Strengthened efforts for the elderly and for those who care for or support relatives

Mona Olin (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating SoU25 Strengthened efforts for the elderly and for those who care for or support close relatives. I would like to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

Madam Speaker! We are going to talk about important changes in the Social Services Act, the Health and Medical Services Act, the Patient Safety Act, and LSS. These are reforms that may not be the biggest when one reads about them. But they are good and reasonable improvements that can make a big difference in people's everyday lives, and sometimes I think that is exactly where politics should be.

The Sweden Democrats support these proposals because they strengthen three fundamental things in welfare. It is about security, continuity, and support for those who bear a great responsibility.

Let us begin with the proposal for a fixed care contact for those living in special housing. Many elderly people have for years felt anonymous and abandoned in the system. I am thinking of Ola. He lives in a special housing facility. Every day he meets new faces. He does not really know who he should turn to. Information is lost. Small things fall through the cracks. With a fixed care contact, that changes. Then there is a person that Ola knows he can turn to. It is a person who knows Ola, who knows how he wants his daily life, and who, not least, sees when something changes. A fixed care contact creates security, continuity, and human presence. It creates something as simple and important as recognition in everyday life.

I also want to speak about the relatives. I have the greatest respect for the responsibility that many relatives take to care for and support their loved ones. We often speak of welfare as something that the public sector is responsible for, but in reality, it is thousands of Swedes today who care for their loved ones at the cost of great personal sacrifices.

We have, for example, Ingrid, who cares for her husband at home. She keeps track of the medicines her husband needs to take, the care and doctor visits that need to be made, the care he needs and, in addition to that – hopefully – on her own daily life.

She does not know what measures exist. She does not know where to turn for support. With the new rules, the social welfare committee shall offer her information and guidance. Furthermore, Ingrid shall be offered a support contact who, in addition to information and guidance, shall provide her with support regarding the planning of measures and regarding decisions that may potentially need to be taken.

This can be the difference between being able to cope and breaking down. If we do not support the relatives, we also betray those who are being cared for.

Madam Speaker! The new clarifications regarding the children's needs are particularly pleasing. When a parent or a sibling becomes ill or dies, both social services and health and medical care shall have a clear responsibility to support the child.

Let us take an example. It is about a boy named Daniel who is seven years old. His mother is seriously ill. At home, everything is different. It is restless, and it is uncertain. But no one asks Daniel how he is doing. No one explains what is happening. This legislative change clarifies that the care has a responsibility to support the child who has a sick parent or a sick sibling. Social services shall act, and support shall be offered.

It is about ensuring that no one has to be the invisible child in a difficult situation. Children should not have to end up in the shadows just because they do not shout loudly themselves. Here, we put the child's best interests first.

We also view the change in LSS positively, where the provision of relief service no longer needs to take place in the home. It may sound like a small change, but for many families, it is crucial. If one takes a family with a child with extensive needs as an example, relief in the home does not always work. The child may need to get out, change environments, and do something else. This provides increased flexibility and can facilitate both the child's needs and the family's situation.

Practical solutions instead of rigid bureaucracy is something Sverigedemokrater always strive for. That is exactly how welfare should function.

Madam Speaker! The common thread in all these proposals is clear: more humanity in the systems and more adaptation to reality. The Sweden Democrats believe that the welfare system should be built on security, dignity, and responsibility. These changes are clear steps in that direction. These are reforms that are not seen in big headlines. It is everyday politics. But for all those who care for their relatives and who meet their care contact every day, or who are children in a difficult life situation, this can be a decisive support. That is exactly why it is so important.

The Sweden Democrats support the proposals. I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

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

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating a committee report concerning strengthening efforts for the elderly and for those who support and care for relatives. The debate also concerns safety and dignity and what responsibility we as a society are prepared to take throughout life.

The report is not only about the quality of elderly care but also about seeing and supporting all the people who uphold the care in everyday life. This applies to relatives and loved ones – not least children and siblings – who live with seriously ill people in their proximity.

For us Social Democrats, it is clear that the welfare system should be strong, jointly financed, and be there for everyone when it is needed. But that requires more than words. It requires political will and larger investments.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats support the committee report because it is absolutely necessary to strengthen the support for relatives. We also took the initiative for step one during the previous parliamentary term by introducing a fixed care contact within home care services. It is important to build upon that. But we believe at the same time that the fundamental challenge facing elderly care today must be solved in parallel. We have therefore chosen to support a reservation, or follow-up motion, from the Left Party which is linked to the supply of competence.

It is clear that the shortage of nursing assistants in elderly care is a problem, but it is also the general staff shortage. An important reason is that people experience that the conditions are too poor to stay, and many therefore seek to leave the profession. We see that problem in all 290 municipalities in Sweden, but above all perhaps in rural areas and smaller municipalities.

At the same time, we know that the needs are increasing. We are getting older in our country. Life expectancy is increasing, and that is pleasing. At the same time, there is also a greater need for support and service when one becomes very old. It is not enough to hope that the problems will solve themselves, as the Tidöre Government does. More active, long-term solutions are required to make, among other things, elderly care an attractive workplace.

The government's proposal that regular care contacts shall be nursing assistants is good in principle. But the problem is that staff who have that competence are difficult to obtain in sufficient extent. One cannot legislate more nursing assistants into existence. One must make the profession more attractive. That is where we as politicians must step forward. It is the classic stuff that is needed: better working conditions, reasonable schedules, and a work environment that allows the staff to endure. Full-time employment must be the norm, wage development must reflect the responsibility, and so on. We must also strengthen the educational pathways into the profession and ensure that more people choose to work within elderly care. It is about both status and quality.

When elderly care is insufficient, Madam Speaker, it is not only the elderly and the staff who are affected, but relatives also face poorer conditions. They are forced to take on an excessively large responsibility, resulting in increased stress and difficulties in balancing their lives.

If we do not act now, we risk a situation where the elderly do not receive the care they are entitled to, while at the same time the staff are pushed to the breaking point and relatives are forced to bear an ever-increasing burden. It is not worthy of a society that wants to take responsibility for its elderly. That is why we stand behind the report and also stand behind the reservation.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats have been clear throughout this entire parliamentary term, and also in government, that we want to see significant reinforcements of elderly care. In our budget proposals, we have included large increases for municipalities and regions, and we also have a specifically targeted initiative to increase staffing in elderly care.

We also want to ensure that the state grants are index-linked so that one does not end up in another such cost shock as the one that hit healthcare and the municipalities a few years ago. It is about giving people time to perform their profession and thus provide good quality for the elderly. It is about time for the staff to see every individual, time to provide care with quality, and time to create security. Too few staff leads to stress, high sickness absence, and many leaving the profession. It becomes a vicious circle that must be broken.

Madam Speaker! The report also reminds us of something more, namely that care is not only about the elderly but also about those who stand beside them. Relatives take on a great responsibility today. Many do it out of love, but all too many do it without sufficient support from society. This also applies to children who live with severely ill parents or other close relatives. These are children who take on responsibilities that no child should have to bear alone. These are children who worry. These are children who adapt and who often become invisible. It also applies to siblings, who are deeply affected by a brother or sister being severely ill or by their parents being so.

There is an enormous need for support, information and, above all, relief. Here, society must step forward further. No one should have to be alone in such a situation, neither child nor adult.

Madam Speaker! When we talk about support for the elderly and relatives, we must see the whole picture. Individual reforms are not enough. A coherent policy is required. More employees are needed in elderly care. Better conditions are required for the staff. Higher quality in care is required in everything from treatment to food, strengthened support for relatives – which we are debating today – and a society that also takes responsibility for children and siblings who live close to this.

The Social Democrats stand for a welfare state that is built up, not dismantled. We know that investments in elderly care are not actually costs but a prerequisite for a secure society. It is about how we treat those who have built our country and how we take care of each other when life is at its most vulnerable.

I move for approval of reservation 1 under point 2 on competence supply.

(Applause)

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the bill Strengthened measures for the elderly and for those who care for or support relatives. I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal.

Madam Speaker! The legislative changes we are discussing today concern the Social Services Act, the Health and Medical Services Act, the Patient Safety Act, as well as the Act on Support and Service to Certain Persons with Disabilities. I want to be clear: These are thoroughly worked-out and necessary reforms to strengthen the security in Swedish welfare.

At its core, it is about something very simple but at the same time decisive. It is about trust – trust that society is there when life falters, when age takes its toll, when illness strikes, and when families are pushed to their absolute limit.

Madam Speaker! We know that the reality in many residential care facilities does not always correspond to the security that we want it to offer. Many elderly people face an everyday life where the staff varies, where continuity is lacking, and where relationships do not have time to be built up. It is against this background that we are now introducing the right to a fixed care contact, when the needs exist.

This is a reform that puts the human being at the center. A fixed care contact does not just mean a named person, it also means a responsibility, continuity, and quality. It means that someone sees the whole individual, not just individual needs. It means that relatives also know who they should turn to. It also means better conditions for the staff to work professionally and long-term.

Mr. Speaker, we must not turn a blind eye to reality. Making decisions here in the chamber is one thing. Making it work in practice is another. There is a responsibility there as well. Therefore, it is crucial that the reform is accompanied by the right conditions. We need to continue to strengthen the supply of competence in elderly care, and we need leadership where quality and continuity are prioritized.

Madam Speaker! Another core part of the proposal concerns relatives, those who often provide a silent and sometimes invisible part of the welfare. Every day, there are people who care for a partner, a child, or a parent. They plan their lives around someone else's needs. They take responsibility, often without requesting support themselves.

The government is now clarifying the social committee's responsibility to offer precisely information, guidance, and a support contact. It is an important reinforcement. A support contact should not be a formality. It should be real support in everyday life. It can involve understanding what rights one has, getting help to plan interventions, or having someone to talk to when the situation feels overwhelming. For us Moderates, this is a self-evident priority. When relatives receive better support, the entire care system is strengthened. It is both humanly and socio-economically wise.

Madam Speaker! In the report, the children's perspective is particularly important. When a parent becomes seriously ill, when a sibling struggles with a difficult diagnosis, or when someone in the family suddenly passes away, the children's world changes. Children do not always have the words to express their worry, but they feel it and carry it.

Therefore, we now clarify the responsibility of both the social welfare committee and for health and medical care to notice and support these children. It is about acting in time, cooperating, and not letting children fall through the cracks. It is more than a legislative change. It is also a position that children's needs must never be overlooked.

Madam Speaker! We also propose a change regarding respite services. That the intervention no longer needs to be carried out in the home provides increased flexibility. For some families, it can mean better relief. For others, it can open up for more than adapted solutions. It is important that the support is designed according to the individual's needs, not according to the system's limitations.

This is how we Moderates and we as a governing party want to develop the welfare, with a focus on quality, flexibility and the individual's best interests.

Madam Speaker! The legislative changes are proposed to enter into force as early as July 1, 2026, but we know that a date in a legal text does not in itself change reality. It is only when the reforms are fully implemented that they make a difference. Therefore, follow-up is crucial. We need to ensure the intention of the legislation as well so that it becomes a reality across the entire country, even in Dalarna. That the quality is maintained and that the support reaches its destination is something we Moderates are prepared to take responsibility for in the municipalities and here in the Riksdag, but the municipalities must also do their job for all their inhabitants.

Madam Speaker! We Moderates believe in a strong welfare state but also in a welfare state that functions, a welfare state where resources are used wisely, where quality is monitored and where the individual's needs always stand at the center. With these reforms, we take an important step forward for the elderly who need security in their everyday lives, for the relatives who bear a heavy responsibility and for the children who need support in life's most difficult moments. It is responsible politics, it is a humane politics and it is reforms that will make a difference.

(Applause)

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Madam Speaker! Ulf Kristersson, Jimmie Åkesson and Ebba Busch have lowered the tax for themselves and for the 51 billionaires and 575,000 millionaires that we have in Sweden. The richest will not be dependent on relatives caring for them and providing them support or be dependent on tax-funded elderly care, because they have always been able to buy the care and nursing they need.

At the same time, the government and the Sweden Democrats have implemented cuts in Swedish elderly care, which at least 130 municipalities are bleeding money for. The result of that is fewer staff, who are more stressed to keep up. They constantly have feelings of guilt but are not directly rewarded with a good salary. The elderly wait illegally long to receive elderly care. They receive poorer food and feel that they need to apologize if the toilet visit takes longer than the minute-management allows.

At the same time, the government and the Sweden Democrats allow our tax money to disappear as salaries for the CEOs of healthcare and care companies and dividends to shareholders, despite alarms being raised about very serious problems with profit-seeking within elderly care. It involves fraud, crime, neglect, and worse working conditions.

In that situation, relatives are expected to perform unpaid care and nursing when the welfare state's elderly care is cut, deprioritized, and commodified. Most often, it is women who have to carry the heaviest burden. It is a wife, a daughter, or a sister. This is a woman trap.

Vänsterpartiet demands that an inquiry commission be appointed to review the entire elderly care system, from the financing and working conditions to the pursuit of profit. It must no longer be possible to turn a blind eye to a crisis in welfare that the Tidö government has deepened.

Now, however, the government and the Sweden Democrats give the impression of prioritizing elderly care with today's bill, which we in the Riksdag are to debate and vote on. The government presents proposals to strengthen support for the elderly and relatives.

Vänsterpartiet has the basic view that care and nursing, as well as support for relatives, need to be developed. But we in Vänsterpartiet are completely convinced that the best support that relatives can receive is a welfare system that has good quality and exists throughout the entire country. There is probably nothing that pleases and eases things more for the relatives than when the elderly receive care and nursing in a timely manner and based on need, from welfare staff who feel good at work and can afford to stay in their jobs.

One of the government's proposals is that a fixed care contact shall be offered for those living in residential care for elderly people. We in Vänsterpartiet support this, as we believe that the fixed care contact can meet the individual's needs for security, continuity, individualized care and nursing, and coordination. The fixed care contact can also play an important role for relatives and contribute to their security.

The Government proposes that only assistant nurses shall be able to be appointed as a permanent care contact in residential care for the elderly. Vänsterpartiet agrees with this. But the reality in the country's various municipalities is that the shortage of assistant nurses is acute and long-lasting. There is today, if nothing is done, an obvious risk that assistant nurses will be forced to take responsibility for an unreasonable number of care recipients, which directly counteracts the proposition's goal of continuity and security. The permanent care contact in home care has already shown that it is difficult to ensure equal access to a care contact across the country because there is a lack of trained staff. More and more demands are being placed on those who are already active, which means that they eventually break down from the workload and, in the worst case, leave elderly care.

If the government's proposal is to be successful, more people must want to train as nursing assistants, while today's nursing assistants must want to stay in the profession. For this to be possible, the government and Sverigedemokraterna need to act to increase the attractiveness of training for and working as a nursing assistant.

Instead, the government and the Sweden Democrats have only increased the demands on nursing assistants and other staff in elderly care during this mandate period. Workers are breaking down from the workload because they lack colleagues. Workers are being ruined financially because the wages in Swedish elderly care are the worst in the entire EU, according to new figures. They are governed by minute-tracking and work longer hours than is the case in many other EU countries. If they fall ill, they are forced to pay a penalty fee of thousands of kronor. If they are on long-term sick leave, they are dismissed. In the midst of a staff and competence supply crisis, nursing assistants and healthcare assistants are also being deported on an assembly line.

Why have the government and the Sweden Democrats not presented proposals for more resources to the municipalities so that they are well-financed, so that elderly care gets more staff, can afford to further train staff and can invest in raising wages for workers and in shorter working hours? And why has the care deduction not been abolished, national staffing guidelines such as full-time and permanent employment not been introduced and minute-management and split shifts not been stopped?

Since another question: Why do the government and the Sweden Democrats allow our tax money to disappear into CEOs' salaries and shareholders' dividends instead of letting it stay in elderly care so that high-quality care and nursing can be provided across the entire country, by staff who feel good at work and can afford to stay? It is these efforts that relieve the relatives.

We can take just one example. Mark Jensen, CEO of one of Sweden's largest healthcare and elderly care companies, Ambea, earns 550,000 kronor every month. We are talking about over half a million kronor. That is as much as the salaries of 22 healthcare assistants combined. At the same time, we know that there are lower wages, worse pensions, and fewer staff members within just profit-seeking healthcare and elderly care companies.

This is the result of our tax money not staying in elderly care but being allowed to disappear. Instead of going to the staff's wages and the elderly's right to a place in special housing, they become profits for CEOs and dividends to shareholders. Furthermore, these companies and corporations get away with fraud and neglect and are allowed to continue establishing themselves. Therefore, the profit-seeking in Swedish welfare must end.

I therefore do not understand how the government and the Sweden Democrats can manage to conjure up 50,000 new employees in elderly care by 2030 without these investments. The equation is simple: If the politicians do not succeed in ensuring that staff do not become sick and poor from working in Swedish elderly care, relatives, the majority of whom are women, will be forced to provide unpaid care and nursing. They take time off work to go to doctor's appointments with mom. They help dad with his shower if he hasn't wanted to shower when the minute-managed home care has decided that he should shower, or they cook for their sister because she doesn't want microwave food every day.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, we in Vänsterpartiet call for approval of our reservation 1. We must solve the personnel and competence supply crisis to secure the quality of today's and the future's elderly care.

In conclusion, I also want to say that it is positive that relief services according to LSS are proposed to become more flexible and also be able to be performed outside the home. At the same time, it is noteworthy that the government chooses to only pick out a minimal part of the 2018 LSS investigation without also taking into account how the right to assistance, accompaniment, and relief are systematically connected. When individual parts are changed without a holistic approach, persons with disabilities risk being affected by lack of clarity, inequality, and legal uncertainty. A reform of LSS must be based on a systemic understanding and cannot be done on disconnected grounds.

We believe that the government should return with a unified proposal, where relief services, companionship, and personal assistance are treated in their systematic context according to the intentions of the LSS legislation. Such a reform should also aim to strengthen the conditions for relatives by ensuring that the interventions become accessible, legally secure, and sufficient to prevent relatives from being forced to compensate with their own support and thereby risk impaired quality of life and ill health.

I want to add that LSS has an upper age limit, currently 66 years, above which it is no longer possible to apply for personal assistance. That age limit is discriminatory and should be removed. The age limit means that many who would benefit from the measure have to apply for other support or are left without support. Since I was not granted permission to move for approval of such a reservation, as this was not considered to be connected to the bill, I nevertheless want to raise it for the record.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! In Sweden, we estimate that there are around 1.3 million relatives who in some way care for or take care of a parent, a partner, a child, a sibling, or a close relative. The work that these people perform is not only a deeply humane act but also involves a great relief for society. That is precisely why it is so important that society is there and relieves the relative when it is needed.

For the vast majority of us, it is a self-evident matter to help when a relative becomes ill. It is, so to speak, part of the very mission of being human. Regardless of whether it concerns a partner who becomes ill, a parent who develops dementia, or a child who is injured in an accident, one is there as a relative. One helps, guides, supports, and comforts. One organizes, donates, and fixes. One contacts healthcare, care services, and authorities. But at the same time, there is a limit to what one can endure as a relative. That is why society must be there and fill the gap when it is needed.

As a relative, one can already today receive help and support in many ways, for example through respite services, alternating care, day activities, and home care. Many municipalities offer support via a relative consultant or relative groups. Some possibility may also exist for financial compensation, such as close relative allowance or nursing allowance.

With today's consideration, we take further steps in the support for the relative. They are not enormous changes, but they are nonetheless important.

In the Social Services Act, it is now clarified that the social services shall offer a support contact to those who care for or support a relative who is elderly or seriously ill, and to those who support a relative with a disability. The support contact's task shall be to provide information and guidance to the relative, as well as provide support in planning measures that may be needed. It may not sound so dramatic, Madam Speaker, but it is an important measure so that the relative does not feel that everything rests on their own shoulders, but that there is someone who supports and guides when it can be difficult to see clearly in a very vulnerable situation.

Madam Speaker! A group of relatives who unfortunately have received far too little support and who have, so to speak, been allowed to slip under the radar are children and young people. As children, one should never have to take adult responsibility for one's parents or siblings. Nevertheless, there are many children in Sweden who have had to do so throughout their entire upbringing.

Too many children grow up with a parent with mental illness or substance abuse, and they need to be made visible. I will quote one of all the children who have made their voices heard through the organization Maskrosbarn: "I wish someone had said: 'You are not alone.' Because that is exactly how it felt. Alone. Had I known that there were other children in similar situations, maybe I would have dared to speak earlier, dared to ask for help, dared to breathe a little easier."

Now, Madam Speaker, we clarify in the legislation that the social services shall offer the interventions that are needed when a child is in need of support due to a relative's illness, disability, or in the worst case, death. Also in the Health and Medical Services Act, we clarify the provider's responsibility to offer support to children, not only when it concerns a parent but also when it concerns a sibling or a step-sibling.

Now, of course, the most important thing is how the changes in the law will be handled afterwards. In the Riksdag, we establish the frameworks, but the implementation takes place in our municipalities and regions. It is there that the children who are in need of support must be identified. It is there that there must be routines and methods to apply. It is there that the support is to be given in reality.

Madam Speaker! Most of us will at some point in life be a relative of a loved one who suffers from a serious illness, becomes disabled, or perhaps falls into substance abuse. Society's task must be to help, support, and relieve the relatives as much as possible. From the Center Party's side, we are therefore positive about the extra steps taken today, with clear requirements for information, guidance, and other support that one may need as a relative, but much more needs to be done moving forward.

(cont. § 9)

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