that there are no problems? Or does the member mean that the legislation for change of grounds for asylum should still be reformed?

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! What a strange question. Now the member is pitting people seeking protection against people seeking work permits in Sweden, that is to say that they would take their places. The problem is that you do not want people seeking protection in Sweden or that people should seek these jobs either. The only thing you as a government want is deportation, deportation, and deportation. It is also because you have no other policy in any other area, and you cover up all your failures by talking about deportation.

I do not think that the asylum seeker who changes tracks has any obligation to do the right thing in the system. That is what happens, that is to say, they are processed for their asylum application. During the long processing time, they get a job, as people do, work, and then change tracks so that they are here with a work permit. We have a totally legally insecure asylum system in Sweden. Then you get to work here, are inside society and inside the systems. What the member wants to do is to put them outside the entire system, increase the shadow society and force people to work illegally.

I receive a question about reforming the system. I said in my speech that it is clear that we want controls, but the Moderaterna were also not so eager during the last parliamentary term to give money to Migrationsverket to increase the controls.

You have never cared that people are exploited in the labor market. But now you in the government have a chance to ensure that people are not exploited in the labor market. The only thing you are putting forward is a wage demand. That does not solve the problems of people being exploited in the labor market at all.

I do not know what the government wants other than to deport, deport, and deport, but you have no solutions to the real problems we are debating today.

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

Magnus Resare (M)

Mr. Speaker! The report shows that a quarter of all those who seek a change of status come from countries where 90 percent are rejected in their asylum applications. One can read that the Swedish Migration Agency's case officers say that people, during their asylum interviews, tell them that they are not actually seeking asylum but are seeking a work permit. There are travel agencies that engage in helping people to come to Sweden. They explain to them how to seek asylum and then make a change of status. The purpose is not to seek asylum, but the purpose is to burden the system in order to jump the queue for labor migration.

We say that it cannot be a system where one mixes labor immigration and asylum immigration. It is unfair to the people who are standing in line to get a work permit, and it is absolutely unfair to the people who are fleeing from terror and potential death in their home countries.

Vänsterpartiet thinks that the system should still be maintained so that these are subjected to further waiting times in the Swedish migration system. I do not think that it is fair.

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! Now these arguments come again, as if the member cares about those who flee bombs or seek refuge in Sweden because they are subjected to terror or otherwise. You do not want them here. In every way, you try to close the EU's borders so that people die in the Mediterranean, face violence at the border, are deported immediately or put in prison. That is the policy you support in the EU.

It is not that the member in any way cares that people seek asylum in Sweden. Those fleeing from terror cannot reach Sweden with your politics. Good heavens! The Moderates are even going to stand at the border and campaign against coming to Sweden.

According to the Moderaterna, there are people who exploit the system, that is, come from a country where there is no basis for asylum grounds. They are self-sufficient and have jobs. I do not understand why they should not be allowed to continue working in Sweden. They are already inside the system. Then we are at what I took up earlier, namely that you want to pull them out of the system. It is not that people will leave the country, but they remain in a shadow society where they are exploited as black labor and face exploitation on the labor market.

I do not know how many minutes I have now spoken about solutions to the problem. Then a needs-based labor market assessment must take place in Sweden. People must be inside the systems with controls and so on. You have never wanted to give resources to Migrationsverket for all of this. Instead, you pit those seeking work permits against those seeking protection, as if you would ever care about people seeking protection. The most sympathetic cases were quota refugees, and even there you have closed the door. Do not stand here and pretend that you care about people seeking protection!

(Applause)

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by noting that Tony Haddou has not understood the mandate of the Swedish National Audit Office. He returns to the point that the Swedish National Audit Office does not recommend that the track change be removed. It is therefore not that audit that the Swedish National Audit Office is to perform; rather, the Swedish National Audit Office audits the government's work in relation to its own set goals. A set goal for the legislation today is that we shall have the track change, and then one audits how the track change shall function. Whether it shall exist or not is a political question, and it is not strange that the Swedish National Audit Office does not involve itself in that part.

Tony Haddou has also not understood what the problem is actually about. He returns again and again to the point that the individuals are either self-sufficient or are inside the system. First and foremost, we can state that these persons during the review period have had a salary threshold of 13,000 kronor per month gross. One is not self-sufficient on an income amounting to 13,000 kronor - at least not if one lives in a large city in Sweden. It is completely ruled out.

That the individuals are inside the system is not quite correct either. The entire report we are discussing is about how the system is being abused, that is to say that entrepreneurs sell residence permits and exploit the individuals to employ them under worse conditions and wages. It is a setup where a person wants a work permit and therefore allows themselves to be exploited in order to be able to stay in Sweden. They are, therefore, not inside the system.

How does Tony Haddou view countries such as, for example, Mongolia? Many of these people who seek asylum come from Mongolia, and 90 percent of them are rejected. Is it because of errors at Migrationsverket? Is it misjudgments, as Tony Haddou claims? Is there actually a war going on in Mongolia that no one in Sweden knows about?

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Mr. Speaker! One is not self-sufficient on 13,000, says the member. Raise the pensions then! For example. My God! Or the health insurance or something else. You are in power. My God, what arguments one has to face in this chamber! There is truly a long distance between the castle walls and ordinary people and the labor market and what people experience as a problem.

Say that one seeks asylum or makes a track change if one is from, for example, Mongolia. One still works in Sweden, and one is self-sufficient. One is that, so I don't really understand what the big problem is.

I know pensioners who receive less than 13,000. Why don't you raise their pensions? The member says that it is not possible to live on 13,000. Raise the sickness insurance! Raise the pensions! If that is the biggest problem in this debate, raise it for those who live on under 13,000 today! You are the ones in power.

(Applause)

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Madam Speaker! It does not surprise me in the least that Tony Haddou absolutely does not want to talk about his own speech and answer questions.

(TONY HADDOU (V): I would be happy to.)

Instead, he says: No, we are talking about pensions instead! It will be much better.

(TONY HADDOU (V): You say that they cannot live.)

People who come to Sweden and people who have lived here their whole lives and are established do not end up in the same situation. They are two completely different situations. It is not possible to compare them. Then I absolutely agree that pensions in Sweden should be raised. There we agree. But perhaps we could stick to the matter, Tony Haddou.

We return to Mongolia. Tony Haddou says in his speech that the asylum process is legally insecure and that "spårbyte" (track-switching) was needed as a kind of safety valve because there are very many people who actually have grounds for asylum who are rejected by the Migration Agency due to this legal insecurity. In that case, I would like to take Mongolia as a very good example, as many of the "spårbytare" come from that country.

There is no war in Mongolia. There is no humanitarian catastrophe of any other kind in Mongolia. Approximately 95 percent of those seeking asylum from there are rejected immediately, which I believe is completely reasonable. The actual figure, if the regulations were applied correctly, should be somewhere around 100 percent.

Is Tony Haddou seriously claiming that the reason why 95 percent of those coming from Mongolia are rejected in the first instance is legal uncertainty? There are, therefore, good reasons for persons from Mongolia to seek asylum in Sweden - it is just that the Swedish Migration Agency either does not know those reasons or does not believe the statement from the individual. Is this what Tony Haddou is seriously standing in the chamber and claiming?

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

Tony Haddou (V)

Madam Speaker! We do not see any safety valve. We want a safety valve throughout the entire asylum process. We believe that it should be safe to seek asylum in Sweden and work permits in Sweden. One could say that it is more like a legal path, absolutely. There are hardly any legal paths left, and you want to remove the last ones.

It becomes a bit of the same argumentation as from the Moderaterna that Ludvig Aspling pretends to care about people. The biggest problem, regardless of whether they are from Mongolia or from some other country, is that people can be exploited on the labor market. Cleaners are forced to work shifts that are ten hours or work seven days a week for starvation wages. Restaurant staff are forced to pay back their wages to be allowed to stay in the country. People are exploited sexually and so on. We have an incredible amount of exploitation on the labor market.

It is also the greatest betrayal the Sweden Democrats are making. They are abandoning the labor market test and setting a wage floor in order to keep up with this government. Had we had a labor market test in Sweden where we let the needs dictate what labor we have in Sweden, then we would have solved the problems being raised here.

My problem is not that people come from Mongolia and do a track change. My problem is that people are being exploited on the labor market. And the Sweden Democrats, who run this government, let it continue and do not have a single solution to that problem other than a wage floor. That is the only thing they have to offer, and everyone who knows what the labor market looks like knows that it does not solve the problems we have on the labor market and that it does not solve the labor migration. It is the exploitation that you do not want to do anything about. Perhaps that is what you should sit down and think about, Ludvig Aspling.

(Applause)

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Madam Speaker! The word "track change" is a rather typical Swedish bureaucratic euphemism that actually aims to hide the very purpose of this rule, which is to phase out regulated immigration step by step.

In practice, the rule on track-switching means that persons who seek asylum but are denied can switch tracks and instead apply for a work permit from within the country. This happens, so to speak, in conflict with the fundamental principle for Swedish labor immigration, which is that one should apply for and be granted a work permit before traveling into the country.

The rules for this were introduced in 2008 and were made even more generous in 2014, so no party other than mine is innocent of this failure.

The rule is also quite unique internationally. As the Swedish National Audit Office points out, no other country has a corresponding rule, and that is naturally for good reasons. Sweden has for a long time been a total basket case regarding migration policy legislation.

When the rules were introduced, any caseworker at the Swedish Migration Agency could foresee exactly what would happen, namely that people would come to Sweden and seek asylum despite having no grounds for asylum whatsoever. The purpose is then to circumvent the rules on labor migration. And who can really blame a person who abuses a regulatory framework that was built up from the very beginning for the sole reason that it should be abused?

The figures also speak for themselves. The National Audit Office concluded that 25 percent of the asylum seekers come from five countries that together account for 6 percent of all asylum seekers. At the same time, very few from these countries are judged to have any actual grounds for asylum.

A large group of asylum seekers are from Mongolia. Is there a war or a humanitarian catastrophe going on in Mongolia? No, of course not. Around 95 percent of all asylum seekers from there are rejected immediately, but that is not the purpose. The purpose of the journey is from the beginning to obtain a work permit. We also know that travel agencies - in the broadest sense of the word - in these countries sell tickets to Sweden that include an explanation of how to exploit the system.

Every sixth track-changer also comes from countries that have been on the Swedish Migration Agency's list of safe countries of origin since 2021. A quarter of the track-changers had wage income before the asylum application, i.e., worked illegally. A quarter of the track-changers have received wages from more employers than the one for whom the work permit applies, which also violates the rules.

The National Audit Office also notes that the deficiencies in the control of track changes lead to a great risk of wage dumping and sham employment, which we know is extremely common in Sweden, that vulnerable people are exploited in the labor market, and that persons who do not even meet the already generous conditions for track change are still granted residence permits precisely because no real scrutiny takes place. The risk exists that this, in the long run, causes the public to lose confidence in the entire system.

Furthermore, it is the case that the processing time for residence permit cases usually amounts to several months or even a year in addition to the time that the asylum process itself has taken. This means that the asylum seeker can in practice work in Sweden during both of these time periods, even if the wages and other working conditions are worse than what is actually required on the Swedish labor market, which naturally leads to people being exploited.

The National Audit Office also notes that even in cases where the Swedish Migration Agency rejects an application for a change of residence because the conditions are not met, it is still possible for people to work in Sweden without a work permit during the processing time, and there is thus an additional risk that employers exploit the situation by, for example, offering worse conditions and lower wages.

The Swedish National Audit Office concludes with the following: "Overall, we assess that track switching can be utilized as a way to circumvent the legislation that applies to other labor migration. The applicant can gain access to the Swedish labor market and the employer can avoid the regular controls that apply to work permits for other labor migration."

This is a diplomatic way of expressing what is completely obvious: The regulatory framework is laid out for cheating.

It is naturally not only the Swedish National Audit Office that has noted this. Delmi, that is the Delegation for Migration Studies, raises the issue in its report 2020:1. The report was also cited in the Migration Committee's report, so everyone in the committee should be familiar with it. It should be added that Delmi is not a conservative institution but extremely liberal on migration issues, so when criticism comes even from there, one should therefore listen.

I read out: "The possibility of switching tracks appears, in light of research in the field, as an extra chance to stay in Sweden for those who have had their asylum application rejected and have had a job in Sweden. Frödin and Kjellberg (2015; 2017) showed that even those who did not meet the conditions for a formal track switch to labor migrants could still obtain work permits (informal track switchers). Often, these are people who have stayed in the country during a protracted process with an asylum application, appeals, rejection decisions, and notices of deportation or expulsion - and then apply for a work permit from abroad."

Further: "A consequence of the many large opportunities for switching tracks is, according to several informants, that it is being systematized. Kristina Rännar, Migrationsverket, also points out that it risks disrupting operations by making the boundary between being an asylum seeker and a job seeker more diffuse. By seeking asylum, one gets the opportunity to work and thereby a chance to stay in the country despite having lacked grounds for asylum from the beginning. The expanded opportunities for switching tracks result in that a no in the asylum process does not need to be a no to being allowed to stay in the country, which in turn means that the person who has received a no does not have incentives to prepare for return. A similar reasoning is put forward by Mikaela Eriksson, Justitiedepartementet: Coming here and seeking asylum can just be one way to legalize the stay and be here for a short time and engage in something else. It could be to work or . Our inability to handle these asylum applications very quickly means that it becomes attractive to come to Sweden because one can legally be here for a long time."

In light of all this, it is very difficult to understand how there can be a reservation in this report at all. How is it possible that there are political parties that are against the proposal that the track change be removed?

The reservations come from the usual suspects, i.e., those parties that see chaos, the exploitation of lawless and poor people, wage dumping, and corruption as completely okay or even something positive as long as the overall purpose is that as many as possible who lack grounds for asylum still get to stay in Sweden.

I believe, however, that the Center Party on one hand and the Left Party and the Green Party on the other have somewhat different starting points, even though they are joined in a common text.

For the Center Party, it is about an important opportunity for unscrupulous entrepreneurs to exploit poor people in low-paid work, to be able to sell residence permits for money and to press wages and working conditions, which is obviously good for profitability.

For the Left, it is rather a matter of some kind of mental block that prevents them from being able to understand that asylum applications can be completely unfounded. It doesn't matter that 80 percent of so-called refugees vacation in their home country—the one they fled for their lives from—or that people come from Mongolia, which is obviously not in a war or any humanitarian catastrophe, and that almost all of them receive immediate rejections. But apparently, there is still an asylum ground in the background that no one outside the Left Party knows about.

In the reservation, it states: "The system of track switching benefits both society and the individual." But after several reports that list examples of how extremely poorly this system functions for both society and the individual, it is difficult not to suspect that it is self-interest that is in control. The rules do not benefit society or the individual, but they benefit these politicians' own interests.

For my part, I am glad that this madness will come to an end.

In this speech, Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD) agreed.

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! I do not quite know where to begin, but perhaps where the member ended, with "this madness." In my world, it is not madness that people go to work in the morning, contribute and pay tax to our common good. That is actually what we are talking about. The Center Party thinks that a no should be a no for those who do not have grounds for protection, but if one can work, contribute and pay tax to our common good, it is only good. We need more, not fewer, who work in our elongated country.

Something is missing in the speeches from the Moderates and the Sweden Democrats – at the same time as the Liberals and the Christian Democrats are completely missing from the debate – and that is the competence shortage. Many companies have an incredibly difficult time finding the competence they need. People who work, contribute, and pay tax should be encouraged, not deported.

Centerpartiet stands up for the possibility for an asylum seeker who is denied their application for a residence permit but who works during the asylum period to be able to make a so-called track change in order to be able to stay in Sweden and work, contribute, and pay tax. Sweden needs more labor in both the short and long term. This does not, however, mean that the system with track change works exemplarily, on the contrary. The National Audit Office's report shows that there is extensive fraud linked to track change.

The National Audit Office therefore proposes a number of measures to tackle the problem, and the Center Party welcomes this. The National Audit Office recommends that the government shall ensure that the Swedish Migration Agency can exchange necessary information with cooperating authorities and that the information can be used in case processing, as well as that the Swedish Migration Agency can compile all necessary information regarding the employers concerned in order to be able to investigate and control track-switching cases.

Fraud, irregularities and organized crime do not belong in any part of society. Therefore, we stand behind the National Audit Office's recommendations. However, we do not stand behind the government's intention to, instead of implementing the National Audit Office's recommendations, completely abolish the possibility of asset forfeiture.

We also consider that the issue of track-switching is linked to how the reception of asylum seekers shall be designed in general, for example, how the possibility of living in own housing during the asylum period shall be designed and under what conditions an asylum seeker shall have the right to work during the asylum period. The government is now looking at these questions, and that is good. We consider therefore that, in addition to dealing with the fraud and exploitation that exists linked to track-switching, the possibility to perform track-switching needs to be reviewed broadly within the framework of how the entire reception of asylum seekers shall be designed.

The competence shortage is one of our time's absolute greatest challenges, perhaps as large as the climate crisis and insecurity. It is truly here and now for our companies. By 2026, 11,000 people need to be hired in northern Sweden, and that is only in the basic industry. The CEO of Industriarbetsgivarna says that the limitation of labor immigration is a blow to Swedish industry. And the blows follow one after another. First you introduce wage floors, then you remove the possibility of switching tracks, and then you introduce the benefit line with increased unemployment insurance and abolish the work line with increased employer contributions for young people.

This is what it is about, in my opinion – that more people need to work in Sweden. Companies need more people who can work. When I became a member of Alliansen, as I sometimes say, the Moderaterna had an election slogan that read: Sweden works when Sweden is at its best. Now I can only state that Sweden expels when Sweden is at its best. It is a tragic development.

Madam Speaker! I would like to move for approval of reservation 1. I hope that during this parliamentary term we will once again see the Moderates become the new workers' party, because Sweden needs more parties that stand up for the work ethic, not fewer.

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

Magnus Resare (M)

Madam Speaker! We are four right-wing parties that want to move Sweden forward. We would very much like to be five, but then you in the Center Party must sober up on migration issues. You must stop this struggle for open borders and unregulated immigration. Sweden cannot handle any more of that.

The Speaker is giving a speech and tells of a competence supply that is to take place through a track change in the migration process. It is completely the opposite. This is about people who do not want or can get a normal work permit and who therefore turn to a travel agency in some other country that arranges a trip where one comes here, seeks asylum and then immediately makes a track change - the whole idea with the asylum application is to make a track change.

Then I wonder where in the report the member finds a single word about it being to any greater extent about highly qualified labor and that it is the competence supply that is necessary which occurs through the track-switching process. When I read the report, it is low-paid jobs that are suspected to a high extent of involving human trafficking in the worst case, but in any case sometimes that the employer forces back the wages or other forms of abuse. Where does the member find a single word about this being to save the Swedish competence supply?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! Let us begin by saying that I did not speak about highly qualified labor. This is what the government has not understood: We need all labor, not just the highly qualified. On Sunday, I watched Aktuellt and Agenda, and there the CEO of Industriarbetsgivarna stood and said that we need all labor.

We need childcare workers and nursing assistants; we need all sorts of things. We need actual labor, not just highly qualified [labor].

I do not know if the member simply wanted to be mean or if he is truly ignorant. But to stand here in the speaker's chair and say that the Center Party is for unregulated immigration, that is not serious. You know—excuse me, Madam Speaker, I am becoming so upset—the member knows that the Center Party stands for regulated immigration, even if we do not stand for the same immigration as the Sweden Democrats and the Moderates. To spread that type of falsehood here in the chamber is another tragic sign of where the Moderates have headed. Debate instead in earnest how the Swedish base industry in Norrland shall get the competence they need!

No, it is not just about changing tracks, and I also realize that it is not the most important of measures, but I realize that it is part of everything else. Instead of the benefit line with increased unemployment insurance, we need the work line with lowered employer contributions for young people. We need foreign labor in the form of labor immigration, and changing tracks is part of this. Swedish industry needs more people who can and want to work. I hope that the Moderates one day, instead of standing and lying in the speaker's chair, will talk about the Swedish work line again.

(Applause)

In this speech, Annika Hirvonen (MP) agreed.

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

Magnus Resare (M)

Madam Speaker! Then it is the rules for work permits and the regulatory framework surrounding them that should be reformed, perhaps not the track-switching rules. We have 700,000 and more non-European born, a large part of them asylum seekers and former asylum seekers, who are not self-sufficient today. Why do we not ensure that those people get into jobs first? Why do we maintain a system where people come from Mongolia and in 95 percent of cases are rejected in their asylum applications? Still, people come here, and practically all of them do a track-switch. Then one can ask how it can be so. From certain countries we see that people come here just to do a track-switch, when we have 700,000 people who are already coming from countries outside Europe and are not self-sufficient today. Is it not better that we reform the regulatory framework for labor migration if we want labor migration?

Does the member think it is good that the asylum system is burdened with people who are actually only here for a work permit? Should they not go the labor migration route so that the poor people who need to apply for asylum get a faster and more efficient review of their case?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! I do not know if the questions were directed at me or at the government. Why we do not ensure that the 700,000 foreign-born people who are not self-sufficient are working – yes, I wonder that too. The entire opposition is probably wondering why the Moderates, the Liberals, and the Christian Democrats do not do more so that more foreign-born people have a job to go to. Do not ask me that question, but ask that question to Johan Pehrson or Paulina Brandberg, who are the Minister for Employment and the Deputy Minister for Employment. We have several times tried to get answers from the ministers in the committees on why more is not being done so that more foreign-born people have a job to go to. Then the member asks me why we should not reform the system for labor migration. You are doing that now. You are reforming the systems so that it becomes harder for people from other countries to come here and work.

I can state that there is something that is grating, Madam Speaker, and it is grating for real. One can find quote after quote from Gröna arbetsgivare, Industriarbetsgivarna and Svenskt Näringsliv. They are truly worried. No, it is not the Social Democrats' fault, and it is not the Center Party's fault. It is your responsibility. It is the Moderaternas responsibility to ensure that the companies find those they need so that they can hire. And it does not only concern the companies. It also concerns the public sector – that I and all of us others should be able to receive high-quality care and that the school should become good. It concerns that the basic industry in Norrland should be able to flourish and be part of the green transition. For this, we need more labor, not less.

I have said it before, and I say it again: Sweden is at its best when Sweden works.

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Madam Speaker! We can begin by stating that Jonny Cato usually has no idea what he is talking about. He says in his speech that we do not just need qualified labor, but that we need all labor, for example, childcare workers and nursing assistants.

I thought I would take the opportunity to inform that childcare workers shall undergo a training of at least one and a half years of full-time studies plus one must learn Swedish very well, I think, to be able to work as a childcare worker. With nursing assistants, it is roughly the same thing. It is at least one and a half years of full-time studies plus one must learn Swedish quite well to be able to work as that.

I think these are qualified jobs. This may be because I have worked both in preschool and as an assistant nurse, so I know what this is about. I know that it is not as easy as Jonny Cato thinks. One cannot step in as an asylum seeker from Mongolia without education, which is often the case with these people, and take such a job straight away. These are Jonny Cato's fantasies. When he says that we need all labor immigration, he does not say why. In Jonny Cato's world, this is about pressing conditions and wages for ordinary working Swedes. It is robber capitalism - that is what it is about.

Jonny Cato writes in his reservation that it can simultaneously be stated that the system of track switching is associated with a number of deficiencies, including in the form of fraud linked to the system, as appears from the Riksrevisionen's report, and that Riksrevisionen directs a number of recommendations to the government.

This is quite well known. It couldn't have come as any news either for Jonny Cato or for any of the other reserve members. It has been well known for a long time that there are very many deficiencies.

I would like to direct a very simple question to the member. A serious Member of Parliament would then write a motion regarding measures against these deficiencies, but is there a single motion from Centerpartiet to remedy these deficiencies that has been submitted before this report reached the Riksdag?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! One must choose one's words carefully, as debates with Ludvig Aspling end up on the YouTube channel Riks.

When it comes to pressing wages, there is a lot of talk about 13,000 kronor. Let us look at how many who received a work permit in 2020 had a salary between 13,000 and 14,000. It was 147 people. The Center Party does not think this is reasonable either, and we can imagine that something is being done to raise that level. It was 147 people, but here in the chamber it sounds as if everyone who immigrates as labor has 13,000 kronor.

Let us talk about the definition of highly qualified labor. In my world, we need all the labor we can get in Sweden. Or excuse me, not in my world but in the companies' world, in the public sector's world, in Svenskt Näringslivs world, in Gröna arbetsgivares world and in Industriarbetsgivarnas world.

When it comes to the definition of highly skilled labor, the government, together with the Sweden Democrats, has already stated that the labor force is highly skilled above the median wage on the Swedish labor market: 33,500. That is what you define as highly skilled labor within the framework of labor migration, Ludvig Aspling. It does not depend on what education or how much competence is needed within a certain profession, but what you have chosen to define is a wage. Above it, one is highly skilled, and below it, one is low-skilled. That is how reality looks.

I am the first to agree that we and many other parties, including the member's coalition parties, could have done more to safeguard the system of labor immigration and the system of track change so that the anomalies would have been fewer. It is time to do that now instead of completely pulling the rug out from under Swedish companies that want to find the competence they need, regardless of whether it concerns track change, labor immigration, or regular employment.

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Madam Speaker! I must begin by expressing my sympathy. If I were Jonny Cato, I wouldn't want to be on YouTube either, because this is quite embarrassing.

Jonny Cato pointed out that few people on paper had such a low salary as 13,000 kronor. If Jonny Cato had read the report, he would have understood that it is not about what is on paper, because we have no idea how much these people actually earn because the fraud and corruption is so widespread. Very often, the salary is higher on paper, but then it must be paid back to the employer as payment for the person to, for example, receive their residence permit in Sweden. This would have been completely obvious to Jonny Cato if he had taken the time to sit down and read the report that he is debating.

To return to the question of whether the track switchers were needed for the competence, Jonny Cato says they were needed. But if the track switchers were needed, Jonny Cato, why is then the unemployment among asylum seekers who have received residence permits that way so incredibly high? It is the same group we are talking about. All these people have come to Sweden as asylum seekers. How is it possible to argue that the track switchers were needed and that the industry is screaming for track switchers when people who are granted their asylum applications and come in that way have a very difficult time entering the labor market? Jonny Cato knows this. These two things are impossible to reconcile.

And finally, Jonny Cato, I asked a simple yes-or-no question. Jonny Cato points out that there are deficiencies, cheating, and problems, and that even the Center Party would like to see it addressed. That is very good, but where is the motion? Has the Center Party introduced a single motion to address the cheating at the track change? Does this exist in the Riksdag's motion bank? I know, because I have looked. Yes or no, Jonny Cato?

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! It is so amusing with Ludvig Aspling. As soon as one does not agree with him, he makes it appear as if one is almost stupid, but that is obviously not the case. Politics is about the fact that one sometimes thinks differently. It is truly a pity that the Sweden Democrats do not stand up for dissent in any part of society, not even here in Sweden's Riksdag.

One thing that is truly embarrassing is that the member stands there and argues that one sets a wage on paper and another wage in reality. That is exactly why your wage floor does not work. It is exactly this that your own investigator has said: A raised wage floor only means that one sets a wage on paper but has another wage in practice. What the member just said is that the government knows that a wage floor does not work, and yet they introduce it.

(Applause)

Finally, we have it in black and white that it is not about the wage floor itself, but that the member believes Sweden is best when Sweden expels, not that Sweden is best when Sweden works.

I am glad that one can have different opinions in this chamber. I am proud to belong to a party that takes the skills shortage seriously and that does everything it can so that Swedish companies can find the skills they are in such great need of. The member may stand here and laugh, but I do not believe that Swedish basic industry is doing so right now.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Madam Speaker! I thought I would conclude this debate by explaining what track change actually is. Track change is about people who are in Sweden, who work here, who meet the requirements for a profession with conditions in accordance with collective agreements and who have a salary they can live on being able to obtain a residence permit in Sweden.

Persons have the right to apply for a residence permit to continue their work if the application is submitted two weeks after they have received a rejection of their asylum application, instead of them first needing to leave Sweden and then apply for a residence permit for work from their home country.

Today, there are long processing times at the Swedish Migration Agency, and people who have a job that meets the requirements for a work permit would need to leave their job for quite a few months if they first have to go back to their home country, submit their application, and then wait for the Swedish Migration Agency to process it.

The employer is deprived of its workforce very suddenly, and there are a number of challenges with this for both the employer and the employee. If one also has a family, one needs to pull the children out of school, and a partner might also need to leave the country. Since one is not allowed to work while being abroad during the time the application is being processed, one might also need to terminate their rental agreement and join the housing queue again. Yes, you understand – it becomes a hell of a hassle.

The track change is a very good way to ensure that those who are already established on the labor market and who work here can continue to do so while the Swedish Migration Agency examines the right to a work permit. This is what the track change is about.

For Miljöpartiet, it is incomprehensible that the government wants to deport a mass of people who work, support themselves, and pay tax in Sweden. The abolition of the "spårbyte" (track change) is one of the measures that the government wants to implement which concerns deporting people who work in Sweden, support themselves, and contribute to the Swedish welfare by both paying tax and performing jobs where we today have a shortage of people who can take these jobs.

Other proposals concern the wage floor, which will result in people who currently work in Sweden being deported because they only earn, for example, 25,000 at their job.

This is insane, and it will make Sweden poorer. It is also completely unacceptable considering what consequences it has for people and for companies.

Fundamentally, this is about the fact that this government is in the pocket of the Sweden Democrats and that the Sweden Democrats want to deport people at all costs, regardless of whether they work or not and regardless of whether it makes Sweden poorer or not. For the Sweden Democrats, it is about wanting a country populated by white people. It is a racist basic ideology that governs the government that Sweden has. And that is the reason why even the right wing's and the Moderates' best friends, Svenskt Näringsliv, are now actually pulling the emergency brake and pressing all the alarm buttons available. This will harm Sweden.

The National Audit Office has submitted a report on the tracking of the migration process. They state that the overall conclusion is that the system, overall, appears to reach the correct target group. We have had an entire debate where this fundamental and overall conclusion that it appears to reach the correct target group has not been addressed.

The National Audit Office also recommends that the government and the Swedish Migration Agency take a number of concrete measures to curb fraud, as fraud occurs in this system just as it does in all other systems we have. I intended to read out these recommendations, and the Green Party stands behind them. Together with the Centre Party and the Left Party, we have a reservation stating that the recommendations should be implemented and the system should be retained.

The National Audit Office's recommendations are about the Swedish Migration Agency being able to exchange necessary information with cooperating authorities, so that the agency can use the information in case processing. It could, for example, involve exchanging information with the Swedish Tax Agency, so that one has track of that people have also received the salary that it says on paper they are supposed to have. It is super simple.

It is about compiling the necessary information about employers in order to investigate and monitor cases of identity theft. It is just a matter of taking action.

It is about prioritizing and strengthening the work with follow-up controls of granted track changes, so that one knows that people actually continue to have the jobs in the way that is required and that they are simply not being exploited without continuing to receive their salary.

It is about investigating the possibilities of automating controls to see if the conditions for track changes are met. AI can do a lot, and it can be done quite simply even by the Swedish Migration Agency.

It is about developing a technical solution to obtain data from Skatteverket even for persons who have a coordination number, i.e., persons who have not been registered in the population register and do not have a personal identity number. Migrationsverket can already today easily exchange this data with Skatteverket. It is just a matter of taking action.

It is about developing processing support to assess the employer's financial conditions, because it is required that one can expect the employer to have the means to employ this person for at least one year ahead.

It is also about investigating the possibilities for processing support to determine which employers should be checked more thoroughly in track-switching cases.

Madam Speaker! With this, I move for approval of the reservation, for we shall not engage in deporting people who are here and working and contributing to our country and paying tax so that we can build our common society strong.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Resare (M)

Madam Speaker! When all other arguments are exhausted, Annika Hirvonen, one can always play the racism card.

It is obvious that this heavily burdens our asylum system. The problem with post-controls is that they occur after the system has been abused, not before. We will not be able to curb what we see today, that people choose not to apply for a work permit the standard way, i.e., that they apply for a work permit from the country they live in, but instead take the shortcut and hire a travel agency that helps them to Sweden so that they can burden the asylum system and prolong the process for everyone who truly needs asylum and is seeking asylum.

I know that Annika Hirvonen often speaks warmly for those who come here and who are under 18 years old. How many of those who are under 18 manage to turn 18 because there are people here who are burdening the asylum system because they actually want a work permit? Is it not more reasonable that people apply for a work permit if they want to work in Sweden and apply for asylum if they want asylum in Sweden? These two systems should be separate, so that the people who are truly in need of protection come here so that they can be granted protection and not so that they can be granted a work permit.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Madam Speaker! To begin with, I want to ask Magnus Resare if he does not agree that SD's policy is fundamentally based on a racist ideology. This is, in fact, a real reality that many people are now being hit very hard by. The Moderates refuse to see the consequences of having submitted to the Sweden Democrats and are now implementing policies that aim to deport people from this country so that one, according to Richard Jomshof, can achieve a homogeneous society. This is something that has been said by the Sweden Democrats in this chamber from this rostrum.

Abolishing the right to change tracks will lead to that people who work in Sweden, support themselves and pay tax in accordance with the conditions and rules that apply today will be deported. People who, during the all too long processing times, have ensured that they secured a job to support themselves will be torn from their workplaces and their homes and forced to seek their own job again from their home country. It is a process that can take many months.

Of the recommendations that I listed, six of them concern improving the process when assessing the cases. One concerns post-control. Both are important in order to curb the cheating that also exists in the system.

But what you are doing now is closing your eyes to a reality where people remain in Sweden, behave correctly during a long asylum process, and wishing for a different reality where decisions are made quickly and they do not have to wait so long.

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

Magnus Resare (M)

Madam Speaker! I must nevertheless ask a question to the member. We see in the report that there are applicants from countries where 95 percent of those who seek asylum have their applications rejected. The case officers at the Swedish Migration Agency say that these people are open about the fact that they are not seeking asylum but a work permit. Should we deny people from certain countries the right to seek asylum because we know that they are engaging in a pure labor migration through a fast track? Is it not better that we reform the track-switching legislation rather than that we reform the asylum legislation and say that if you come from a country where you are likely to be rejected, you do not have the right to seek asylum? I do not believe that is what the member wants.

What we want to tackle is that people come here and abuse our asylum system because they want to get a work permit and a job in Sweden. I thought that the member, if anyone, cherished the Swedish asylum system and that those who are here and seeking asylum should have their case reviewed and receive any potential protection as quickly as possible. Right now, their processing times are being extended because people are here for completely different reasons than to seek asylum. They tell the processors at Migrationsverket that they are not here to seek asylum but to get a work permit and that they know our regulations allow it. And the legislation means that the processors at Migrationsverket cannot do anything other than grant a change of track. In that case, these people have bypassed the entire queue for work permits that many are standing and waiting in and have extended the queue for those who are sitting and waiting to have their asylum application reviewed.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Madam Speaker! Now we are approaching something here! Magnus Resare speaks of reforming the system with track switching. I would very gladly sit down with the Moderates and discuss how we can reform the system with track switching. Just as we, the Center Party and the Left Party, write in our joint reservation, we believe that cheating and exploitation must always be curbed and that the deficiencies in the system with track switching should be addressed. Let us therefore sit down and do just that!

Do not pretend that all people seeking a change of status are some kind of fraudsters, because that is not the case. It is about people from, for example, Afghanistan who have sought asylum, been denied, and waited for a very long time in Sweden due to long processes. During that time, they have obtained work and supported themselves and their families, paid taxes, and contributed to the welfare.

With your proposal to abolish track-switching, Magnus Resare, these people would be torn from their employment and their security here and deported to Afghanistan - which is still one of the world's most dangerous countries, even though Migrationsverket continues to grant people from there asylum applications. If you want to abolish the system, you want that these people should also not be granted track-switching.

This could, however, be an opening to reform the system so that we address the cheating and ensure that those Afghans who work, pay tax, and behave correctly here can stay without having to go back to Kabul and once again seek jobs and work permits from there - with all the risks that, honestly speaking, I believe we all agree that it entails. If this is an opening to reform the system, perhaps we are not so far apart after all.

The Swedish National Audit Office's report on track changes in the migration process - controls and follow-up

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

Ludvig Aspling (SD)

Madam Speaker! I requested the floor solely to move for the approval of the committee's proposal.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 16.)

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