Support for persons with disabilities

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is a somewhat historic day today when we are now going to debate and decide on how society's support for persons with disabilities shall be designed. Based on how the discussions have been conducted in the Social Affairs Committee leading up to this day, the Riksdag today will cast a far too passive government ahead of it in the work for better living conditions for persons with disabilities.

But this debate is not just about concrete measures and support for a defined group of people. It is about how we as a society should behave towards one another, regardless of who we are and what needs we have. For a society, our society, never becomes better, stronger or warmer than the web that we weave together around those who need more support than others to be able to live life to the full.

Society's support for persons with disabilities involves a long series of measures so that people can be part of the community regardless of their bodies' functionality. Not all perspectives are contained within the framework of the Social Affairs Committee's work, and not all are contained within the framework of LSS, the Act on Support and Service for Certain Persons with Disabilities. Much more than one law is required to create a good society for everyone. But this year, as LSS celebrates 30 years, there is reason for us as a society to evaluate ourselves.

When the law was enacted, it was a proud reform that gave persons with disabilities the right to live a life as good and independent as possible. But the developments of recent years have led to ever greater gaps in the support that the LSS legislation was intended to provide.

Today I will highlight two perspectives - the two perspectives where the Social Affairs Committee submits proposals for motions to the government. It concerns the right to accompaniment for persons with visual impairments, and it concerns a review of the model for the financing of the assistance allowance.

Mr. Speaker! We are now talking about support for people with disabilities. One of the most obvious measures should be that those who cannot see for themselves can have a sighted companion in society. But that is not the case today - no longer.

In the gallery today, we have listeners who are listening to the debate but who cannot see it. They cannot see the large beautiful gray weave behind me, which consists of a long row of gray shades of linen from all of Sweden's landscapes. They cannot see me as the speaker right now. Now I am interpreting a bit. I might blend in a little bit in that gray weave with my gray hair and my linen jacket.

There might have been more in the stands today if more had had that right to accompaniment that society should give them.

These people can tell us about how the tears in the fabric of society function and about the difference between having a companion and not having a companion, both during life's most important occasions and when it comes to all of life's everyday needs and desires.

The previous Social Democratic government saw these cracks. It saw that fewer and fewer were being granted companion services according to LSS. The government at that time therefore tasked Socialstyrelsen in July 2022 with mapping the changes. The mapping showed with all desirable clarity that the companion service intervention according to LSS had decreased very significantly between the years 2010 and 2022, both in terms of how many were granted companion services and in terms of the extent of it. The deterioration has been greatest for the youth.

During the past year, we have also been able to observe several court cases and witness testimonies in the media regarding the exclusion and isolation that the lack of guidance leads to. This applies in particular to the group of deaf-blind people. Even if one is both deaf and blind, one does not have a self-evident right to guidance today. We have a law that no longer functions as it was intended to function.

I would like to thank you for all the stories and materials that we politicians have been given access to, which form the basis for the decision that the risk day will make today.

The proposal is that the government shall review the conditions for free assistance for persons with visual impairments and that the government shall review whether the assistance should be regulated in a special act.

The Moderates, the Liberals, and the Christian Democrats have, in a government position, all had every opportunity to live up to their previous beautiful words about the importance of people's freedom. But they remain silent about the freedom for those who need guidance.

Not voting for a review of the legislation we have today cannot be called anything other than a betrayal of those who, more than most, need society's support for their freedom and to be able to live life to the full.

Mr. Speaker! The question of the design of the compensation levels for personal assistance is, just like the question of accompaniment, an example of a reform that has been eroded over time.

Personal assistance is, just as it sounds, about support for people who need assistance to manage their lives and their basic needs. The person entitled to assistance can choose between being an employer for their assistants on their own or purchasing assistance from a municipality, a company, or a cooperative of which they are a member. It is good that the individual has great influence over who is hired as an assistant, but it makes the question of financing very difficult.

In recent years, we have seen how more and more, especially smaller providers and individual families, have found it increasingly difficult to make the assistance activities viable because the compensation levels have not kept pace with the cost developments. Inflation has dug deep holes in the system. This makes it difficult today to recruit and retain competent assistants.

At the same time, we can see how large companies, which have administrative and staffing economies of scale, continue to make multi-million profits on personal assistance. We still see that tax money intended for welfare is instead going to dividend payments. Therefore, I am pleased that a majority in the Social Affairs Committee now joins what we Social Democrats have written in our committee motion, that today's system is no longer sustainable.

I could have said that I am surprised that we do not have a united social affairs committee on this issue, given how it sounded from the side of today's governing parties before they became the government. But, as it has been said from the Tidö government's side in other contexts: One says one thing before the election. Then the election happens, and then one says something else.

The government is now mandated, according to the proposal, to appoint an inquiry with the aim of developing a long-term sustainable financing model for the personal assistance allowance that better takes into account the actual costs of different providers. That is good. It is a prerequisite for people in need of personal assistance to be able to continue receiving this in the future. It is a way to begin repairing the tears that have occurred in the fabric surrounding people with disabilities, and these are necessary measures to ensure that this fabric does not completely unravel.

Mr. Speaker! In summary, I therefore stand behind the Social Affairs Committee's proposal regarding the announcements to the Government. I naturally stand behind all the Social Democrats' reservations, but I particularly wish to demand approval for reservation 5, stating that the Government should implement the proposals of the so-called Huvudmannaskapsutredningen.

(Applause)

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

Carina Ståhl Herrstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today's report covers a wide range of issues. It is not entirely surprising that today I intend to focus on the proposals and the issues that actually command a majority today. Let me begin with the question of escorting.

A functioning escort service is extremely important for the visually impaired to be able to live an active and independent life, a life that many of us others take for granted. It is about going to and from one's work and to and from the grocery store, and about meeting friends and acquaintances. The vast majority of people, regardless of whether they can see or not, simply feel bad about being involuntarily tied to their home without the possibility of meeting others. It is precisely this that is now about to happen.

The right to accompaniment has been progressively eroded depending on how the law is interpreted. We thus once again have a law where the application over time has changed into something completely different than what was originally intended.

We now see how persons who for many years have been granted the intervention of accompaniment suddenly have the intervention withdrawn, completely without anything in the person's situation having changed. The only thing that has changed is how the law is interpreted.

Fewer and fewer visually impaired people are being granted companionship according to LSS. Instead, visually impaired people are often referred to measures according to the Social Services Act, which often means fewer hours and more restrictions regarding what the companionship can actually be used for.

Mr. Speaker! It is not uncommon for the municipality to also have a fee of several hundred kronor per hour. Support through social services therefore does not only lead to reduced opportunities to influence oneself. The cost itself affects and clearly limits purely economically. Interventions according to LSS, on the other hand, are free of charge.

These deteriorations and these changes are pointed out, not least in the report that Socialstyrelsen submitted just over a year ago.

I and my party have submitted proposals for the government to review the conditions for free-of-charge assistance for persons with visual impairments and also to review the conditions for regulating assistance in a specific law. Miljöpartiet has submitted exactly the same proposals. Together with the other opposition parties, we have now succeeded in gathering a majority for a proposal for a motion for announcement on the issue. It is an important issue for us, which we now hope will be handled in the best possible way.

Another thing that I and my party have long fought for is the increase of the personal assistance allowance. Therefore, I am also incredibly pleased that we have now gathered a majority in that issue as well.

Every granted assistance hour is replaced with a flat-rate amount. But I have sat in the Riksdag as a member since 2010, Mr. Speaker, and in no budget has it ever been shown how this compensation has been calculated. Other proposals in the budget have, throughout all these years, been presented with long texts, statistics, and diagrams showing how one arrived at the conclusion one arrived at. But when it comes to just the assistance compensation, Mr. Speaker, it basically states that according to the Social Insurance Code, a flat-rate amount for assistance compensation shall be determined every year and that the government for the coming year determines that the flat-rate amount shall be increased by X or so many percent. That is all - completely without any explanation of what the decision is based on.

We consider this to be a major deficiency that we want to change. Therefore, it is also very pleasing here that a proposal that the Sverigedemokraterna were alone in putting forward has now managed to gather a majority. This is actually a purely Sverigedemokratiskt proposal, and I think we should be honest about that. Regardless of what is written online by different organizations, regardless of what individual members or parties give the impression of having driven, it is a party that has put forward this proposal, and it is the Sverigedemokraterna.

But enough about that. The most important thing is that we get a good proposal.

That the hourly rate over time has been far too low and has not followed wage developments or the rest of society's cost developments is one thing, and I agree with that. But to stand year after year and discuss, debate, and negotiate the hourly rate is next to madness. It means that the assistance companies are given no opportunity whatsoever to plan long-term. It is difficult for them to promise any kind of wage increase. It is difficult for them to recruit new staff. It is difficult for them to retain existing staff. It is a completely unreasonable arrangement.

Therefore, it is strange that no previous government, regardless of color and constellation, has addressed the issue of index-regulating the assistance allowance so that long-term conditions are created for those who provide assistance.

This is another issue that we have been pushing for some time but have not received support for. I am pleased that today, together with Miljöpartiet and Socialdemokraterna, we have succeeded in gathering a majority in this matter to investigate the conditions for a long-term sustainable financing model that better takes into account the actual costs of different operators, that is, in some way indexed against developments in society.

Mr. Speaker! I do not want to miss the opportunity to also move for approval of reservation 17, which concerns car support. I have not had time to raise that question today, but briefly, it is about our wish that the regulations for car support be extended to also include persons who do not drive their own car and that the age limit for car support be removed.

I have today, as I said, chosen to focus on the issues I have now raised and which hopefully, if everything goes as planned, will also be decided this afternoon, that is to say that today two announcements are submitted to the government with a total of four proposals - firstly that the conditions for free accompaniment for persons with visual impairments are reviewed, secondly that the conditions for regulating the accompaniment intervention in a specific law are reviewed, thirdly that in the future, it shall be reported annually how the flat-rate amount for assistance was determined, and fourthly, last but not least, that the conditions for a long-term sustainable financing model that better takes into account the actual costs of different providers are investigated.

I will content myself with this, as I see that my speaking time is running out. I move, as I have said, for approval of reservation 17.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Carina Ståhl Herrstedt, for the speech and for the fact that we can today gather a majority in the Swedish Riksdag behind these two proposals for announcements that you mention! Not least the one about guidance is extremely important. Since the report from the National Board of Health and Welfare in June last year, where it was shown in black and white how guidance has been eroded for people with blindness or visual impairment, initiatives have been requested in this matter, and it feels very good that the Riksdag can now jointly take such an initiative, give an announcement to the government and put pressure on the issue. It is very good.

It is also good with the announcement regarding the increase of the assistance allowance. Then it always ends up in a budget issue, naturally, and there we have to hope that the government can deliver a budget with a higher percentage increase than the one that has been.

There is, however, a large number of areas where announcements are actually needed for this government. There is a lot of talk, but very little is happening within the area of social services, not least within the policy for people with disabilities.

There is an additional reservation in the report concerning the 2020 interpreter services investigation, which the Centerpartiet, Socialdemokraterna, Miljöpartiet, and Vänsterpartiet stand behind. Had the Sverigedemokraterna stood behind it, we would have had one more announcement on a very important issue for people with deafness, hearing impairment, or deaf-blindness.

My question to the member is: Why do the Sweden Democrats not also stand behind that reservation and provide even more strength behind the Riksdag against the government?

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

Carina Ståhl Herrstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Christofer Bergenblock, for the question! First and foremost, I must say that I agree that it feels incredibly good that we have at least come some way with the proposals for announcements that we can agree on today.

The reason they can be agreed upon is that they are formulated in such a way that they are about investigating, reviewing conditions, and so on. As the member knows, we have a budget cooperation with the government, which means that I cannot stand behind proposals that involve costs or in any other way affect the budget here and now. When it comes to investigating issues, I can do that.

This also actually answers the question regarding the 2020 interpreter services investigation, where I agree with the member in substance. I know that the government is looking into the issue, but one cannot return with that answer year after year. Something really must happen here. It is an important issue that I would like to be able to stand behind in substance, but given the situation, I cannot. It would involve costs, and those are not included in the budget that has been presented.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is naturally a weakness that we cannot agree on that issue. It is an area where a notification would also have truly been needed. The 2020 interpretation services investigation was completed in March 2022, and the referral process was finished in September 2022. When the new government took office, this was on the Social Ministry's desk, and it has remained there since then. As far as is known, not much has happened.

It is fundamentally very important reforms that are addressed in the interpretation services investigation. This is also about people who do not receive the support and the help they need to enter into society and be able to be a part of working life, not least, which is one of the important issues addressed in the investigation. It is about introducing a national function for the interpretation service, creating a new interpretation services act, and separating everyday interpretation from work-life interpretation.

Just this is one of the burning points that prevents many in this group from entering the workforce. Today, the responsibility lies entirely with the employer, and in the interpretation services investigation, there is a sharp proposal that the state should take responsibility for interpretation services in the workforce as well. It is naturally associated with a cost, but it is also a great opportunity for the state to increase its revenues when more people enter the workforce.

Even if there is no announcement on the issue today, I hope that the Riksdag can push the government properly to get something to happen, even for the interpretation service, where the government is unfortunately all too passive in these matters.

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

Carina Ståhl Herrstedt (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Christofer Bergenblock for a good account of the assignment.

I agree that these are important issues. There was a nearly finished proposal, just as the member states. I also agree that it is a shortcoming that the work has not progressed further. But the proposals that the member brings up cost money, and there my hands are tied. They are proposals that cost money, and it is a question of budget priorities. It is only to be regretted that they have not been prioritized so far, and I hope that moving forward, even in these issues, we can push the government forward so that we get to the point.

A lot is happening in the area at the Ministry of Social Affairs, and I hope that one can really tackle this specific issue. It is important so that people can enter the workforce and be a part of society, and I hope that we can push the government forward and deal with the proposal that so rewardingly lies on the table.

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Social Affairs' report 13, Support for persons with disabilities. The subject engages many, and there are approximately 90 motions from the general motion period. I move for approval of reservations 9 and 10, and otherwise I move for approval of the committee's proposal and rejection of the motions.

Mr. Speaker! This is a broad area where the motions concern, among other things, the rights and living conditions for persons with disabilities, interpretation services, and driving support.

Mr. Speaker! In the government statement on 18 October 2022, Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson stated the following:

"Persons with disabilities shall be able to be fully included in society without being subjected to discrimination. Integrating the perspective of disability rights into more policy and social areas continues to be in focus."

Mr. Speaker! Disability policy in Sweden has been an important issue in recent years, and it continues to be so for us Moderates. There is more that needs to be done to ensure full participation and equality for persons with disabilities in society. One of the biggest challenges for disability policy in Sweden is to ensure accessibility and accessible means of communication within the areas of society. It is crucial so that persons with disabilities can participate fully in society. We need to ensure that all public buildings, means of transport, and digital platforms are accessible for persons with disabilities. We also need to increase awareness among the general public about the importance of accessibility for persons with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker! Another important issue is to promote the right to work and education for persons with a disability. To achieve this, we need to ensure that employers and educational institutions take into account persons with a disability and create workplaces and educational environments that are accessible to everyone.

At this time of year a year ago, I met Mimi. She worked in a clothing store and priced clothes. Mimi has a disability. At first, the shop owner was quite skeptical: How is this going to work, and how are we going to communicate with each other? But today she is happy that she accepted Mimi because Mimi does a job that she avoids doing, and Mimi is included in a community with colleagues.

We need to invest in a broad and accessible labor market where people with disabilities have the opportunity to participate and contribute to society based on their abilities.

Mr. Speaker! During the month of May, I have received interns from Organisationen Jag. It has been one or two every week. We have had conversations about daily operations, housing, accessibility, and getting work done. It has been very educational, and it is something I intend to continue with in the autumn. In that way, I can create a better picture for myself and become a better politician so that I can make the right decisions in the future.

The Moderates believe that it is important to strengthen the cooperation between different actors in the field of disabilities, including organizations, authorities, and the business sector. By working together, we can create a more inclusive and accessible social environment for persons with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates believe that it is important that people with disabilities have access to assistive devices and rehabilitation to facilitate everyday life and increase independence. The focus should be on the individual's needs to manage everyday life as best as possible. Today, access to assistive devices is a bit like a postcode lottery. It therefore matters where in Sweden you live for what access to assistive devices you receive.

Mr. Speaker! We need to see an increase in the availability of assistive devices, and the research and development of new technical solutions must continue. Last year I visited Samhall in Dalarna, which has a responsibility to manage the reconditioning of assistive devices. Every assistive device is cleaned, and if any part needs to be replaced, spare parts are available. Among other things, they manage rollators, beds, and permobility vehicles.

In Dalarna, we are doing well with assistive devices, but that is not actually the case in the rest of the country. Problems can arise when a person who has assistive devices wants to move to another part of Sweden. In the worst case, the person may have to hand over their assistive devices and need to apply for new ones where the person moves. You can therefore have to leave your belongings at the county border, and we cannot have that.

Mr. Speaker! I want to conclude where I began with a quote from the government statement of 18 October 2022:

"Persons with disabilities shall be able to be fully included in society without being subjected to discrimination. Integrating the perspective of disability rights into more policy and social areas continues to be in focus."

It is such a Sweden we shall have.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! I have a question for Member Höglund, representing the party that also holds government responsibility for disability policy. I, like many others, wonder what is actually happening at the Ministry of Social Affairs. There is a long line of completed investigations waiting to become government bills to the Riksdag. Member Bergenblock just highlighted the interpretation services investigation in the discussion.

In connection with today's debate, I would like to ask the Moderaterna about another investigation. What is actually happening with the Huvudmannaskapsutredningen, that is, the one that proposed that all personal assistance should be gathered under state control and not be divided as it is today between municipal assistance for some and state for others? I have understood that there is a broad political consensus regarding the importance of that reform. Increased equality and increased predictability were needed for the assistance users.

When the question is posed to the responsible minister, the answer is always that work is underway. I know that Member Höglund thinks the issue of personal assistance is important. Therefore, I want to ask if she is truly confident and certain that the work is actually underway at the Ministry of Social Affairs. From the Riksdag's perspective, it does not seem like particularly much work is taking place on the issue in the ministry.

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you to Member Sundin for the question!

The main responsibility investigation is very important. I think so too. I think that the assistance should be gathered. The member points out that it is an ongoing work, and that is exactly my answer: It is an ongoing work in the Government Offices. The report has been referred for consultation, and it is being prepared within the Government Offices.

The question is important so that there can be an equal assessment of the assistance across Sweden. Therefore, we need to have a state ownership. As mentioned, it is being prepared within the Government Offices.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the answer.

We are in complete agreement that the issue is important, so the next question is: When will it arrive? The investigation was presented on March 1, 2023. The consultation period expired almost exactly one year ago. When will it arrive? Is it not time to at least present some kind of timetable for when the government intends to be finished with the issue?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to the member for the question!

I feel confident in this matter. It will come. What I cannot answer; as I answered earlier, it is being prepared within the Government Offices. It has been referred for consultation and so on, so I feel confident in the matter.

I am pleased that we are both equally committed to this issue.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you to Member Malin Höglund for the speech!

A notice will be directed to the government today regarding accompaniment. The reason the Riksdag is directing this notice is that the delivery from the government and the governing parties is too poor.

As far as guidance is concerned, it is doubtful whether there is even any form of preparation underway of the report that came from Socialstyrelsen a year ago. It is true that this is stated in the reservation submitted by M, L and KD, where they say no to directing this announcement to the government. But there is very little that indicates that this report is actually being prepared, and what is included in the report is the proposal to develop new legislation specifically for the guidance intervention.

However, work is ongoing at the National Board of Health and Welfare to produce support material for the municipalities and to develop a handbook on how to make assessments. But that will not change the practice that has been established in Sweden over the last ten years, where person after person after person is deprived of their assistance and where fewer and fewer are granted this right.

For those who have support in accordance with LSS and belong to person group 3, there has been a reduction of almost 70 percent over the last ten years for those who actually should have been entitled to accompaniment.

My question to the member and to the Moderaterna is: Why did the Moderaterna not also stand behind the announcement that will still be directed to the government today regarding the guidance?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Many thanks to Member Bergenblock for the question!

The answer I give is that work is ongoing within the Government Offices. It feels unfortunate to have to say it, but the answer regarding a number of different matters that we have been able to take part of in this report is that a number of different works are ongoing within the Government Offices. Some naturally take longer to reach a conclusion.

I also think that this is important. The guidance is a very important issue; it is that. It is important that people get out into work, get out into activities and so on. But the short answer that I also mentioned earlier is that work is ongoing. Therefore, we do not stand behind the announcement.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! One then wonders if the Moderates are satisfied with the time it takes for the government to resolve these issues.

Since the government took office just over a year and a half ago, the delivery within the area of disability policy has been extremely low, despite there having been investigation after investigation after investigation with proposals. The answer is always that it is being prepared within the Government Offices. Yes, but one can prepare questions for a very long time without arriving at anything. In the end, it is action that counts.

This was just a question regarding the Main Responsibility Inquiry. It is being prepared in the Government Offices.

Here is a report from Trafikanalys on changing the transport service. It is being prepared in the Government Offices.

We have the 2020 interpretation services investigation, which was completely finished and had been referred for consultation when this government took office. It is being prepared in the Government Offices.

We need to make a change to the standardized parental allowance, and it is urgent to make that change. It is being prepared in the Government Offices.

Assistance, which is a very important issue for many with blindness or severe visual impairment, is being prepared in the Government Offices.

It is well and good, matters must be prepared, but what counts in the end is delivery. The government is not delivering, and unfortunately, there is very little that indicates that one intends to deliver within the area of guidance more than possibly in the form of additional knowledge support.

What is needed here is to investigate new legislation. That, in turn, will take time, but one must come to a point and understand that it is that path we must take.

I demand greater delivery from the government and from the governing parties in the various issues within the disability policy. But regarding the guidance specifically, an announcement to the government will at least be made today.

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to Member Bergenblock for the summary of various matters!

I actually feel quite secure in the work that is ongoing in the Government Offices. Member Bergenblock would have said exactly the same thing if he had stood in my shoes, because that is how it is. A lot of work is being prepared within the Government Offices. Things take time, and they must sometimes. But I feel secure in that. These are important issues, and that is what we actually agree on.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating a number of different but very fundamental functional policy issues.

On behalf of the Left Party, we place great emphasis on the proposal to realize the conclusions of the Main Responsibility Inquiry regarding moving the responsibility for decisions on and funding of personal assistance to the state.

This investigation came into being as part of the Left Party's committee initiative in the autumn of 2020, and we are very proud that we then succeeded in getting a majority to stand behind the implementation of the investigation.

Today, the responsibility for personal assistance is shared between the state and the municipality, and this division of responsibility has entailed several different problems. In some cases, the municipality and the state have made completely different assessments regarding a person's right to personal assistance and assistance allowance respectively. The assessments have appeared to lack legal certainty, and the different outcomes have created anxiety among the applicants as well as mistrust towards the system. Furthermore, the stricter case law of recent years has resulted in fewer and fewer people qualifying for the state assistance allowance. More have thus been referred to municipal assistance.

Many municipalities absolutely have a high level of ambition as well as good resources and can in that way resolve the situation in the best possible way. But others, especially smaller municipalities, have a narrower economy, which entails a risk that groups are pitted against each other. The risk is then high that the municipality's budget and not the individual's needs govern the decision on assistance. This erodes the intention of the rights legislation LSS.

With the state as the sole principal, the conditions for equal assessments throughout the country would increase. However, the Left Party wants to clarify one thing: that the nationalization of assistance should only occur if it is ensured that people's current assistance is not loosened, reassessed, or results in clawbacks. The Left Party does not want to see people with disabilities lose their assistance just because it has become state-run.

On March 1, 2023, the investigation presented the report A state head of agency for personal assistance. It is said that the report is being prepared within the Government Offices, but like many interest organizations, assistance providers, and those entitled to assistance, we believe it has taken far too long for the government to present a bill.

Mr. Speaker! Another proposal that we emphasize strongly is that the government shall task Socialstyrelsen with identifying the proportion of persons who have the intervention daily activity and who may be relevant for employment with wage subsidies, but also mapping out what obstacles exist for the municipalities to annually assess the possibility of work or internship placement, as well as producing support material as guidance for the municipalities in the collection of necessary statistical data.

From the preparatory works for LSS, it appears that the goal of the daily activity should be to develop people's opportunities for gainful employment in the short or long term. Despite this, no proper mapping has been conducted with the aim of producing reliable statistics on how many people with the intervention daily activity could be relevant for, for example, employment with a wage subsidy. In different contexts, however, it has been possible to discern that it concerns everything from 10 to 30 percent of the participants.

Today, approximately 40,000 people are in daily activities according to LSS, which means that between 4,000 and 12,000 people could manage an employment provided that the right support is given.

Despite the preparatory works on the objective of the measure daily activity and despite that the lack of reliable statistics is well known, a systematic work is lacking in the municipalities with the goal of increasing the number of transitions from daily activity to employment in the regular labor market. Therefore, Vänsterpartiet moves for approval of reservation 11 that Socialstyrelsen should be tasked to identify the proportion of persons who have the measure daily activity and who may be relevant for employment with a wage subsidy.

Mr. Speaker! For many deaf, hard of hearing and persons with deaf-blindness, interpreting services are a vital social service that is completely crucial for their opportunity to participate in social life.

The interpretation service has long had serious deficiencies, especially within the working life. Today's system is unpredictable and arbitrary and often prevents interpreter users from working. On one hand, there is uncertainty about who should have the primary responsibility for funding, and on the other hand, the protection against discrimination for persons who need an interpreter in the working life is deficient.

Overall, this negatively affects the everyday lives of people with hearing impairments, particularly these individuals' opportunities to obtain employment and to be able to perform their work tasks under the same conditions as employees without hearing impairments. The issue has been investigated on a number of occasions, but so far no reforms have been implemented. During this time, thousands of deaf, hard of hearing, and people with deaf-blindness have lost jobs, missed career opportunities, and even been forced out of the workforce.

In the spring of 2019, the Riksdag rejected the Left Party's motion to appoint an inquiry into interpretation services. In March 2022, the inquiry presented its report.

The disability rights movement definitely has views on some of the investigation's proposals, but overall they consider that most of the proposals in the report are a big step in the right direction for a positive development of the interpreting service and to increase the participation of the hearing impaired in society. According to the investigation's proposals, the public support for interpreters in the working life shall be centralized at Arbetsförmedlingen within the framework of a special initiative on contributions to interpreters for deaf, hearing impaired, and persons with deaf-blindness.

The government has not notified any proposition. The government should promptly implement the proposals in the report.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, the Left Party thinks it is positive that the Social Affairs Committee has gathered a majority to propose two announcements concerning free accompaniment and the system for calculating assistance compensation.

However, I have a few short additions to the proposals.

During the last ten-year period, the number of people to whom the municipalities have granted accompaniment has decreased significantly. Over twelve years, between 2010 and 2022, accompaniment services according to LSS for the group including the visually impaired have decreased by 68 percent in the country, according to the National Board of Health and Welfare.

It has also become more common over the last 20 years for municipalities to charge fees for assistance. Therefore, it is important to ensure the right to fee-free assistance for people with visual impairments, but also that they receive it at all. For many visually impaired people, the pandemic is not over. More and more are being denied assistance, and the consequence is that people are isolated in their homes. The right to assistance means that visually impaired people should have the same right to move in society as everyone else has. The law must be restored to what it once was.

That the flat-rate compensation corresponds to the general wage development is also important, primarily for small assistance providers. Persons entitled to assistance and their relatives testify that it is becoming increasingly difficult to recruit assistants because the flat rate for the hourly compensation has, for several years, been lower than the collectively agreed wage increases.

To enable skills development, good working conditions and contractually compliant wage increases for the qualified work that personal assistance is, the Left Party wants to raise the level of the flat-rate for the hourly rate by 2.2 percent per year.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Initially, I would like to move for approval of reservation 15 under point 14 regarding the interpretation services investigation.

Mr. Speaker! All people's right to participation in society on equal terms must be a starting point for Swedish disability policy. Nevertheless, we see in investigation after investigation and example after example that this is not the case. When the rights for people with disabilities should be strengthened, we see instead that the rights are weakened.

As late as March, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities issued sharp criticism regarding how Sweden complies with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and delivered a long series of recommendations on how we should address the problems.

What is happening in Sweden in 2024 to address this? Unfortunately, far too little is happening. It is not that there is a lack of knowledge about the nature of the matters. Nor is it that there is a lack of proposals for measures. What is missing, however, is initiative and decisiveness from the government's side. There is, by all means, a lot of talk and many beautiful words, but there is vanishingly little workshop. For that very reason, two announcements will be directed to the government today, but they should actually have been many more.

Mr. Speaker! In March 2022, the action plan for a long-term development of the interpreting service for deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind persons was completed. Half a year later, it had also been referred for consultation and landed on the government's desk. The investigation contains a number of important proposals on how the right to an interpreter can be strengthened in general and in working life in particular. Among other things, a completely new law on interpreting services is proposed.

As recently as a month ago, I had an interpellation debate with the Minister for Social Services regarding the interpreter services investigation, but no timeline for when the content of the investigation could be realized could be presented.

At the beginning of 2023, the Main Responsibility Inquiry's report on personal assistance landed on the government's desk. The report concerns moving the main responsibility for personal assistance from the municipality to the state in order to create greater equality across the country and avoid people getting caught between the municipality and Försäkringskassan. This is a reform that the disability movement has waited for for a long time and that all parties in the Swedish Riksdag say they support.

In the investigation, an introduction starting in January 2026 was proposed, and since Försäkringskassan had stated that it needed two years for implementation, the Riksdag would have needed to make a decision before Christmas last year. That did not happen. Instead, it seems that even this reform has gotten stuck with the Minister for Social Services, and as far as I know, no timeline is known.

Madam Speaker! In the spring of 2023, a report from Trafikanalys was also placed on the government's table. In the report, it was stated that the right to travel services has decreased drastically over the last ten years, which has particularly affected persons with disabilities. Persons with visual impairments appear to be especially vulnerable because they are often denied travel services with reference to regular public transport, which can often be difficult to access—unless one has access to a companion, that is.

Trafikanalys submits a number of proposals for changes in the legislation to restore the right to transport services and clarify that the permit shall be assessed based on the individual's ability to move and orient themselves along the entire travel chain, that is, from door to door. What happens then with these proposals? Yes, unfortunately, the report appears to have become stuck in a bureaucratic drawer at the Minister for Infrastructure.

This leads me further to the report on accompaniment that Socialstyrelsen placed on the government's desk in June 2023. In this report, it is stated that the right to accompaniment has been significantly circumvented over the last ten years, which leads to many people with blindness or visual impairment becoming isolated in their homes, or alternatively completely dependent on relatives.

The reports on how individuals have been affected have emerged frequently over the recent years. Between 2010 and 2022, decisions on accompaniment for person group 3 in LSS have decreased by 68 percent. Instead, one is referred to assistance via the Social Services Act, which only grants the right to a reasonable standard of living and is furthermore usually subject to a fee.

What has happened since the report was presented a year ago? Well, as far as is known, nothing – instead, the report is gathering dust at the Ministry of Social Affairs. For that reason, the Riksdag will this afternoon issue a notice to the government to investigate new legislation for the accompaniment intervention and that the accompaniment shall also be free of charge. This is such a serious issue that the Riksdag cannot just sit and watch.

Another area where an announcement has been needed concerns the change of the standardized parental deduction within personal assistance. We have already debated this in a separate committee report, but it is worth repeating. There, too, we are waiting for delivery from the government's side.

Madam Speaker! The problem with this government is not that it lacks ambition or that it lacks beautiful words. The problem is that there is no delivery. Investigation is piled upon investigation, but in the end, it is not the number of investigations that counts, but the number of implemented reforms.

Therefore, one must ask: When will the proposal to implement the content of the 2020 interpreter services investigation come? When will the proposal for a unified ownership for personal assistance come? When will the proposal to clarify and strengthen the right to transport services come? When will the proposal to restore the right to accompaniment come? And when will the proposal to rectify the standardized parental deduction within personal assistance come?

In the gallery today, many representatives from the disability rights movement are seated, and even more are sitting in front of televisions and computer screens. They all deserve to find out what the government parties' plan is for these issues. From the Center Party's side, I can at least promise that we will continue to push forward on these issues, for everyone's right to full participation in society. It is only practical, actual reforms that count in the end.

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservations 9 and 10 of the Christian Democrats, the Moderates and the Liberals. In other respects, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report, that is, the rejection of the other motions.

We are debating today important issues regarding the rights and living conditions for persons with disabilities, but also issues concerning interpretation services and driving support.

Christian Democratic policy is anchored in a view of humanity that starts from the premise that humans have an inviolable value and that all people are different. From their own conditions, everyone has the right to participate fully in society. The goal of disability policy is that persons with disabilities shall have the same opportunities as others have. The policy shall focus on improving accessibility, educational opportunities, and integration in the labor market.

The Christian Democrats want a society that sees, embraces, and includes all people. Therefore, knowledge about hidden disabilities must also increase, and the situation for persons with neuropsychiatric or intellectual disabilities must be strengthened.

Madam Speaker! Regarding the proposals for announcements that have been submitted, I therefore move for the approval of our reservation 9, which concerns the escort effort. There, we Christian Democrats, in a joint reservation from the government parties, set out our view on the proposal for an announcement on escorting.

As mentioned in the reservation, Socialstyrelsen was given the assignment in July 2022 to map out and analyze changes to the intervention ledsagning. In June 2023, the assignment was reported in the report Changes of ledsagning over time - report to the government in response to assignment. We note that Socialstyrelsen in the report proposes that the conditions for regulating the intervention ledsagning in a specific law should be investigated. The report is now being prepared within the Government Offices.

The mapping shows that there is a need to increase knowledge in the municipalities regarding accompaniment. Socialstyrelsen has therefore announced that the authority intends to develop support material for the municipalities. Socialstyrelsen's assessment is that support material could contribute to increased equality between the municipalities. While the ongoing work is being carried out, we do not believe that the Riksdag needs to issue a motion to the government. The ball is already rolling, and this is the fastest way to achieve a change.

I move to the next proposal for announcement, Madam Speaker. I move here for approval of reservation 10 under point 7, where we in Kristdemokraterna set out how we view the proposal for an announcement regarding an increase in the assistance allowance.

The level of the flat-rate compensation is significant for the possibility of ensuring good working conditions for personal assistants. The Government establishes the flat-rate annually, which is used as the basis for calculating the compensation for personal assistance. We note in this context that the Huvudmannaskapsutredningen has proposed changes to the flat-rate compensation in the event of a transition to a state-run management, as the employers would take responsibility for the sick pay costs for the personal assistants.

The report is now being prepared within the Government Offices. We do not consider that the Riksdag needs to issue a motion to the government. Even here, the ball is rolling. This is the fastest way, as I previously touched upon.

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats consider that the questions regarding the level of assistance compensation and the standard amounts that are now being prepared are very important. We Christian Democrats believe that the state alone should have the responsibility for personal assistance. It could provide a clear connection to the person and their need for assistance instead of a registered address. Additionally, the conditions for an equal and legally secure assessment across the entire country would be improved.

We are pleased with the investigation on state ownership, which contains many good proposals. They are being prepared now, and therefore there is a lot going on in the Government Offices.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! I have a question for the Christian Democratic member Hovskär, who represents the party that has the primary responsibility for social policy in the government and who has a party friend, Jakob Forssmed, as head of the department. It is the same question that I asked the member Höglund a moment ago: What is actually happening at the Ministry of Social Affairs?

I also want to ask Member Dan Hovskär if the Christian Democrats are truly satisfied with how the Ministry of Social Affairs is delivering on the issue of a unified principal responsibility for personal assistance. There is a broad political consensus that this is absolutely necessary for us to achieve increased equality and increased predictability for those in need of personal assistance. Are you satisfied with the delivery?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Karin Sundin for the question.

This is an important issue. It is a major investigation, and we Christian Democrats have long pushed to get it done. Preparation is ongoing within the Government Offices. The investigation proposes, among other things, the nationalization of assistance, which could ensure better conditions for equality, long-term perspective, and quality. We see this as something positive.

When preparing matters concerning new legislation, it is important to do so thoroughly and to achieve good legislation. I am satisfied that the process is underway and that we will see a good legislative proposal ahead.

This is being prepared within the Government Offices, and I am convinced that we will soon see delivery.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! During this debate, we have heard a long enumeration of various investigations that have accumulated within the field of disability policy at the Ministry of Social Affairs. I agree that the issue is important, but we have heard long enough that this is being prepared. This applies as much to the principal responsibility investigation as to other investigations that are now at the ministry and waiting.

How long shall the preparation continue? How can one as a member of the Committee on Social Affairs be satisfied, as the member Hovskär says he is? Is it not time that the Christian Democrats, who are responsible for social policy and for the department that has the task of laying propositions before the Riksdag, demand at least a timetable from the responsible minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall? Is it not reasonable that we at least get a timetable for when proposals might be expected to reach the Riksdag?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! One always wants fast delivery. However, it is also important that it is done solidly and thoroughly, so that one obtains good long-term proposals.

When it comes to the minute hunt within the assistance, we need to look at the conditions to improve equality and obtain a good final proposal. It is important to obtain a final product that is good in the long term. I look forward with confidence that in the near future we will receive a good proposal from the Ministry of Social Affairs. The Government is working on this issue. I feel secure about that.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank Member Dan Hovskär for the contribution.

The Chairman and I jointly organized a seminar together with Synskadades Riksförbund on April 11 this year under the theme escorting and the deficiencies in escorting. It was a very interesting seminar. We had invited representatives from Socialstyrelsen who accounted for the report that has been referred to several times during the debate. It clearly shows how the right to escorting has been eroded and how the opportunities for escorting have deteriorated for those who have a need for such due to visual impairment or blindness.

At the seminar, we also received clear and concrete examples of individual people who have been affected in this society - people who have become isolated in their homes because they have not been given access to accompaniment, who cannot take the bus because they receive neither accompaniment nor transport services, and who cannot go shopping because they do not receive help with accompaniment.

Dan Hovskär referred to the reservation that the Liberals, Christian Democrats and Moderates stand behind in the report regarding why they say no to an announcement on guidance. The member stated that they set out their view on this issue there.

My question, based on the seminar we had, based on what Socialstyrelsen has proposed and based on what the organization desires, is whether the Kristdemokraterna want to investigate new legislation regarding the right to accompaniment.

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! This is an important issue. During the seminar that Christofer Bergenblock mentioned, we heard how the guidance deteriorated during the previous government's time and how it has continued to be eroded. Therefore, it is important to now see how new proposals can be put forward that make it something long-term sustainable. It is not the intention that people should have to leave their jobs because they do not receive guidance, which is actually the case today.

We must find a long-term solution that has a real impact moving forward. This work is currently underway, and I look forward with confidence to us producing a proposal regarding these parts and in that way also being able to achieve a holistic view on this issue.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! It is important to find a long-term sustainable solution, says the member, and that is exactly what it is. Therefore, I request the Christian Democrats' position on a long-term sustainable solution. What the National Board of Health and Welfare has proposed is that new legislation regarding specifically the intervention of escorting should be investigated because it is observed that it does not work with the current legislation and that legal practice has shifted over the last ten years. It will not be possible to back down just because clarifications or a new handbook from the National Board of Health and Welfare are issued, but reforms are needed here.

I understand that reference is made to work being carried out in the Government Offices - if there is indeed work being carried out in the Government Offices. But what I am requesting is the Christian Democrats' position on the issue. What is the Christian Democrats' position on investigating new legislation for the escort intervention? I would very much like to have an answer to that.

To answer this question, one can simply base it on what the Christian Democrats themselves want. There is no need to refer to the fact that work is ongoing in the Government Offices. So again: What is the Christian Democrats' view on investigating new legislation for the escort intervention?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Christofer Bergenblock for the question.

Assistance is important so that people with visual impairments can have a normal life and be able to participate in society. Therefore, this is a very important issue. We Christian Democrats say that the goal of disability policy is that people with disabilities shall have equal living conditions as the rest of the population. This requires that different parts are anchored and clarified so that these people can continue to live a normal life. We Christian Democrats think that this is an important issue.

Case law develops over time as various judgments and the like are issued. One can look at the legislator's original intentions and then see what changes can be made to improve the situation. I feel confident and am reassured that we and the government are working on the issues and that we will together find a good solution even for those with visual impairments.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! I will take over from where Christofer Bergenblock has just finished. Ahead of the debate, we in the Social Affairs Committee have received quite a lot of material from organizations that work with issues concerning people with visual impairments, including from Synskadades Riksförbund.

The Federation has sent a document to all of us explaining why what is stated in the reservation from M, L, and KD does not hold. They write, among other things, that they met the responsible minister as recently as May 3, but that they have received no indications that Socialstyrelsen's proposal to seriously investigate a law is being prepared at the ministry as claimed, and that the only information they have received from the Minister for Social Services is that the government wants to wait for knowledge material that Socialstyrelsen is to prepare for the municipalities regarding the application of LSS. That is also the answer the minister has given to a written question in the Riksdag.

A few days ago, I met the artists behind the skeleton art that we can currently see just outside the entrance to the Riksdag building. Very creative activism! They told me quite vividly that a new law is necessary because legal practice has been eroded more and more over a long period and that we have now reached the end of the road.

I too am very curious about what the Christian Democrats specifically think about the need for a new law.

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Ulrika Westerlund for the question.

As I mentioned in my speech, it is an important issue, and we are working on this in the government cooperation. The Christian Democrats think that this is an extremely important issue and see that several things are in motion.

The announcement is about investigating the conditions, but we are already doing that. Therefore, the announcement is a shot in the air. We are currently reviewing how we can improve the situation for those who need accompaniment. The mapping that Socialstyrelsen is conducting is a step along the way, but it does not solve the whole. Much is in motion, and it is an important issue.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! I interpret this as that it is not possible to get an answer on what the Christian Democrats consider regarding the need for a law. We know that the instructions are formulated so that it "is assigned to", that one should "look specifically at" and so on, but parties can still have an opinion on a certain issue even if it is something that is to be investigated or if work is ongoing at the Government Offices.

I continue to look at the materials that have been generously sent to us from, among others, the Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired. It is described in a very pedagogical manner that the work currently underway at the National Board of Health and Welfare is to develop a handbook for municipalities when assessing LSS cases, where accompaniment according to LSS is one of the interventions. The current legal situation shall also be described.

In this context, it can be noted that the shift in case law has led to the fact that the visually impaired and the deaf-blind are no longer considered to belong to the group of persons for LSS and thus cannot receive such measures. In plain terms, this means that the knowledge material the government refers to will have no significance for the visually impaired and others who today are consistently excluded from LSS. It will be of no use whatsoever to all those who today are instead referred to seek guidance according to the Social Services Act. All the well-documented problems will therefore remain.

I ask again: Do the Christian Democrats have any own opinion on the question of the need for a law?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! As I mentioned earlier, the Christian Democrats have a great commitment to these issues, and we are working very hard to try to find a good solution. We see that case law has changed and that we must look at new ways: How can one be able to participate in work life and leisure life and have a normal life? Here we must review what is best for those who need this support. That is why the government parties are working to find solutions. We are not just conducting placard politics, but we want to try to achieve a change for these people. The Christian Democrats highlight these issues, and we are passionate about trying to find a long-term solution. I feel confident that things are in motion.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! Today's debate is based on a report containing two announcements. During this parliamentary term, this has been unusual. The government base has mostly held together, even if it has meant that a party has withdrawn motions that the party had submitted. I am very happy that it did not happen this time; the Sweden Democrats stand by their motion, which was formulated in almost exactly the same way as the Green Party's motion when it comes to, among other things, the right to a companion.

The questions the announcers are asking about, the right to accompaniment for the visually impaired and the assistance allowance, are extremely important issues for the disability rights movement and the people affected – but also for us as a society. Do we want a Sweden where everyone is included and can live their lives as they wish, or do we not want that?

Let me regret that there is no sign language interpreter on site. I have received emails from people in the gallery who thought that the debate would be sign-interpreted, which can occur during debates of particular interest but, therefore, not during this debate.

Before this debate, I have been contacted by several organizations and journalists who monitor these issues. Here in the gallery, several of them are represented, including Synskadades Riksförbund. I mention this because I naturally hope that the representatives of the governing parties will notice that the announcement that will be voted through today will be monitored—naturally by us in the opposition, but also by civil society organizations and by the journalists who monitor the area. I naturally hope that this will lead to today's decision leading to real action during this parliamentary term.

On Monday, I met the skeleton artists who also stood outside the Riksdag building here this morning. Their message is very clear: today's situation leads to many fearing that they will have to wait their entire lives to receive a sensible decision on accompaniment, a decision that means it is actually possible to live their lives on the same terms as others.

The skeleton artists brought a letter from Emelie, 23, which I want to share with you. Emelie writes, among other things, in her letter as follows:

Because I have been denied a guide, I am approximately as independent as when I was eight years old. Instead of moving forward in my development, I am moving backward. My parents are my only chance to get out, otherwise I am locked in my own home. It is no dignified life to live. I was granted a guide when I was 13 years old, and at that time I had significantly better vision than today. I had a guide until 2022 when I was going to start at a folk high school and live there most of the time. Naively enough, I thought I could just resume the guide when I came home again, but instead, I was stabbed in the back. Without a guide, I cannot move out of my home, because I cannot get outside the door on my own. Tears run down my cheeks when I think about the life that is just rolling by, but also about what the isolation will do to my mental health. I am 23 years old and want to live my life to the fullest according to my circumstances, but I am constantly hindered by our social system. It is outrageous! Being blind is difficult in many ways, but the absolute worst is how I am treated by society. The Swedish system looks good on paper, but we who really need help do not get it.

It is Emelie and many others in the same situation that today's decision is about.

Madam Speaker! In my motion, which is one of those that form the basis for today's announcement regarding escorting, the problem is described as follows:

"When LSS, the act on support and service for certain functional impairments, was adopted in 1993, severe visual impairment was a ground for support according to the act. This right has been eroded through a successive shift in how the act is applied. Visually impaired people today regularly receive a rejection of applications for escort services according to LSS. Even persons who have been granted escort services for many years have suddenly had their right to support withdrawn. Decisions to deny escort services from one day to the next are issued without anything in the person's situation having changed; the person in question has not suddenly started seeing better. The only thing that has happened is that the act is interpreted differently."

As has been mentioned earlier, the reduction is 68 percent since 2007, according to the report from Socialstyrelsen that has been mentioned by, among others, Karin Sundin. The development is worst among young people. They often receive neither support according to LSS nor other interventions from their municipality.

In my motion, it also states that persons who are denied accompaniment according to LSS can be referred to interventions according to the Social Services Act. In practice, this means fewer hours and more restrictions regarding what the accompaniment may be used for. The user is given less opportunity to influence how the support can be used, and it usually costs money. Furthermore, it states that the right to fee-free accompaniment service must be secured and the application is reviewed. The motion also emphasizes that if it is not possible to resolve the problems in the application, the government should consider the possibility of securing access in a special law.

I have previously referred to Synskadades Riksförbund and the material they have sent to us. They conclude as follows:

The legislation needs to be changed to break the negative trend and stop the dismantling of the life-saving intervention of guiding for the visually impaired. To vote against investigating a specific law on guiding in this situation is to vote for continued political passivity. It is a vote for blind, deaf-blind, and severely visually impaired persons to have poorer life chances than others in Sweden.

So, that is what Synskadades Riksförbund writes. Now, I hope, as I said, that this announcement will have a clear and rapid effect. An investigation into this law should be appointed as quickly as possible.

Madam Speaker! The second announcement in the report concerns the assistance allowance. This may be one of the most highlighted issues in all the intense and professionally arranged panel discussions that we, as spokespersons for disability policy, have been invited to during the parliamentary term. Here too, we can expect intense scrutiny from civil society so that this announcement also leads to real action during the parliamentary term.

Miljöpartiet was the only party that included a specific increase of the compensation in our budget motion, and we are pleased that we now have a majority behind the line that it must be reported how the flat-rate amount has been calculated and that a review must be made of the model for the calculation of the assistance compensation.

Additionally, I just want to mention that Miljöpartiet has submitted motions with a number of proposals concerning, among other things, strengthened rights to personal assistance, upholding the proposals of the Huvudmannaskapsutredningen and the Tolktjänstutredningen, a crackdown on ableism, support for purchasing specially designed bicycles, improved access to assistive devices, better systems for leisure certificates for children, and the need for an LSS inspection. We also want to appoint an inquiry on how Sweden is to fully comply with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. All of these are also included in today's report, and we will continue to draw attention to all of these issues.

I stand behind all our reservations and the two announcements, and I move for the approval of reservation 7.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! 30 years ago, something revolutionary happened. Persons with disabilities were granted the right to support according to LSS. One moved from being objects of care that society was to take care of to being persons with the right to decide over their own lives.

Previously, it was institutional housing, home care, or relying on relatives that applied. One had to adapt to the staff's schedules and the relatives' goodwill. The one who could not move had to wait patiently until someone could come and help them out of bed. When the parents could no longer manage everyday life, the child had to move into an institution, sometimes far from the parents. If one wanted to go on a date, one had to take along mom, dad, or some friend, because that was hardly something the home care would provide. Starting a family and having children was something that most did not even dare to dream about. Likewise, it was difficult to work or study.

Adolf Ratzka, the founder of the Independent Living movement in Sweden, has expressed it well with the words: It is difficult to contribute to society if one cannot get out of bed.

LSS is and was a freedom reform. In the large sense, it concerned things such as young people being able to move out of home, manage on their own, enter the labor market, and start a family. In the small sense, it concerned being able to take a walk, put on makeup, or start a leisure activity, things that most take for granted.

Madam Speaker! LSS gave persons with disabilities the right to a life like others. Those who have personal assistance can themselves decide where, when, and in what way they shall receive assistance. Persons who live in an LSS-housing shall have the opportunity to have their own interests and not adapt to others at the housing. LSS also gives the right to companion service, relief service, contact person, short-term stay outside the own home, daily activity, and a number of other interventions.

This year marks 30 years since the LSS reform came into force. One would like to summarize these years as 30 years of more freedom, but unfortunately, the freedom curve has not moved straight upwards.

For the last decade and some change, it has largely been marked by questioning of the reform. Can we afford it? Isn't there a lot of cheating? How much support must one actually provide? Demands for cuts from previous governments, authorities that have pushed forward new practice through judicial review or used practice for which there is actually no basis, and a general debate about cheating in society that has not always been based on facts.

Madam Speaker! The Liberals have during these years pushed to patch and repair the reform that we once took the initiative for. When breathing and tube feeding were no longer counted as a basic need, we pushed through a change. When the reassessments caused several thousand to lose their assistance, we pushed through a reassessment freeze. When people no longer dared to move from a municipality where they had received a decision that makes their daily life work, because the municipality they move to might make a different decision, we pushed forward an investigation on a state ownership.

We are, however, far from satisfied. Decisions based on minutes and seconds instead of on individuals' total needs, fewer being granted accompaniment, unreasonable requirements for medical documentation and so on - the list of reasons why the reform has been eroded can unfortunately be made long.

In the long run, I believe we have come as far as we can with patching and repairing, and a rethink of LSS needs to be made - LSS 2.0 - which ensures that we return to the basic intentions of the law.

In the report being discussed today, there are two announcements. Both concern LSS, and both are issues that the Liberals have championed and will continue to champion. We welcome that more want to join in and champion these issues.

The first thing is to investigate whether we can index the calculation of the flat-rate compensation, which is a very good idea. But it is a matter that is handled in the budget. We will have to come back to that.

The second point concerns the escort service. From 2010 to 2022, the number of people in personal area 3, which includes among others the blind and deaf-blind, who have been granted escorting according to LSS has decreased by 68 percent. This is shown in the Socialstyrelsen report that arrived last year.

Until 2019, it appears that most who are no longer granted accompaniment via LSS have instead received it via SoL, the Social Services Act. But from 2019 onwards, both curves curve downwards.

Madam Speaker! What then is the problem with this? The obvious thing is, of course, that people cannot live a life like others if they do not receive the support measures they need. A woman interviewed in the report says: "My sister and I are both deaf-blind. We received assistance according to LSS shortly after 1994. We could use it after school and do whatever we wanted with the hours, visit friends, exercise, etc. No one questioned what the hours were used for. I moved around after my studies and met the love of my life. I was denied LSS because I am now married. It is included that my partner should be able to care for me, they say. It does not become an equal relationship, but I am dependent on my husband."

This story summarizes well how LSS has developed over time. Furthermore, the problem is that decisions have been shifted from LSS to SoL. The LSS intervention is cost-free and more flexible than the SoL intervention. A walk granted via SoL is often, specifically in 103 municipalities according to Socialstyrelsen's survey, paid according to the municipality's home care fee. The lowest fee is 35 kronor per hour, and the highest is 470 kronor per hour. I suspect that there are not many in here who are willing to pay those sums to go out for a walk or to get to the store to shop.

Furthermore, the Socialstyrelsen report shows that 52 percent of the municipalities state that the established practice for the visually impaired and blind has changed and that they have therefore granted accompaniment according to LSS to a lesser extent. According to Socialstyrelsen, it can be questioned whether the established practice is being used correctly, and in some cases where it is claimed that there is an established practice, there is in fact no such practice to be found.

The National Board of Health and Welfare also points out that many municipalities have their own guidelines for how LSS cases should be handled which are not compatible with the intentions of the law.

Madam Speaker! I think it is wise that the National Board of Health and Welfare produces support material for the processing of LSS in general. Knowledge support is needed for the municipalities when it comes to existing legislation. It is obvious.

But in the long run, the Liberals want to see a review of LSS. We argued from the beginning that more people with visual impairments should be covered by LSS. This does not mean that I rule out that separate legislation on escorting could be a necessary and perhaps a more feasible way to address the problems with escorting that we see today. We will definitely look more closely at this proposal from Socialstyrelsen, which is now being prepared within the Government Offices.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Malin Danielsson, for the speech!

LSS has, as said, existed since 1994. There is no doubt that the Liberals have had an enormous part in that legislation being developed. There may be a need to review the legislation in its entirety. It naturally sounds good to create an LSS 2.0 when we know how many problems there are today.

But creating an LSS 2.0 is also something that one can hide behind in order to not really tackle the problems that exist right now. The most important thing is to fix the things that can be fixed now.

There are two issues on the table where the Liberals, before this mandate period, spoke very warmly about implementing parts of this and pushed forward in those issues. But they have become somewhat more reserved in a government position.

The most important of those parts is the Main Responsibility Investigation. All the parties that are now part of the government cooperation stood completely behind it before the election. Then it was modified slightly in how it was expressed in the Tidö Agreement.

Now the Huvudmannaskapsutredningen is complete. It has been since the beginning of 2023. It has been referred and is finished. It has lain completely ready on the government's desk for over a year, but no proposition has arrived yet.

My question to the Liberals is: When will a government bill regarding state ownership come? Given the Liberals' commitment to this issue, one must be very well aware of what the timeline looks like. When will the bill come?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Christofer Bergenblock, for the question!

Regardless of whether we proceed with LSS 2.0 or a separate piece of legislation for accompaniment, it takes time. I am, just like the member, very keen on things happening here and now. One such thing is that the knowledge support to the municipalities is delivered.

We have here today in the gallery a guy who lives in Vårgårda, is 35 years old, and who has been deprived of his assistance according to LSS. He has also applied via the Social Services Act but has been denied. He has, among other things, applied to be able to shop for food and have leisure activities. The chairman of the board in the municipality who made this decision is a party colleague of Christofer Bergenblock. I know that Christofer Bergenblock is just as upset as I am about that decision.

I assert that it is fully possible within today's legislation to make more decisions regarding accompaniment according to LSS. In the Socialstyrelsen report, one can read about case law that is believed to be interfering in the decisions concerning the visually impaired's right to accompaniment.

It is a case that the Supreme Administrative Court has examined, which concerns the question of whether an 81-year-old man with a visual impairment belongs to category 3 or not. It examined the individual case and not whether those with visual impairments generally should belong to the category. In that specific individual case, it concluded that he did not belong to the category.

This makes me believe that the knowledge support to the municipalities is truly needed when it comes to existing legislation. I wonder if Christofer Bergenblock also thinks it would be good if his colleague could have this in his hand when he is to make decisions in LSS matters in the future.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I hope the Speaker noted that the member did not answer at all the question that was asked regarding the Principalship Inquiry, but instead moved the debate to the question of escorting. There, the Liberals have chosen not to stand behind the extremely important announcement that the Riksdag will make to the government today because the government is not delivering on that question.

It will not be enough with a knowledge support from Socialstyrelsen, but a reform is needed here. The Liberals should be able to say that a reform is also needed regarding the guidance. When one says that a reform of the entire legislation in LSS is needed, one should be able to stand behind that small part.

I return to what was my question and what the member so clearly avoided answering. When will a proposition regarding a unified ownership within LSS regarding personal assistance arrive?

This is a very important issue. It is being requested from the disability rights movement and also from the coordinators for LSS. It is being requested from the municipalities. It was requested, at least before the election, from all parties in the government base, and it is naturally being requested from us in Centerpartiet.

Given the commitment that the Liberals have in the issues regarding LSS, I assume that one is very well updated on the question of the contracting authority.

My question remains. This time I ask the member to try to answer it. How is the Huvudmannaskapsutredningen progressing? When can we expect a proposition on the Riksdag's table? Are the Liberals really pushing for a change to occur there?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Christofer Bergenblock, for repeating the question! I became so engaged when you started talking about LSS 2.0 that I had to speak a bit more about it plus the issue of companion services, which I believe is one of the most important issues here today.

Regarding the issue of the principal, we have seen far too much patching and repairing within LSS in recent years, where the legislation has been implemented but not according to the intention. For me, the timeline for the Principal Inquiry is such that the proposal is submitted when we can ensure that more people receive assistance and that people do not fall through the cracks when we move the assistance from the municipality to the state and to a state principal.

I intend to adhere to that timetable, and while we work out the proposal, the answer is as dull as usual: It is being prepared within the Government Offices.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! No one who follows these issues in the Riksdag can doubt that the Liberals have pushed forward on issues regarding the development of disability policy. No one can doubt the commitment regarding LSS. I have come to know Malin Danielsson as an incredibly well-read and committed advocate for support for people with disabilities.

We stand here in the Riksdag today and have a proposal on the table aimed at improving one of the issues that Member Danielsson has pushed hard, namely the guide dog service for persons with visual impairments and personal assistance. But when there is a proposal on the table to improve, the Liberals will still vote no.

It is difficult to reconcile these pictures. I am hooking into what the member Bergenblock just asked about. I have previously asked questions to the government parties about when the important question of a unified principal for personal assistance can actually be addressed. I would say that the member Bergenblock still did not receive any answer, because the timeline is that it will come when it comes. It is a difficult timeline to abide by both as an impatient opposition politician and, I can imagine, as people who are directly affected by the dysfunctional legislation we have today.

I therefore repeat the question: How, more specifically, does the timetable look for a bill regarding the state's principal responsibility?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! My basic position regarding issues of functional rights is that it is too little and too late. This applies regardless of whether we govern together with the Social Democrats or with the Moderates.

But I am also a friend of the principle of doing it well. The principalship investigation affects incredibly many people's lives. They are to move from a municipal decision to a state decision. This needs to be done carefully so that people do not fall between the cracks. We must not again end up in a patching and mending of our legislation that results in fewer people, instead of more, receiving assistance.

Therefore, the timeline is this: When we feel confident that we can present a proposal that guarantees this, we will also present a proposal. And I can promise you, Karin Sundin, that intensive work is underway on this.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer! We share the view that, in any case, too little and too slowly is happening in the area at the moment.

I also share the view that proposals to be laid before the Riksdag should be well-prepared. We must do the work well regardless of what role we have in the process. It must be done carefully. But the picture is skewed when Member Danielsson paints a picture that work is ongoing, because that is not the picture anyone else has on the issue. We have heard testimony from the rostrum today that organizations working with the issues do not perceive that any work is ongoing at all. From my opposition politician's horizon, I also do not see that any work is ongoing at all.

Against that background, I must nevertheless ask Member Danielsson with his clapping liberal heart: Are the Liberals really satisfied with how the work on disability policy is being conducted in Sweden right now? It is too little, and it is too late. In what way do you ensure that there will be more workshop at the Ministry of Social Affairs than what apparently is going on there right now?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! The Liberals are never satisfied, Karin Sundin. It is in our DNA. We always want more; that is what drives us in our commitment.

But I welcome the newly awakened interest from the Social Democrats in these issues, and I would like to see everyone, both the opposition and the government, engage even more in them, because we need to make major changes in the field of disabilities to ensure that people get a life like everyone else.

It can sometimes be nice to be a little humble, especially when one belongs to a party that has been in power for many years. I want to remind of a couple of things to perhaps reinforce the sense of humility.

In 2016, the government at the time made a decision regarding a regulatory letter to Försäkringskassan. In it, one can read: Försäkringskassan shall contribute to breaking the development of the number of hours within the assistance allowance. In 2016, an LSS inquiry was also commissioned. In the directive to the inquiry, one can read: In view of the sharp cost increases within the assistance allowance, additional savings also need to be made.

This is the legacy you left behind. It is the legacy that we have had to try to patch and repair in order to make the reform work. I hope now that we can work together, all parties in the Swedish Riksdag, to ensure that we have an LSS that follows the basic intentions that exist and that gives people a life just like everyone else.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 16.)

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