Special debate on the occasion of the high number of fatal accidents in the workplace

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! The year 2023 was a dark year for the Swedish labor market. In total, 65 people died at work. And even though only 17 days have passed in the new year, an additional 3 people have perished. It can never be accepted that people die at work. Every single death is a tragedy, both for the employer and for society.

The Left Party has raised the issues of fatal accidents in working life in the Riksdag for many years, and this debate is therefore held at the request of the Left Party.

Mr. Speaker! I and the country's workers expect the other parties here today to present concrete proposals for measures and that the government implements targeted measures in the near term to reverse this development. No one should have to die at work.

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Mr. Speaker! The year we have left behind was an incredibly dark year for the Swedish labor market. As the member said, it was 65 people who lost their lives as a result of workplace accidents, and that is 65 people too many. It was a year where December, the month when many look forward to holidays with family and friends, became the most accident-prone month of the entire year and 11 people did not come home to loved ones after the end of the workday.

So it should not be on Swedish workplaces. No one should die, be injured or become ill as a result of their work. Therefore, this government, like the previous one, works based on a zero vision for work-related deaths, in line with the work environment strategy for 2021-2025. It is satisfying that we fundamentally have a consensus across party lines on these serious issues.

I visited the scene of the accident in Sundbyberg in the days following the tragic elevator accident, and it was shocking to see it with my own eyes. Many of us have expressed shock regarding what has happened, and my and the government's thoughts naturally go to those affected, their relatives, and their colleagues.

We still do not know exactly what caused this specific accident. The police authority, the Swedish Work Environment Authority, and the Accident Investigation Authority are all conducting their investigations to get to the bottom of what has happened, with the aim of ensuring that nothing similar can happen again. From the government's side, we are following the authorities' work. I have personally received special briefings from both the Accident Investigation Authority and the Swedish Work Environment Authority. It is of the utmost importance that we now let the authorities' important work proceed. These are complex investigations that must be allowed to take time.

But until the situation clarifies regarding what has actually happened in this case and what consequences it entails, all actors need to be reminded of the clear regulatory framework that exists in our Work Environment Act – where those responsible for the work environment are identified and cooperation in everyday life, in the systematic work environment management, is the very core. It is about a systematic work environment management where every employer, large or small, together with representatives for the employees, work preventatively to prevent all types of risks in the work.

Arbetsmiljöverket is, of course, an agency with a very important task, the inspection activity. Even though we are now steering Arbetsmiljöverket towards conducting more unannounced physical inspections, they cannot be at all thousands of workplaces in Sweden every day. The work on the working environment takes place locally, and every person responsible for an operation must take that responsibility fully.

I have therefore called in representatives for the employers to hear what they are doing to prevent accidents. I have also invited representatives for the unions in the affected industries to listen to what they see as important to do, in both the short and long term, to reverse this development.

We now also have centers against crime against the working life in every region. In the budget bill for 2024, the Government has proposed major investments in the justice system, including more police officers and prosecutors. The initiative on agency cooperation against crime against the working life is a step toward creating a safe working life, where no one should have to risk life and health or be affected by crime or fraud, and to combat organized crime.

We have a zero vision towards work-related fatalities, and we take this most seriously.

(Applause)

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! With 65 deaths in workplace accidents, 2023 is summarized as a pitch-black year. Not since 2011 have so many people lost their lives on the Swedish labor market. It is completely horrific that people should have to die at work, and every individual fatal accident is a tragedy, obviously primarily for family, loved ones, and colleagues – but also for society. In our Sweden, all jobs shall be safe jobs. No other objective will suffice.

That many fatal accidents occurred last year is obviously not the government's fault, but politics inevitably has a responsibility. And when the curves point in the wrong direction, one must act. Unfortunately, I can state that the government has so far exhibited an obvious passivity in labor market policy generally, as well as regarding issues concerning the work environment, fair conditions, and crime in working life. This is exactly how it usually looks when the right-wing parties are in power. The last time we had a conservative labor market minister, work environment policy was slaughtered through massive cuts to Arbetsmiljöverket and the closure of Arbetslivsinstitutet.

After the alliance government's cuts, we Social Democrats gradually increased the resources. We adopted a zero vision for fatal accidents, which the right-wing parties first voted against. We established the Agency for Occupational Health Knowledge. We significantly increased the maximum amount for corporate fines, and we launched a heavy offensive against fraud and crime in the working life, among other things by establishing the regional a-krim centers, which now function as hubs in the work against this.

We also put forward a bill to give the regional safety representatives access to more workplaces. Unfortunately, the right-wing parties used their majority to vote down this in the Riksdag. Now, the SD government is also opening up to weaken the safety representatives by decoupling them from the union, which would make Swedish workplaces more dangerous.

Despite everything we Social Democrats have done, there is demonstrably much left to do. We have therefore, among other things, proposed a crisis commission to counteract fatal accidents in the hard-hit construction industry, as well as significantly increased appropriations to Arbetsmiljöverket.

But now we see instead how history repeats itself. When Sweden gets a right-wing government, the work environment policy is neglected. And even if the government now, in a pressured situation, lets on that they are investing in Arbetsmiljöverket, the truth is that while they are marginally inflation-adjusting the grant, they are also making a general saving. They are therefore not injecting resources that are sufficient to ramp up the work, which makes the agency's mission to increase the proportion of unannounced inspections toothless.

Mr. Speaker! The government's actions so far have been weak, sluggish, and reactive. An empty list of bills and meager budget tables will not make the situation any better. Now the government needs to act.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! In 2019 we stood here in exactly the same debate, even then following a reminder from Vänsterpartiet. Yet we have not succeeded in reversing the development. It is a failing grade for all of us in this chamber and shows that we must take a major new grip on the entire occupational health and safety policy, but the biggest failing grade is for the Socialdemokraterna. They sat in power for three years after that debate, and nothing happened. The previous government's occupational health and safety strategy has obviously not had the desired effect, despite good intentions. There are not many here who were part of that debate. It is I and Saila, I believe, but then it is quite empty. But enough about this, Mr. Speaker.

Construction and transport are two areas that stand out. I am not at all surprised. I have personally worked in the construction industry for 26 years and have on more than one occasion experienced colleagues losing their lives for reasons that could have been avoided. Then, Mr. Speaker, one asks the question: Why does it turn out this way? The reasons are many. Some are stress and pressured prices linked to short construction times, but above all, there are major problems with foreign labor. Most are posted according to the applicable regulations, but unfortunately, they exhibit major deficiencies in knowledge regarding the Swedish work environment legislation.

Many stand completely outside the authority's control. They are part of the shadow society that one has turned a blind eye to and allowed to emerge for years. They are workers who are ruthlessly exploited by unscrupulous employers who operate far down in the subcontracting chain. They are persons who should not even be in this country.

Mr. Speaker! This is a subject where we all want to reach the same goal, but where the solutions and the path there may look a bit different. For the Sweden Democrats, it is about clear directives to the Swedish Work Environment Authority. It is about creating opportunities for more wage earners to become safety representatives and to clarify their mandate so that there is full focus on the work environment work.

Regional safety representatives should not only have access to workplaces with union members. It is completely crazy and horrible that state-paid safety representatives do not have access to all of Sweden's workplaces. It is an opinion supported by, among others, LO and Byggnads, according to the referral responses regarding the bill that we had a number of years ago.

It is about research and development of the work regarding work environment-related problems. SAM, systematic work environment management, must be a requirement. But, Mr. Speaker, it is also about tightening the requirements and introducing a strongly regulated labor immigration and deporting those who should not be in the country. Only then do you take the tools out of the hands of many unscrupulous companies, particularly within the construction industry, who exploit these people ruthlessly.

We need to see harsher penalties and clear legislation. We need to see extended prescription periods for workplace environment crimes. No responsible employer should get away simply because the prescription period is too short.

Mr. Speaker! According to all forecasts, we have worse times ahead. A recession is at the door, and then we know that prices are squeezed, that pressure and stress increase, and that cheap labor becomes the biggest competitive factor. Then the number of accidents will also increase. If we are to reverse this trend in 2024, we need to start the work now, together.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! No one should have to die as a result of their work. Every fatal accident is a tragedy for those involved and their relatives. A workplace accident with a fatal outcome is unacceptable in a modern working life. For the Moderate-led government, this is a very important issue.

I have received calls from parents both in Jämtland and in Västra Götaland – parents who have lost their sons, both in their 20s, in workplace accidents. They have, independently of one another, contacted me to describe their frustration and grief over having lost their sons in accidents that should never have been able to happen.

They have also wished to describe their experience of how the legal processes have been handled after the accident. According to them, there is great potential for improvement here. These are views to be taken into account. I feel strongly with them in their grief and am firmly convinced that a change must be and is necessary.

It is the employer who has the responsibility for the work environment, according to the work environment legislation. With knowledge and systematic work environment management, the vast majority of fatal accidents and work-related deaths can be prevented. The year 2023 is a black year in the statistics of fatal accidents. Based on the Swedish Work Environment Authority's statistics, one can see that the number of fatal accidents in working life during the recent years, 2013-2022, lies between 24 and 40 people per year. The year 2023 unfortunately shows higher death figures.

Since the government took office, Arbetsmiljöverket has received more resources so that the agency can, for example, strengthen its supervisory work and carry out an increased number of inspections. Today's 278 occupational health and safety inspectors and the approximately 25,000 inspections shall therefore also be increased.

Constantly working on improvements in the work environment is extremely important and something that must not be deprioritized. Every incident shall be reported and investigated. This work is extremely important to prevent another person from not coming home after the end of the workday.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! That death at work is not highlighted in the public debate in a way that is actually in proportion to the number of those affected is a consequence of the fact that we live in a class society. Companies' pursuit of profit is often the basis for workplace accidents with a fatal outcome. The pursuit of profit and high surpluses leads to a poor work environment, negligence with protective equipment, and substandard work tools. To address workplace accidents, a society is needed where people's best interests are prioritized over companies' profits.

Work life is characterized today by an ever-increasing pace where employees are pushed to the limit. Many have insecure employment and do not dare to question safety deficiencies for fear of losing their jobs, and in many workplaces, especially within the construction sector, there are a number of subcontractors, which affects the possibilities to carry out precisely that important systematic work environment management and demand accountability if something happens.

In addition to this, there is widespread crime in the working life in many industries where unscrupulous employers exploit employees and migrant workers for low wages and poor conditions, and the state's work on the working environment has for a long time been very neglected.

The government and SD want to keep unlimited subcontracting at all costs, which makes it almost impossible to have control over who is working and who is responsible for the working environment at, for example, a construction site. The tragic elevator accident in December, where five construction workers died, is one of many examples. None of those who died were employed by the main contractor. At that workplace, there were a total of 119 subcontractors in four tiers.

Furthermore, the government also wants to make it more difficult for safety representatives and regional safety representatives to carry out inspections and detect deficiencies in the working environment. Vänsterpartiet also views the deficiencies in the legal aftermath of the fatal accidents that occur seriously. It takes an average of 1,000 days before charges are filed, and after that, it can take another year before a verdict is reached. And then it is only 15 percent of the fatal accidents that lead to charges.

If we are to be able to reverse this development and counteract the fatal workplace accidents, measures are required in several different areas in parallel, both preventive measures and harsher penalties. It is time to move from words to action. Sweden's workers expect this change, and the relatives and friends of those who have perished expect this change.

(Applause)

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Mr. Speaker! First and foremost, I would like to extend a thanks to the Left Party (V) which has initiated this very important debate.

The large number of fatal accidents in working life in 2023 is, of course, a great failure. 65 fatal accidents are 65 too many. Every death is one too many.

I would first like to express my sympathy for all those who are still mourning their partner, their parent, their children, their friends and their colleagues. It is a failure that requires action from both politicians and employers. The goal of the work environment must be that people should feel good at work and feel good about their work. Instead, we see that people go to work with their lives at stake. That is, of course, unacceptable.

The state plays an important role in enabling good work environment work for employers, while at the same time the requirements must be sky-high, the controls robust, and the consequences for negligence and cheating rock-hard. Specific initiatives are needed to provide better conditions for employers to conduct preventive work environment work. In the initiatives, a special focus on smaller companies is needed. This is natural because they have more limited resources than the big giants. The initiatives can involve knowledge dissemination, advice, and better tools to facilitate the systematic work environment work.

Mr. Speaker! In this debate, it is also inevitable to highlight the crime in the workplace, which is a very serious problem. People should never be exploited at work and by employers. More needs to be done.

I still want to highlight the work that the Centre Party, together with the previous government, did during the last parliamentary term when we pushed through, among other things, increased resources for the work of combating specifically crime in the workplace.

An important part is to improve inter-agency cooperation to detect more cases of fraud. More also needs to be done to prevent fraud and the exploitation of, for example, work permits when it concerns sham establishments and the trade of work permits.

Every lost life is an immense tragedy and focuses attention on the shortcomings in today's work environment efforts. Every worker has the right to a good and safe work environment, and it is ultimately the employers' responsibility to ensure a good work environment.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! In 2023, 65 people died at work. In 2022, 116 people died due to fatal violence. And in 2022, 1,254 people died due to suicide.

Even though death is a part of life, no one should have to die at work, due to violence or because they can no longer bear to live.

In a good society, we have safe and well-functioning workplaces. There, no one is afraid to be out in the evening. And there, one dreams of a better future.

Mr. Speaker! For us Christian Democrats, it is obvious that we have a problem when individuals travel to work but, due to security flaws, poor maintenance, lack of routines, occupational crime or negligence, do not come home after completed work because they have been affected by an accident.

As politicians, we must do what we can to reduce the risk of accidents. We must cooperate to find solutions that increase safety in our workplaces. At the same time, it is not enough that we work on these issues. If we are to achieve better and safer workplaces, it must occur in cooperation with the parties in the labor market.

Ultimately, it is the employers who are responsible for the working environment. And in cooperation with trade unions and safety representatives, they have a shared responsibility to ensure that no one is harmed at work.

It does not mean that we have no responsibility. On the contrary, it is important that politics is engaged and works actively to create the best possible conditions for our companies and for those who work. Therefore, it is good that the government is already doing quite a lot to reduce the risk of accidents. But it is always possible to do more to try to prevent people from being injured at work.

Mr. Speaker! In my second speech, I will return with more concrete measures. I conclude this speech, therefore, by stating that we should have a zero vision for fatal accidents at work. No one should have to go to work and be worried about whether they will return home with their health and life intact.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the Left Party, which has initiated this debate.

My thoughts go to the families who have been affected by the unthinkable of losing family members who never came home after a day's work. It is an unthinkable tragedy, like something taken out of a Dickens novel. But it is not actually about fictional people in a novel. Behind the figures are real people and real lives that have been lost and real families who have lost their loved ones.

People sell their labor, not their lives. In today's modern society, it should not be possible to lose one's life at work.

Despite our strong work environment legislation and the improved strategy from the previous S-MP government, and despite a zero vision towards fatal accidents in the workplace, the statistics show a worrying increase. Last year, 65 people lost their lives at work, according to Arbetsmiljöverket. It is high time that we reflect on these grim facts and take measures to reverse the negative trend.

Mr. Speaker! Per Nylén, department director at the Swedish Work Environment Authority, has highlighted the need for attitude changes and a changed vocabulary when we talk about deaths in the workplace. He suggests that instead of the word fatal accident, we should say incident with a fatal outcome. It then becomes clearer that this is not something random but actually something that can be foreseen and prevented. I agree.

According to previous reviews of fatal accidents carried out by the Swedish Work Environment Authority, a combination of causes was identified. But the most prominent cause concerns highly deficient or completely absent risk assessments. It is a concerning fact. But it also means that there is every possibility of changing the situation.

I welcome that the current government has the ambition to reduce fatal accidents, particularly by giving Arbetsmiljöverket the opportunity to carry out more unannounced inspections. However, the government's ambitions are not followed by concrete opportunities for Arbetsmiljöverket to take the right measures. The agency lacks resources both to increase the number of inspectors and to perform more unannounced controls. It is high time for the government to transform its ambitions from wishful thinking into concrete measures.

Finally, I want to highlight the problem with subcontractors and unclear responsibility. It is difficult to hold people accountable when you do not know who is working at a workplace and who is responsible. It should not be possible to pass the buck and shift the blame. We in Miljöpartiet want to see a tightening regarding the contractor chain.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Mr. Speaker! If we are to succeed in pressing down these death tolls, we must work within two different areas. We must make it easy to do the right thing, and we must make it easy to have a functioning and systematic work environment work.

This government sees it as a problem that we are getting more and more workplaces in Sweden that lack local safety representatives. The government has therefore taken an initiative and given a mandate to the Swedish Work Environment Authority to see how more people can be encouraged to want to engage as local safety representatives and how existing safety representatives can be encouraged to want to stay.

I must say that I think it is a bit rich of the Social Democrats to accuse this government of passivity. I wonder if the Social Democrats did not see it as a problem that we now have more and more workplaces without local safety representatives. Instead, they come with claims that the government has taken the initiative to decouple the safety representatives from the union.

I must say that I think the debate we are having today is far too important for us to provide untruths. We must stick to the facts. No such initiative has been taken by this government.

We have also increased the appropriations to Arbetsmiljöverket, and Arbetsmiljöverket has also confirmed that they will hire more inspectors to be able to carry out these important inspections.

But we must also realize that we have a shadow society in the Swedish labor market with far too many actors who have no intention of doing the right thing. They do not want to do the right thing, but rather they want to make money at the expense of the workers' lives and health.

We must fight this with full force. We have a shadow society that has expanded over a long period, and I wish we had acted much, much earlier to stop that development.

I welcome the initiative that the previous government took to establish centers against labor crime. Unfortunately, agency cooperation, which this is based on, presupposes that the agencies can also exchange information with each other. The previous government missed that part.

This government is now actively working to remove the secrecy barriers so that the important centers against crime against the working life can function as effectively as possible. It will only be able to function when the exchange of information can take place fully.

I know that we have a consensus that we must achieve results. But we must also see that we have failed, and there is a responsibility backward for the fact that it looks the way it does.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! A classic dividing line between the Social Democrats and the right is that while it is in our political DNA to promote the security of wage earners in the labor market, this has practically always been sidelined by the bourgeoisie.

The last time we had a conservative government, the work environment policy was dismantled. During our following eight years, we increased the resources and introduced a zero vision against fatal accidents.

We have submitted proposals that the regional safety representatives should be granted access to more workplaces, as well as proposals for more sanction fees for companies that neglect work environment management. In our budget options, we have proposed significantly expanded resources for Arbetsmiljöverket. So far, however, the government has said no to all of this, despite rising death tolls and despite the fact that Arbetsmiljöverket as recently as last year was forced to cancel new recruitments precisely because of a lack of resources.

We have also proposed a crisis commission to counter fatal accidents in the hard-hit construction industry. Will the minister at least stand behind that proposal?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Mr. Speaker! Once again, I believe it is important that we stick to the facts in the debate. There is an investigation regarding regional safety representatives being prepared within the Government Offices. The Government will, of course, return with a decision on that matter.

The sanction fees are, of course, a very important tool, because there must be some consequence if one fails in their responsibility as an employer. There is an ongoing assignment to Mynak which, in March, will report an evaluation of the existing system regarding sanction fees. Naturally, we in the government will await Mynak's conclusions before we issue any further information in that part.

It is important generally that we work with both carrot and stick. It should be easy to do the right thing, but it should also cost very much to do the wrong thing. One should never be able to use insecure working conditions as a competitive tool to compete out serious actors in Sweden.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is as if the construction industry has been struck by aggressive cancer, and the government is trying to cure it with Panodil. It is obvious that the government has been caught off guard by these fatal accidents. I believe that Paulina Brandberg is tormented by the fact that she and the government did not see this coming – otherwise, one would reasonably have taken some measures or at least complied with ours.

Unfortunately, I can state, according to the government's own list of propositions which arrived yesterday, that the government does not plan to submit any concrete proposals in the near future. Calling the parties is obviously good, but it should not need to be highlighted by the media for a minister at the Ministry of Employment to call the parties. It should be a standing item on the minister's schedule.

Mr. Speaker! The Minister also did not answer my simple question: Will the government stand behind the Social Democrats' proposal for a crisis commission to counter the fatal accidents in the construction industry?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Mr. Speaker! As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the government is working according to the work environment strategy that the previous government was involved in developing. Had the Liberals and this government developed the strategy, it would likely have looked different. However, we have wanted to have a continuity in the work and have therefore continued the previous government's work environment strategy.

I am a bit wondering: Do the Social Democrats mean that we should have scrapped the strategy that the previous government established and decided on a different strategy? We will, of course, work actively to develop new tools when this strategy expires, but we think it is important to have continuity in that work.

Regarding a crisis commission, we can use different words. What is important now is that we unite across party lines, that we have contact with the parties and that we listen to each other and the parties in order to produce the measures that actually work as quickly as ever possible.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! I have met Minister Paulina Brandberg in quite many debates here regarding the working environment in general and most recently in May regarding specifically fatal accidents.

Unfortunately, the only thing I continue to hear from Paulina Brandberg is that she thinks it is regrettable - it is, of course, she is right about that - and that she will sit down and listen. I am very curious about how long the Minister Paulina Brandberg will listen before she actually comes up with concrete proposals and measures to stop death at work.

How many more must Paulina Brandberg listen to - who will come with approximately the same proposals as Vänsterpartiet - before she at least presents one or, hopefully, two proposals?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Mr. Speaker! When one listens to Ciczie Weidby, it sounds as if the government has not taken any measures at all, and that is, as was said, not true. We have taken initiatives to get more local safety representatives at our workplaces, a problem that the previous government left completely untouched. We have also given a mandate to the Work Environment Authority to carry out more unannounced inspections, which we also see as incredibly important.

Above all, we have stepped up the work against crime in the labor market. It cannot have escaped anyone that this government is striking against crime in all its forms, a crime that has spread into all the capillaries of society. We are refurbishing the justice system in a historical manner. The importance of these crimes also receiving legal consequences was conveyed here; it is completely impossible when the justice system cannot cope with the crime that we have.

This government has taken many measures that the previous government left completely untouched.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Mr. Speaker! I will speak very fast so that I have time to say as much as possible in one minute!

It is very good that Minister Paulina Brandberg says that one should ensure that there are more inspections. There is only one small problem: There are too few inspectors, and one is not allocating enough resources to be able to hire more who can carry out all these inspections. What are they going to do? Perform magic with their knees? Actually, no one can do that.

The work-related crime that is spreading and the shadow society that is often talked about exists because it can. The people who live in the shadows are pushed there by someone else; no one has chosen to stand in the shadows themselves. The crime on the labor market and in society as a whole exists because there is a breeding ground that allows it to operate, which in turn is due to the fact that we do not have enough good laws and rules that stop these things. These are further things that the government can do much more about.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Mr. Speaker! This government is allocating resources to the Swedish Work Environment Authority, which has also confirmed that it will hire more inspectors.

When it comes to labor-related crime, I agree with Ciczie Weidby that those who find themselves in the shadow society are pushed there by someone else. They are not pushed there by this government, but they are often pushed there by persons who are involved in serious organized crime. This is a crime that I have seen with my own eyes in my previous role as a prosecutor, and the picture I have seen is not beautiful. There are people in the Swedish labor market who are exploited to a frightening extent. Systematic work environment management does not exist in these people's vocabulary at all.

It is not, however, laws and rules that are the biggest obstacle, but the biggest obstacle is that we have such a problem with crime in our society that we cannot cope. We had as many police officers in relation to the population size in 2022 as we had in 2012, despite the development we have had with crime. The previous government has a great responsibility for the fact that the shadow society has expanded in this way.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is no coincidence that most fatal accidents occur in industries that are heavily affected by crime and cheating with all sorts of things, including the working environment, in order to make money. It simply must become harder to cheat, easier to get caught, and more tangible to be punished.

It is good that the current government says it stands behind the strategy against fraud and crime in the labor market that we Social Democrats developed. Unfortunately, however, it does not seem to be much more than a lip service, as I can state that much of the work has noticeably stalled, despite the S-government leaving behind several proposals that were started in different ways but did not have time to be implemented.

The proposals concerned, for example, breaking down secrecy barriers, expanded possibilities for sanction fees for companies that neglect work environment management, a joint authority supplier control in public procurement, and a needs assessment for labor immigration. The uniquely liberal regulatory framework that the previous Moderate-led government introduced has paved the way for unserious employers to trick people into coming here and force them to work under appalling conditions that most Swedes would never ever accept. Unfortunately, the SD-government threw this proposal in the wastebasket as soon as they took over Rosenbad.

Last year we also submitted more proposals. For example, we presented a proposal for a crisis commission to counteract fatal accidents in the construction industry. A total review of all structural problems beyond the individual elevator or lifting crane was needed, such as long chains of subcontractors, language barriers, and the fact that the working environment is cheated wildly to increase profit.

In our budget options, we have also proposed substantial supplements to the Swedish Work Environment Authority and the work of safety representatives, but the government is instead spending the money on simplifying the companies' regulatory burden. At the same time, they are opening up for decoupling the safety representatives from the unions, which would weaken the safety representatives and make the workplaces more dangerous.

Now it is time for the government to act so that 2024 does not become as dark as 2023.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! In 2019, we had exactly the same debate as now, and exactly the same issues were raised. After that debate, the Social Democrats chose to take a very passive role, even though they were in a governing position and could really influence the development. They constantly voted no to proposals that other parties put forward. For example, they voted in the Swedish Riksdag no to proposals for a state labor market assessment from 2018 to 2020 or 2021.

I simply wonder why one chose to vote no to one's own proposal when one had a majority for it. Was it more important to cling to power than to get order and clarity on the Swedish labor market?

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! I can bounce the question back to the Sweden Democrats, because during the period that Magnus Persson referred to, we Social Democrats actively pushed the issue of introducing a needs assessment for labor migration. We did not have the political conditions to get this through then, but we prepared during the previous parliamentary term to reintroduce this needs assessment. We commissioned an inquiry on exactly this.

When Magnus Persson's comrades in the Sverigedemokraterna joined forces with the current government, one of the first things they did was throw our proposal in the wastebasket. Was it more important for the Sverigedemokraterna to be accepted in the warmth of the business community than to use the majority that could exist in the Riksdag to reintroduce a means-tested labor immigration and to get order and clarity on the labor market and stand up for Swedish wage earners' rights?

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! In 2019, we had this debate, with exactly the same focus and direction. At that time, the Social Democrats were in government. Nevertheless, the Social Democrats chose not to push through these proposals, even though they were issues that they had campaigned on. I can stand here and rattle off a lot of proposals that the Social Democrats voted against.

Mr. Speaker! It was more important for the Social Democrats to appease the Green Party, and in hindsight also the Centre Party. It was more important to sit in power than to fight for a better working environment.

We have not reached all the way, but we have come significantly further in a year than the Social Democrats did in eight years when it comes to these issues.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! I find it interesting that the Sweden Democrats are taking the opportunity to respond to me here. There is much that we disagree on in labor market policy, but I thought that means-testing for labor migration was something that we were even more in agreement on.

As I said earlier, we Social Democrats did not have the political prerequisites to get this through in the cooperation we had during the last parliamentary term. This government and the Sverigedemokraterna are making a big deal out of the fact that they are so in agreement on migration issues and that they are going to implement a paradigm shift. But when it comes to the labor migration, the Sverigedemokraterna have laid flat for the Moderaterna, who want to continue to have all the power in the hands of the employers. It is more important to get into the good graces of the business community than to stand up for the security of Swedish wage earners, well and good, in the labor market. That is the truth, Magnus Persson.

(Applause)

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Today's debate has been initiated because so many are injured and even die at Sweden's workplaces. Of course, we all think this is unacceptable and that we need to find solutions to the problems.

Unfortunately, this is not a new phenomenon; the fatal accidents have been far too many over several years. Measures have been implemented, but unfortunately without impact in the right direction. We must call this a major failure. The statistics speak for themselves clearly.

What is Teresa Carvalho's analysis of the fact that the previous government, despite eight years in power, could not improve the results regarding the number of fatal accidents?

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Social Democrats did very much during their eight years to try to counteract fatal accidents in working life. I am, however, the first to say that more needs to be done and that we have not reached the point where no one needs to risk their life at work. We are not there yet.

The S-led government took this very seriously and significantly increased resources after the major cuts that the previous bourgeois government implemented. The previous bourgeois government also abolished the Institute for Work Life. In response to this, we reintroduced another agency, the Agency for Work Environment Knowledge. We presented concrete proposals here in the Riksdag. Unfortunately, I do not have time to rattle them all off, but I have done so previously.

Now the question is what this government is going to do. We see that the list of government bills is empty and that the budget tables are meager. What does Saila Quicklund intend to do?

(Applause)

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Where is the humility? Where is the self-criticism? Where is the willingness to answer the question I asked Teresa Carvalho about whether she has analyzed why the Social Democrats, after eight years in government, have not been able to reduce the number of fatal accidents at work? It is a humble question. Relevant questions are also: How can one continue to work with this? What went wrong? What could have been done better? These are questions Teresa Carvalho chooses not to answer.

The government continues to work with much from the previous government, but we will also bring news and measures that will hopefully yield a better result than the previous S-led government's - all for a safer workplace for everyone.

I return to my question regarding the analysis and ask Teresa Carvalho to answer it.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! I have no straight answer as to why the fatal accidents increased from 2022 to 2023. But none of us are satisfied until we have no fatal accidents in the labor market.

I would say that there is a large connection between the many fatal accidents and the increasingly widespread crime in the working life. Why do we have that? Yes, it is a bit too complicated to answer comprehensively in half a minute, but it obviously has much to do with long supply chains where the responsibility for the working environment tends to disappear along the way and with cheating and trickery in many industries, not least the construction industry. It is also about the problems that have arisen as a result of the all-too liberal labor immigration. Fraudulent companies have also been able, by utilizing it, to provide their employees with absolutely appalling working conditions.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Before this debate, I have looked at some figures and spoken with a number of friends to scan the reality a bit. My experience is that most companies do the right thing. Most strive to do the right thing, and yet accidents occur. But the attitude is that they want to do the right thing.

Unfortunately, there are criminal and unprofessional entrepreneurs, and it is with them that the risk of accidents is greatest. The government wants to meet this by, among other things, trying to get more people to want to be safety representatives, and it has therefore given a mandate to Arbetsmiljöverket. But before the mandate is even completed, the Social Democrats choose to saw it down. I am surprised that one chooses to saw down something that has not yet been presented. Why is that being done?

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! The assignment the government has given the Swedish Work Environment Authority, which is claimed to strengthen safety representatives, is feared by many to be a first step towards separating safety representatives from the unions, which would instead weaken the safety representatives and make workplaces more dangerous. This is not something only I and the Social Democrats think, but something put forward by some of the country's most highly qualified work environment experts and by the three central trade union organizations, which represent nearly 4 million wage earners.

In previous debates, the Minister has emphasized that it is not the government's intention to decouple safety representatives from the union. Do the Christian Democrats share that view?

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I fully share the Minister's opinion regarding the fact that there is no such mandate. From our side, there is also no such expressed desire.

What there is, however, among us Christian Democrats is a deep concern that people go to work and perhaps do not come home from there. There is a deep concern that this happens at workplaces where criminal people exploit labor. I am, therefore, not talking about the diligent, orderly, and hardworking entrepreneurs.

One of the methods - but not the only one, as we also need to work with judicial care - is to produce more safety representatives. Therefore, it is positive that the government is trying to achieve that.

I return to my question: Is it not a bit strange that one says no to something before it is completely clear?

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! For us Social Democrats, it is not at all strange that we, just like the three central trade union organizations, react when the mandate to the Swedish Work Environment Authority is formulated in a way that is perceived by us and many others as a first step towards separating safety representatives from the unions.

When safety representatives have the trade union organizations behind them, they have the muscle to stand firm against the employer when the boss does not do what is required for a good working environment. Safety representatives do not stand a chance if they stand alone. They have no possibility of conducting a fair dispute on their own. They need substantial backing, which they receive from the trade union organizations. Without this connection, we get weaker safety representatives, which results in more dangerous workplaces.

Therefore we react and want to be clear already now that if this ends with safety representatives being separated from the unions, we Social Democrats do not stand behind it.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! As I mentioned in my previous speech, we had an exactly identical debate as today's 2019, also linked to the increasing number of fatal accidents at the country's workplaces. For me and the Sverigedemokraterna, it was clear that measures were required already then, and for my own part, I saw the problems increasing at Swedish construction sites long before that. For 26 years I have followed the development, and that is a major reason for my political commitment.

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats have since 2018 presented sharp proposals in the Swedish Riksdag linked to the subject we are debating here today. Every year we have presented proposals to introduce state labor market screening, but the Social Democrats have voted no. We have presented proposals to extend the prescription periods for workplace safety crimes - something the Social Democrats campaigned on both in 2014 and 2018 but voted no to. We have also presented proposals on heavily regulated labor immigration - also something the Social Democrats campaigned on in 2014 and 2018 but voted no to. Now they are pushing these issues because they have lost their grip.

The proposal on the reporting obligation is mocked by the Social Democrats and called a disclosure law, even though they themselves have been on the same track. It is an important tool against illegal labor immigration, but it is clear that it is more important for the Social Democrats to distance themselves from certain parties than to jointly and across party lines get the Swedish labor market in order.

If the Social Democrats had let go of their prestige, we would have had measures in place a long time ago that would have guaranteed lives were saved. But now they have unfortunately chosen another path, and it is only to be regretted. The biggest losers are the wage earners they claim to represent and protect.

As a politician, one must look at other solutions and dare to think anew. The Swedish labor market does not look like it did in the 70s and 80s, even if some seem to believe it does. The Sverigedemokraterna are now, together with the government, taking a step in the right direction – even if it is no secret that we Sverigedemokrater would have wanted to go further in many issues. I am proud of this, not for my own sake but for my old colleagues who continue to toil in Swedish workplaces every single day.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Mr. Speaker! Even though the Sweden Democrats seem to be primarily driven by the issue of separating safety representatives from the union, which would make safety representatives weaker and workplaces more dangerous, they have also had a fairly high level of support over the years when it comes to the resources for the Swedish Work Environment Authority.

Now that the Sweden Democrats have finally gained the decisive influence over Swedish labor market policy, it is interesting that they do not use their power to strengthen the Swedish Work Environment Authority's possibilities to ramp up work environment inspections or the work against fraud and crime in the working life.

In our budget alternative, the Social Democrats proposed that Arbetsmiljöverket should receive an additional 50 million kronor, but the SD government is instead allocating the money to a simplification package to reduce the regulatory burden for companies.

Why is it so important for the Sweden Democrats, in a situation with increased fatal accidents, to make it easier for people to run businesses and earn money? Why is this more important than strengthening the work environment for Swedish wage earners?

(Applause)

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! When it comes to safety representatives, I would like Teresa Carvalho to read our committee motion. It states clearly and distinctly there that the union plays an important role and is a great support for local safety representatives.

Then, of course, one must look at other solutions when there is a shortage of over 30,000 local safety representatives. How are we to address that problem? One must think a bit broadly, and that was what I tried to say in my speech. One must start thinking in new ways, because the development we are now seeing is problematic. The level of organization is decreasing drastically in trade unions. People do not want to be safety representatives. People are excluded because they belong to the wrong party; they are not allowed to become safety representatives. There are many parameters in this issue.

When it comes to Arbetsmiljöverket and resources, the agency received the money it requested in this budget. It was a first step in the right direction, we think, and then we will have to see how it turns out in the next budget.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! As said: When the right governs again and when we also see that the fatal accidents begin to increase, there will be no additional funding for Arbetsmiljöverket that is sufficient to hire more inspectors to be able to ramp up the inspection work or combat crime in the workplace. Yes, there will be an inflation adjustment of the grant. But there will also be a general saving.

We Social Democrats have proposed that the Swedish Work Environment Authority should receive substantial increases in resources to be able to hire more work environment inspectors and expand the work against cheating in the working life. But the SD government chooses, as stated, instead to spend the money on simplifying the companies' regulatory requirements.

I can only state that the bourgeoisie is astonishingly naive when it comes to this. They do not see that there are also unserious companies that take every opportunity given to cheat with everything, including the working environment. The Sweden Democrats are so eager to enter the warmth of the business sector that they push their interests ahead of Swedish wage earners.

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

Magnus Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Teresa Carvalho adds nothing to the debate but sounds more like the woodpecker in Donald Duck on Christmas Eve.

This will be a rhetorical question, but it would be interesting to be able to get an answer to it: Why did the Social Democrats vote no to regional safety representatives having access to all workplaces in Sweden when it is something that both LO and Byggnads pushed for in their referral response when the proposition was up a number of years ago? But it is a rhetorical question, because Teresa Carvalho cannot answer it now.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Madam Speaker! Powerful measures are required for us to be able to see a reduction in the number of deaths in working life. The Government has therefore intensified the work against workplace accidents.

The government continues the work with the previous government's strategy against crime in the workplace and has thereby also extended the mandate for nine agencies to cooperate against just a-krim. Arbetsmiljöverket has been tasked with carrying out more unannounced physical inspections. Arbetsmiljöverket has also been tasked to investigate how more people would like to engage as safety representatives, and this therefore applies to all safety representatives.

An investigation regarding the regional safety representatives is being prepared at the Government Offices. The Government continues with the previous government's work environment strategy, and it also includes a so-called zero vision against fatal accidents.

Mynak, the Agency for Occupational Health Knowledge, is investigating the sanction fee system and is planned to be finished with it in March 2024. A supplier control investigation, which has reviewed the possibilities to limit the number of subcontractors, is also being prepared now at the Government Offices.

The Work Environment Authority means that the employer is responsible for the work environment and shall ensure that work environment work is naturally included in the operations as an important part. The Swedish work environment legislation is also based on the employer cooperating with the employees in order to create a safe and good work environment.

It will continue to be the systematic work environment work that is the basis for a good work environment. No one should be harmed or have an accident at work, and the government continues the offensive work so that everyone who goes to work also comes home after the end of the working day.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! Many fatal accidents occur in industries that are severely affected by fraud and crime in the labor market. But despite the fact that the SD government is happy to emphasize that it focuses on combating crime, crime in the working life is somewhat of a blind spot in the Tidö Agreement.

In recent years, it has become increasingly clear that unserious and criminal companies are establishing themselves in the welfare choice system and in markets for public procurement. It is also evident that long chains of subcontractors increase the risk that rules and agreements are not followed and that responsibility for the working environment tends to disappear along the way.

We Social Democrats therefore consider that the number of subcontractors should be limited. What do the Moderates think? And how many more accidents must occur before the government is ready to act on this?

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Madam Speaker! A-krim is a blind spot, says Teresa Carvalho. We now have seven a-krim centers completed and staffed by this government. There are 32 inspectors attached to these, who are only to work with a-krim. We have two coordinators, and we have seven local coordinators. It feels unworthy of this discussion that Teresa Carvalho expresses that this should be a blind spot.

Regarding subcontractors, there is an investigation looking into how the number of subcontractors can be limited. It is called the Supplier Control Investigation, and the investigation's report is being prepared under Erik Slottner's responsibility at the Ministry of Finance. The issue is quite complex, as we are also governed by EU regulations on free movement and by the constitution regarding freedom of enterprise.

The government takes this most seriously. It is an important issue, so let us return to it.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! The a-krim centers that Saila Quicklund highlights were initiated by us Social Democrats. It is good that this government is completing the work, but it also needs to be scaled up now. We cannot be satisfied with what already exists.

Public procurement shall not contribute to unhealthy competition or to the dumping of wages and conditions on the Swedish labor market. Therefore, as stated, a limitation of long contractor chains is needed so that order and clarity are established on the Swedish labor market. No one shall be able to evade their responsibility regarding taxes, wages, the work environment, or safety at the workplace.

For the same reasons, we Social Democrats also appointed an inquiry which has provided proposals on how a coordinated register check can function to remove criminal and unserious companies from the market for public procurement. The proposal is now fully investigated and fully referred and is available at the Government Offices. I wonder if the government will act to get this in place and, if so, when.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Madam Speaker! Teresa Carvalho expresses that she is impatient regarding the government's efforts against fatal accidents in working life. It is quite bold to present such things with that offensive attitude and in that tone in this debate when one has personally sat in a government position for eight years. Is Teresa Carvalho satisfied with the efforts that were carried out then, when she now shifts the blame onto a government that has sat in a government position for one year?

Teresa Carvalho mentioned in another exchange the importance of safety representatives. That is absolutely correct. That is also why the government has asked Arbetsmiljöverket to review how we can get more safety representatives. Safety representatives fulfill a truly important function, and I would like to ask: What initiatives did Teresa Carvalho take so that there would be more safety representatives? Now, Teresa Carvalho does not have the opportunity to answer that in this exchange, but I am including the question anyway. It is central in light of the criticism against us.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! I know that Saila Quicklund is very knowledgeable about issues regarding the working environment and is also personally interested in the issues. However, it has been a bit difficult to find the concrete policy of the Moderaterna specifically. I have, however, read in various places and heard here today that one wants to increase the number of inspections and double the prescription period for crimes against the working environment. I think that is a very good proposal, so now I wonder: When will the bill be submitted?

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Ciczie Weidby for the praise. We have had the privilege of working together as members of the Arbetsmiljöverket's oversight council, so we have gotten to know each other.

You mentioned some of the measures the government is taking. I would like to add to that. Arbetsmiljöverket is to conduct more inspections. We are also looking at how we can get more safety representatives, as I have said before. The evaluation of the regional safety representatives is being prepared. The sanction fee system is being investigated. The subcontractor control investigation is being prepared.

Historical investments are also being made in the judicial chain and judicial policy. It is important, which I have conveyed many times in these debates. The parties of the previous government are only now investing in this, since gang crime arrived, but did not do so before then. It is extremely important for this, with workplace accidents, fatal accidents and so on, that we have a chain of measures. There, both the police and prosecutors are very significant.

It is, therefore, a broad palette of measures. When things and matters arrive, I cannot answer here and now, but they will come.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! I can only say that it is great. There are so many good proposals. I also heard that even the Sweden Democrats think that the penalties for workplace environment crimes must be tightened, that the prescription period should be extended, and so on.

When it comes to previous governments and who should have done what, I have never sat in any government or in a government position, unfortunately, but we share very much the view that we must tighten the penalties. I experience that the government very often talks about wanting higher penalties on all sorts of things, but precisely in the area of the work environment, it is a bit neglected. Even if Saila Quicklund cannot promise when, I really hope that there will be bills in the area specifically to tighten the penalties for work environment crimes.

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

Saila Quicklund (M)

Madam Speaker! Just this issue with the prescription periods is a matter that I and the Moderaterna have pushed very offensively. Only a few weeks ago, we read about a fatal accident that occurred in 2019. That legal process is being concluded now. This is completely unacceptable. We need legal processes that resolve what the cause was and so on, so that we learn for the future. I truly hope that will be achieved. We want, therefore, to double the prescription periods.

I think I will stay there. We agree with each other, and the member knows that I and the Moderaterna have driven this issue and are monitoring it.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet has many proposals that we believe are crucial to reversing the trend and counteracting the fatal workplace accidents. I will go through some of them.

We must strengthen safety representatives with more training and increased powers, maintain the connection to the union, and give the regional safety representatives expanded access rights.

We must tighten the employers' responsibility for the work environment and introduce an expanded scope of responsibility, meaning that the employer who has responsibility for a workplace shall have responsibility for all employees who are at the workplace, regardless of who purchases their work and what form of employment they have.

We must create order and clarity in the labor market. Vänsterpartiet thinks that we should introduce requirements for a maximum of two levels of subcontractors in public procurement. The contractor responsibility that exists in the construction and civil engineering industry should we also have in more industries.

We must also strengthen the state's work environment work and provide more resources to Arbetsmiljöverket so that the agency can hire more inspectors and carry out more inspections. The number of inspectors must, of course, be in accordance with the ILO's recommendation, which states that one should have one inspector per 10,000 workers.

Finally, we must, as we have discussed in previous exchanges, tighten the penalties for occupational environment crimes that lead to death. Today, the penalties for these occupational environment crimes are far too low, and the investigations take far too long. A government that raises the penalties for other serious crimes should reasonably also raise the penalties for occupational environment crimes that lead to death. We cannot continue to gamble with the occupational environment. It must cost the employer, both in the form of money and in the form of years in prison.

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! I want to talk more about local safety representatives. We have talked about it before, and I think it is an important issue.

It is correct that our legislation offers greater protection for those shop stewards who are union members than for those who are not. I know that Ciczie Weidby is aware of this. We have the shop steward act, which provides extra protection to those who are unionized.

This will only be relevant as long as we have local safety representatives, and we are now seeing a development with fewer and fewer local safety representatives.

I want to ask Ciczie Weidby of the Left Party: Do you want to change the legislation and completely remove the non-union safety representatives, even though it would mean that we would have even fewer local safety representatives and even more workplaces that stand without safety representatives? And what proposals does the Left Party have so that we can increase the number of safety representatives?

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! I would like to thank Paulina for the fact that, for once, it is she who is asking a question to me. It is usually always I who hold her to account.

Safety representatives obviously need to be strengthened, and we must have more safety representatives. Vänsterpartiet has many very good proposals on how we should do this. One important thing is to strengthen the representative law so that those who need to have time off to, for example, attend a training course can also get it.

But above all, it is the case that very many safety representatives experience that they are subjected to threats and harassment from the employer. What one should probably start with, therefore, is not to go after people and accuse them of not wanting to become safety representatives, but to pose the question to those who are managers in the workplace: How is it that you do not encourage more people to engage in union activities and together appoint safety representatives in the workplace?

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! I note that I did not receive an answer to my question regarding whether Vänsterpartiet wants to change the legislation so that we remove the possibility of having non-union safety representatives and how Vänsterpartiet, in that case, views the effect it would likely entail: that we would have even fewer local safety representatives in our workplaces.

It is positive that we are talking about hate and threats, which was touched upon here, and that the Left Party is also talking about repression in the debate. To be honest, it is not the Left Party's strongest branch historically speaking. I would like to hear the Left Party's view on the extreme passivity that has existed regarding our justice system and on the fact that crime has been allowed to spread without us having increased the number of police officers. It doesn't matter what regulatory framework we have if we do not have a justice system that can cope. I have personally sat with these investigations and know that the justice system cannot cope.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! It is certainly irritating when politicians do not answer the questions that have been asked of them. That is somewhat how we members here in the chamber often feel when we have submitted written questions and interpellations. But I promise that I will answer the Minister.

No, we do not want to remove the safety representatives. One can already be appointed as a safety representative even if one is not a member of a trade union organization. We do not intend to say that they should be banned or not exist. But I think the effort should be placed on people wanting to become trade unionly engaged and become safety representatives with the safety net that the trade union representative act provides. It should not be invested in just picking out people who will not be covered by the trade union representative act.

When it comes to the judiciary and politics, I have ten seconds to answer. I am sorry, but I cannot answer that.

(Applause)

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

Jonny Cato (C)

Madam Speaker! Liberalism, socialism, conservatism, nationalism – political parties can be described in many different ways. But the Moderates, the Christian Democrats, the Liberals and the Deputy Minister for Employment have made it clear that one can describe this government in another way, with some-other-ism. It is someone else's fault, someone else's responsibility.

It is impossible to ignore the government's inability to deliver policy in the area of the labor market. Last autumn, the government did not send a single labor market proposal to the Riksdag. Now there is talk of investigations and that they are going to look into things. In other areas, things are moving fast. Look at the migration policy and when it comes to nuclear power!

On this year's list of government bills, it continues to echo. Two bills are to be delivered by the Ministry of Employment. It is the fewest of all ministries. Even the Government Offices delivers more bills than the Ministry of Employment. It is time to step down from the gallery, stop talking and start delivering.

This is an important issue. But labor market policy in general is also very important. There is a lack of policy in all labor market policy areas actually, even when it comes to the work environment and fatal accidents, which we are talking specifically about here today.

My appeal to the government is quite simple: Stop talking about what previous governments have not done and start delivering! Sweden deserves better than this.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! The Government is doing quite a lot to reduce the risk of accidents in working life. Arbetsmiljöverket is receiving more resources so that it can strengthen its supervisory work and carry out more announced and unannounced inspections. The Government has tasked Arbetsmiljöverket with investigating how more people can be encouraged to engage as safety representatives. The Government is also preparing proposals regarding increased information exchange to, among other things, counteract crime in working life.

Madam Speaker! All of this is good. More inspections, more safety representatives, and a clear focus on combating workplace crime will likely lead to safer and more secure workplaces. At the same time, we know that there will always be a risk of accidents in everyday life and in professional life.

We Christian Democrats have previously highlighted the idea of a zero vision regarding fatal accidents at work, as well as that after every individual fatal accident, an accident investigation commission shall be appointed to try to see what happened and investigate how to avoid it happening again. This method has been used with success in, among other things, aviation. There, every individual accident is investigated, and one works constantly with continuous improvements in order to create the world's safest transport system. It is a method that we should use in workplaces in order to constantly improve ourselves.

Madam Speaker! I believe that the rest of the working life has a great deal to learn from the transport sector. If we work more preventatively, as the government's proposal aims for, in combination with a more systematic work when the accident has already occurred, we as a society, together with the parties in the labor market, can reduce the risk of accidents and, in the long run, create a labor market where no one risks dying when going to work.

Madam Speaker! Finally, I turn to the strongest point regarding the use of a rhetoric to try to pretend that the government, after a year, would have caused changes that mean more people die on the labor market. It is simply unserious. We should be able to be greater than this in the chamber.

(Applause)

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! With the launch of this year's budget, the government sent out approximately 120 press releases about every little thing that could be packaged as an investment. None of these press releases were about Arbetsmiljöverket. Until now, even the government parties themselves have not thought that what they are doing is investing in Arbetsmiljöverket. Still, we hear the Christian Democrats standing here and talking about how they are investing in and strengthening Arbetsmiljöverket.

The truth is that the government is marginally inflation-adjusting the appropriation to Arbetsmiljöverket. But one is also making a general saving. Bottom line, there is no room to ramp up the inspection work.

Regarding the last thing the Christian Democrats claim, that rhetoric has been presented here in the chamber that it would be the government's fault that we have many fatal accidents, I have not heard anyone claim that. It would be pleasant if the Christian Democrats did not spread such falsehoods.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Regarding the first question, we have already explained that our view is that we have made the reinforcement that was requested. In budgets, one does not usually provide more than what is requested. We have also been informed, among other things by the Minister, that the agency says that based on this they will hire more people and perform more controls. I feel confident about that.

Regarding the second question, I can only urge those who may be listening to this now or in the future to go to one of Teresa Carvalhos' later speeches. There, one can see such rhetoric. I regret that.

This is a question too important for us to throw in each other's faces that one or the other is responsible for individuals passing away at workplaces. I regret that type of rhetoric. It is unfortunate. I try myself to avoid saying that it was the previous government's, our government's, or someone else's fault. It is a pity. This is a question too important.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! I decline such attacks. If the Christian Democrat had listened to my speech, he would have heard me say clearly and distinctly: Of course, no fatal accidents are the government's fault. He can go back and listen to that. On the other hand, I said that there is a political responsibility to take and that this government has been astonishingly passive. No proposals are being delivered to the Riksdag.

We Social Democrats believe that Arbetsmiljöverket is given too few resources to ramp up the work. We proposed an additional 50 million to Arbetsmiljöverket. Instead, the government is allocating those funds to a simplification package for companies.

We obviously have different political ambitions. Let us discuss that instead of throwing pies and saying that someone has said it is the government's fault that people die in the labor market, because in fact no one has said that. Take the political responsibility to strengthen the working environment in the workplaces!

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! First and foremost, I am glad that there is a commitment among all of us. I think that is positive. I also have the greatest respect for the fact that one can have different views on resources and methodology, that is, ways of working.

I think, however, that it is deeply unfortunate and sad - regardless of whether it was only I who perceived it - that it becomes a debate where individual years' death tolls are put in relation to potential resources. I do not actually believe that every single decision in this chamber has a direct connection to what happens next year. I believe that this type of questions sometimes involve crime, negligence, or pure accidents. Therefore, we would probably all benefit from being a bit more humble towards one another.

Thank you for the debate!

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! I devoted myself to trying to look for what the Christian Democrats want to do about the fatal accidents. Magnus Jacobsson told a lot about what the government intends to do. Very good. But the Christian Democrats have not written anything about it in the surveys ahead of the 2022 election, as all other parties have done, and neither in any of their motions on the labor market area. I find that a bit noteworthy, so I am curious to hear more from Magnus Jacobsson about the Christian Democrats' policy and proposals regarding stopping the fatal accidents.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for a very good question! Since there are people listening to this, I want to state that I have sat on the committee for a year and that I continue to work on developing the Christian Democrats' policy in this area. So far, I have accounted for what we do together with the government. In addition, I have carefully pointed out what we Christian Democrats think. We think that one should work from a zero vision, just as is done in the transport area which I previously worked with.

When it comes to the deaths that occur, the Accident Investigation Board is only called in on a larger scale. We think that one should look at every individual case, at least for a period. We need, in fact, to get clear on what it actually looks like. What is it that makes accidents continue to happen? In some cases, it can be due to pure negligence, in other cases to criminality.

We are also trying to work on stopping crime. That is what we are doing right now, above all together with the government, but we are obviously also trying to work out our own ideas as well.

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

Ciczie Weidby (V)

Madam Speaker! When one puts forward a vision, in this case a zero vision, one cannot simply say that one does not want people to die and be satisfied with that. If one thinks that one does not want people to die, one must add that one therefore intends that this, this and this must be done.

I am genuinely – not cheekily – curious about what the Christian Democrats' policy is in this area. Even though Magnus Jacobsson has only sat on the committee for a year, there have been many Christian Democrats sitting there previously. They have also not written in their motions about these specific occupational health and safety issues and how to stop the fatal accidents. I therefore ask the question once more.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! When I agreed to sit on the Committee on Employment, it was precisely because I, together with my party, want to develop the entire area of labor market policy. I am not sure that everyone thinks of that, but as a representative of a smaller party in the Riksdag, one is responsible for all issues. I will therefore delve into them bit by bit.

Regarding this area, I have already accounted for the three things the government is doing. In addition, I have in the previous answer accounted for that we are working with the judicial side, which I believe is incredibly important.

I have also highlighted a reflection or a proposal that I, as a Christian Democrat, have also put forward in conversations with our friends in the government base. It is that in every instance of death - not just certain ones - one should look closer at the case and involve the Accident Investigation Authority, at least for a period, to obtain a better factual basis.

I promise Ciczie Weidby that I will continue to work with these issues and help to develop my party's policy.

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

Leila Ali Elmi (MP)

Madam Speaker! A poor working environment should never be allowed to be a competitive advantage for unscrupulous companies. We need to address the cynicism of employers who clearly disregard the prevention of work-related injuries, who seem to think that it will work as long as it does, and who believe that it is cheaper to pay sanction fees than to carry out the preventive measures that are required.

To ignore the working environment is to break the law, and it must be taken seriously. More workplace environment crimes must be cleared up. We also want to review the sentencing scales for this type of crime.

We want to give the regional safety representatives access to all workplaces with collective agreements, even if there are no union members at the workplace.

I do not doubt that all parties truly want to stop deaths in the workplace. However, I am seriously concerned that the government seems to underestimate the need for resources. In the autumn budget, the government introduced austerity requirements for all agencies, without an analysis of what it would entail. For Arbetsmiljöverket, it meant that they had to stop a planned recruitment of just over 25 inspectors, while they have been tasked with conducting more unannounced inspections. More assignments and fewer resources give Arbetsmiljöverket poorer conditions for its important work.

Many here have stated that no one should have to die at work. I hope that these will not just be empty words and that the government now takes the measures required to reverse the negative development.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)

Madam Speaker! Even though we are holding this debate on account of the large number of fatal accidents, we must remember that the fatal accidents are only the ultimate symptom of a labor market that is not doing well. In addition to the fatal accidents, Sweden has a labor market where many suffer in several different ways.

Just as it has been pointed out in this debate, most employers want to do the right thing. But we have a shadow society where it is becoming harder and harder for serious companies to compete with the unserious actors. I actually want to assert that to some extent we have a situation where we did not see this coming, i.e., that the shadow society has expanded.

The politicians obviously have a responsibility, but one can also do a lot as an employer. There are many interesting initiatives in the country. For example, I know that in Eskilstuna's municipal real estate company, they work on conducting their own unannounced inspections on all their construction sites. Even that type of initiative is needed.

In conclusion, I would like to thank Vänsterpartiet for this important debate. I am pleased that we have a consensus that more is required to resolve this issue.

(Applause)

The special debate was hereby concluded.

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