Support for people with disabilities

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Social Affairs' report 15, which concerns support for persons with disabilities. I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden shall be a country where everyone has the right to live an independent and dignified life, regardless of functional ability. It shall be a society where no one is left behind and where everyone has the opportunity to participate, contribute, and live their life on their own terms. But we know that reality often looks different. Many still face obstacles in everyday life. They do not receive the support they need, they struggle to find work, and they encounter inaccessible environments.

Mr. Speaker! Last year, I read out what the Prime Minister said in the government statement on October 18, 2022. It was so good that I choose to read it out again. "Persons with disabilities shall be able to participate fully in society without being subjected to discrimination. Integrating the perspective of disability rights into more policy and social areas continues to be in focus."

Support for persons with disabilities

These words are not just a promise; they are an obligation. It is an obligation to ensure that no one is excluded because of their disability, and it is an obligation to break down barriers and build a Sweden where everyone has the same rights, obligations, and opportunities.

Mr. Speaker! We know that the challenges are great. We see the long processing times for LSS and assistance payments. We see a lack of legal certainty in the assessments. We see difficulties in obtaining work and self-sufficiency, and we see a society that is still inaccessible for far too many.

Mr. Speaker! The Government has implemented important reforms to improve the situation for persons with disabilities. We have, among other things, restored and strengthened the right to assistance, particularly for children and persons with extensive care needs. We have increased the state grants to the municipalities so that more people can access LSS interventions, accompaniment, and support in everyday life. We have expanded the labor market support so that more people can move from daily activities to real jobs and obtain their own livelihood.

We have further made it easier to obtain assistive devices and housing adaptations so that more people can stay in their own homes and live independently. And we have invested in digitalization and new technology to create more assistive devices and better access to welfare services.

These investments make a difference, but we still see that municipalities make different assessments. Some people receive help while others are rejected, despite the same needs. The path to work is still too difficult, and accessibility in society is still deficient.

Mr. Speaker! We Moderates want to go further. We want to see even faster reforms and more long-term solutions. We believe that no one should be forced into an everyday life of dependency and exclusion. Everyone should receive the right support in time, have the opportunity to work and support themselves, and live an independent life.

We want shorter and more legally secure processing times for LSS and assistance compensation. We want to see more adapted jobs and simpler paths from daily activities to work where companies and public activities do not just see the disability but see competence and potential. We want to strengthen accessibility in the entire society regarding both housing, transport, and digital services.

Mr. Speaker! We want to put the human being at the center. Today, access to assistive devices is somewhat like a postcode lottery; where you live determines what help you can receive and whether you can take your assistive devices with you in the event of a move. It is unreasonable. Access to assistive devices should be governed by need, not by where you happen to live. An increase in the availability of assistive devices was needed, and research and development of new technical solutions must continue.

Mr. Speaker! We know that we are not yet in a situation where everything is functioning. People are still struggling to make their daily lives work. They are forced to appeal decisions to get the support they are entitled to. They are not given the opportunity to support themselves, and they encounter obstacles in their own city, in their own workplace, and in their own daily lives. We must change this.

If we do not continue the work of improving the support and the right to assistance, and if we do not ensure that people can work and support themselves, we risk having a society where more people are left behind. It would become a society where insecurity, isolation, and dependency become everyday life for many, and that must not happen.

Mr. Speaker! We Moderates and the government will continue to push for change. We want a society where everyone can participate, where everyone receives support based on their needs, and where a disability must never be an obstacle to living an independent life.

I want to conclude where I began, that is, with the quote from the government statement of October 18, 2022: "Persons with disabilities shall be able to participate fully 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. It is such a Sweden we shall build together.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Malin Höglund for the presentation.

To begin with, it is obvious that Vänsterpartiet thinks that the government and Sverigedemokraterna need to prioritize and reprioritize their disability rights policy and the policy concerning persons with disabilities. They should live up to what LSS and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities establish and ensure that municipalities and county administrative boards do the same.

The member raised a series of different problems that we can witness in society and which directly affect people with disabilities. But one could almost believe that the member's party does not belong to the government and is not involved in budgeting or influencing the entire country's economy.

Those entitled to assistance today need to undergo privacy-depriving assessments in order to receive assistance when they describe what assistance needs they have. If neither the state nor the municipality investigates how many minutes I or any other person with normative functionality need to shower, dress, or go to the toilet, why should people with disabilities then have to undergo such a privacy-depriving assessment? It is one of the fundamental questions that I really want to ask this government. Why don't the needs assessments regarding the right to assistance be corrected, so that the whole is considered instead of, as today, breaking it down and counting the minutes for basic needs?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Awad for the question. I think that this government really takes things seriously. We had a previous government that sat for eight years when not much happened. The Member also heard what I said in my quote – one sees that disability issues are incredibly important.

On July 1, a new Social Services Act will come into effect. With it, several things will become significantly better compared to how it is today. I look forward with great confidence to the new law.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! I did not receive an answer to my question. When it comes to how I, who have a normalizing functionality, should be able to participate out in society, go on outdoor activities, socialize with friends or meet basic needs such as going to the toilet, showering or dressing, it is not any state or municipality that controls how many minutes I need to be able to do these things. But why should we subject persons with disabilities to such a privacy-depriving process so that they can get the right to assistance? One can assess the assistance based on the needs being seen in their entirety instead of the needs being broken down and counted in minutes in the way that is done.

I can take another strange example that I think shows that the government should make a change. The member mentioned that people with disabilities are overrepresented among the poor in Sweden. Still, this government proceeds with Försäkringskassan continuing to issue demands for repayment of millions to those entitled to assistance. We heard just a few weeks ago about 34-year-old Maria, who has a CP injury and who has received a demand for repayment of over 1 million kronor. Maria is entitled to assistance, and her needs have obviously not changed in many years. Why does Malin Höglund's government allow people with disabilities to be treated in this way?

There is a lot that needs to be done. Prioritize and reprioritize! Does the member think that these things need to be done?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Nadja Awad for the question.

I think the government takes the issues seriously. On the other hand, I do not think it is good that the municipalities make different assessments. If a person in municipality A has the same needs as a person in municipality B but they receive different assessments despite it being the same legislation that is to be applied, then it has not gone right. It must not be a postcode lottery at all where the assessment depends on where one lives; instead, there must be equivalent assessments. That is what we absolutely think.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Malin Höglund for a fine speech.

I agree with a great deal of what the member said from the rostrum, including the quotes that come from the Prime Minister. The government clearly has ambitions within disability policy regarding people's right to participation and to live a full life. This is not just a promise but also an obligation.

I perceive that the delivery is not as positive as the member emphasized. To avoid overstating it, I can say that the delivery within the disability policy area has been quite meager during this parliamentary term.

One of the areas where I have lacked delivery is this matter of accompaniment, Mr. Speaker. A report arrived in June 2023 which showed that the right to accompaniment had been thoroughly circumvented during the last ten years. Regarding persons in person group 3 within LSS who had a right to accompaniment, the reduction was 68 percent over ten years. The report, which arrived like a bombshell, had been written by Socialstyrelsen. It was advocated that a new law should be enacted for the intervention of accompaniment to rectify this, because the legal practice that has developed appears to make it impossible to achieve any change with existing legislation.

Last summer, the Riksdag made an announcement to the government to return with a law. My question to the member is: Do the Moderaterna support the work to get a new law for accompaniment?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Bergenblock for the question.

I think this government is delivering. 78 percent of what we went to the election on is checked off or started. I think that is delivery.

I am glad that the member raises the question of the escort. Today we have had some who have been out demonstrating about this between the Eastern and Western Parliament House. I did not manage to meet them, but we have all received email correspondence from them.

The question of the accompaniment is currently being prepared in the Government Offices. I have been in contact with Minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, who says that the area is being prioritized.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! The report arrived in June 2023, that is, two years ago. During those two years, no change has occurred. Now, this is hopefully being prepared in the Government Offices. But no initiative was taken from the government's side for the preparation to begin; instead, a motion was required from the opposition together with the Sverigedemokraterna. Even the Sverigedemokraterna felt that the government had handled this so poorly that they stood behind a motion to show how the issue should be handled.

So, a preparation is hopefully underway at the Ministry of Social Affairs regarding the accompaniment. But it is sad that an announcement was required for this. I understand that those who have stood here outside and demonstrated today are dissatisfied with the time it has taken.

Then my remaining question to the member, Mr. Speaker, since she just said that she has been in contact with the minister who is responsible for this: When can we expect a proposal from the government's side regarding new legislation concerning the escort effort?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Bergenblock very much for the question. But as the member knows, I cannot answer when the proposal will be submitted. I would naturally have wished that I could say when and where it is to be presented.

The accompaniment is not a new issue. It has been present in the alliance government, in the previous government, and now also in this government, so it takes time. I agree with Member Bergenblock that one would like to fast-track certain things. It is we who sit here in the chamber today who are passionate about these issues.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! This debate is about equality, justice, and human rights. Just as it states in the report, the national goal for disability policy is equal living conditions and full participation for persons with disabilities.

It is a good goal to strive for. But honestly, it is not going particularly well. On the contrary, the development in some areas is going completely the wrong way. It is becoming too difficult for too many to live with one or more functional impairments in Sweden today.

It has been nine months since we last discussed those questions in the chamber. We debated and decided on last year's report on June 12. A lot has happened in nine months. Support for people with disabilities has continued to shrink through decisions made by Swedish authorities and municipalities, and decisions limiting the right to support for individuals have been confirmed in court.

It is through an endless series of court rulings that today's narrow Swedish disability policy has largely been shaped. The shift in legal practice has, among other things, led to people being completely denied or granted significantly fewer hours of personal assistance than before. It has led, as we heard just now, to visually impaired and deaf-blind people no longer being considered in need of support. They are no longer considered to belong to the group of persons according to the Act on Support and Service, and therefore they have no right to intervention.

During the last nine months, we have also heard and seen how individual persons have been ordered to pay back for personal assistance that has been granted, which has already been provided and which has therefore already been paid for. Thus, society creates insurmountable mountains of debt for persons who live on very small incomes.

Mr. Speaker! Some of what has happened during the last nine months we have encountered in the media's reporting on how individual people are affected by Swedish disability policy. Evelina in Piteå, Mathias in Vårgårda, and Maria in Karlsborg are flesh and blood in a development that in practice shrinks people's freedom, equality, and participation. Significantly more become a figure in a column or in a table. They receive their rejections without any major attention. They are deprived of their freedom and the possibility of an equal life under public silence.

For people in need of society's support, a lot has happened in nine months. I agree with the members who previously pointed out that not so much seems to be happening in the Government Offices.

The interpretation service for deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind persons has long had serious deficiencies. This applies in particular when it comes to the possibility of studying and working. Therefore, an interpretation service investigation was commissioned. It submitted its final report in March 2022. It has been investigated and referred for consultation. Three years have passed. In the Government Offices, preparation is still ongoing, and otherwise, there is silence.

Nor even in the question of how the personal assistance should be designed does it seem that much is happening. There is a broad political consensus that today's system, where we have divided the management of the personal assistance between municipal decision-makers and Försäkringskassan's decision-makers, is not a good system. It would be better to consolidate it under one principal. The question has been thoroughly investigated and referred for consultation. Preparation is ongoing in the Government Offices, and otherwise, it is quiet.

Northing is happening either regarding how the assessments of the basic needs, which form the basis for the right to personal assistance, are conducted. A meeting was held, organized by the Riksdag's disability policy network, with representatives from the disability rights movement and the responsible minister regarding how the needs assessments are performed. The message was crystal clear: One must review how the needs assessments are conducted before one can proceed in the process towards state ownership. It was shortly before Christmas, but nothing has happened.

The government seems to reason that if one cannot do one without the other, it is better to do nothing at all. But the government has given notice in one area: in the budget for 2025, the government writes that it intends to investigate the introduction of an indexing of the flat-rate amount in order to increase predictability for assistance recipients and assistance providers. That is good. It is completely in line with the request, or the announcement, that the Riksdag directed to the government in June last year.

Then the Socialdemokraterna, Vänsterpartiet, Centerpartiet and Miljöpartiet, together with the Sverigedemokraterna, demanded a more transparent and predictable financing model for personal assistance. We wait with anticipation to see what the government's investigation will lead to, if it leads to anything at all. But it is good that one has said that one has an ambition.

Mr. Speaker! There is much to say about the government's passivity and silence and how it affects the conditions for a more equal society for persons with disabilities. The last area I want to highlight is the right to assistance.

Just as we heard here earlier, the national organization Unga med Synnedsättning has today stood outside the Riksdag and distributed leaflets with the heading: How would you feel if you could not go out? It is a good question that I think many would need to ask themselves. This applies in particular to those members who are to vote on the report we are dealing with today.

It should be the most self-evident effort that those who cannot see for themselves, or perhaps neither see nor hear, receive support to be included in society. That is what guidance is about – that those who cannot see are given a sighted companion in order to be able to participate in, for example, leisure activities or in cultural life.

But accompaniment according to the Act on Support and Service has decreased significantly in recent years. Instead, one is referred to assistance according to the Social Services Act. This means poorer service but also very costly fees. These are fees that many simply do not have the means to pay.

The organization Unga med Synnedsättning writes: Imagine not being able to decide for yourself when you want to exercise, meet friends, buy clothes or go to a festival. Imagine living your youth like that! Or imagine living your whole life like that!

For me, it is incomprehensible that the government has not acted more clearly to curb the development and that it has not acted based on the announcement that was directed at it during last year. The Moderates, the Liberals, and the Christian Democrats speak beautifully from a government position about taking responsibility for Sweden. But in this issue, they are not particularly stressed. Preparation is ongoing.

For me, it is incomprehensible that it seems as if the Sverigedemokraterna have changed their position. Nine months ago, the Sverigedemokraterna saw the problem and worked together to achieve change. Nine months ago, they stood behind an announcement. Today, they do not. We have not come any closer to the goal of equal living conditions for those living with a visual impairment today compared to nine months ago.

We Social Democrats still maintain that a law is needed. Therefore, an investigation was needed on regulating the intervention of guidance. It is a matter of making it available to everyone who needs it – as soon as possible. It is urgent. It is not a large group we are talking about. Ensuring that those who are visually impaired, blind, or deaf-blind receive the guidance they need would not dig any large, deep holes in the state treasury. But it would bring Sweden a bit closer to the goal of a more equal society for persons with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker! I stand behind all the Social Democrats' reservations. But I would particularly like to move for the approval of reservation 15, which concerns precisely the conditions for and the right to accompaniment.

(Applause)

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.

I am replacing Dan Hovskär today, who has fallen ill, and I will try to describe KD's policy on this important area as well as I can.

Christian Democratic policy is anchored in a view of humanity that proceeds from the inviolable value of the human being and that all people are different. Based on their own conditions, everyone shall have the right to full participation in society – something that I believe we all here agree on.

The goal of the disability policy is that persons with disabilities shall have conditions that are equivalent to those of others. The policy shall focus on improving accessibility, educational opportunities, and integration into the labor market.

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

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats have several proposals to develop the assistance. One of our priority proposals has been that the state should be the sole principal for personal assistance. A first step in that direction was taken in 2020, when we, together with the Moderates and the Left Party, submitted a committee initiative in the Riksdag. The committee initiative won a majority, which led to the investigation that is now being prepared within the Government Offices.

Another priority area is to counter the organized crime that prevails within the assistance sector. It needs to be handled forcefully and effectively without restricting the right to assistance for those with genuine needs.

The Christian Democrats have, in the government, pushed for a high hourly flat rate for assistance compensation with 3 percent for 2025. It is the highest increase since 2021. We want an indexing of the flat rate amount to be introduced, and we allocate 20 million per year for three years in increased state grants to the disability organizations.

Mapping shows that there is a need to increase knowledge in the municipalities regarding guidance, as we heard here in the presentation just now. Socialstyrelsen has therefore announced that the authority shall produce support material for the municipalities, and it is assessed that the support material will contribute to increased equality between the municipalities.

Mr. Speaker! We Christian Democrats consider, as said, that the state should have sole primary responsibility for personal assistance. This would increase the conditions for equal and legally secure assessments throughout the country. We are pleased with the investigation on state primary responsibility, which contains many good proposals and is now being prepared within the Government Offices.

Mr. Speaker! Malin Höglund listed activities that the government is undertaking, so quite a lot is now underway.

(Applause)

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating SoU15 Support for persons with functional impairments. It is an area with many important issues that are crucial for the daily lives of many people in our country. Some issues are more crucial than others, but all affect everyday life in one way or another for everyone living with some form of functional impairment.

I begin by moving for approval of our reservation 9.

The intention of LSS is that all people shall have the opportunity to live their lives like anyone else, regardless of disability. Families with children who have a disability shall feel security in their everyday lives. Young people shall have the opportunity to become independent adults and live a free life. Adults shall be able to spend time with their family on the same terms as others.

Nine months ago, the Riksdag here in this chamber directed several motions to the government. It was pleasing that the Sverigedemokraterna and other opposition parties agreed on these important issues. It concerned the flat-rate amount, the annual reporting of how it was calculated, and a review of the model for calculating the assistance allowance. Motions were also directed regarding that the government should review the conditions for free accompaniment for persons with visual impairments and regarding regulating the measure in a special law.

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to the indexing of the standard amount, everyone sitting in this chamber right now is likely well aware of the problems created for both organizers and recipients of assistance as long as the current system without indexing continues. This means that the assistance companies are not given any possibility whatsoever to plan long-term. It is difficult for them to promise any form of wage increase, to recruit new staff, and to offer staff professional development. It is therefore difficult to retain existing staff and, furthermore, difficult to develop the quality of the operations.

For the staff, it means problems when long-term perspective is lacking. What happens next year? Will I still be working here? How am I supposed to be able to start a family, buy a house, and build my future with these premises? The users' everyday life and future are entirely dependent on the assistance and that it is sufficient for them to be able to live an independent life with everyday life, future plans, and dreams.

This simply makes it impossible for all involved parties to plan ahead and to build their future. This applies to both companies, employees and users.

This is the single most important issue for the entire industry, and I am therefore very pleased that the government and the Sweden Democrats in the budget for 2025 announce that they intend to investigate whether an indexing of the flat-rate amount can be introduced in order to increase predictability for assistance recipients and assistance providers. The committee looks forward to the government returning to the issue as soon as possible.

An index-adjusted assistance allowance creates long-term conditions for those who receive assistance, for those who provide assistance, and for those who work within the industry.

Mr. Speaker! Now I want to speak a little about guidance. A well-functioning guidance service is absolutely crucial for the visually impaired to be able to live an active and independent life – a life that many of us take for granted. It is about such self-evident things as being able to get to work, shop for food, and socialize with friends. Being involuntarily isolated in one's home affects people's well-being negatively, regardless of whether one has a visual impairment or not.

Unfortunately, this is exactly what is happening now. The right to accompaniment has gradually deteriorated due to changed interpretations of the law. Once again, we see how a law that was once clear in its intent is now being applied in a way that deviates from the original thought. People who for many years have had the right to accompaniment suddenly have their measures withdrawn, even though their needs are unchanged. The only thing that has changed is how the law is interpreted.

Fewer and fewer visually impaired people are granted companionship according to LSS and are instead referred to interventions via the Social Services Act. This often means fewer hours and more restrictions regarding what the companionship may be used for. Furthermore, it is common for municipalities to charge high fees, sometimes several hundred kronor per hour, while companionship according to LSS is free of charge.

As I said earlier, a notification was directed to the government in June 2024 that it should review the conditions for free guidance for persons with visual impairments and for the intervention to be regulated in a specific law. We could have supported a notification even in this discussion, but placing a notification on a notification is perhaps not as constructive as discussing it with the other Tidö parties and driving the issue forward.

The Riksdag did, therefore, issue a notice nine months ago. Unfortunately, not much has happened, but we look forward to the conclusions and proposals that are presented when the ongoing preparation at the Ministry of Social Affairs is complete. I and many with me hope that this will happen very soon.

Mr. Speaker! On 1 January 2023, a flat-rate deduction, the so-called parental deduction, was introduced when assessing a child's need for personal assistance according to LSS. The purpose was that more children should receive assistance, but the increase has not materialized. What applies now is that the deduction is halved so that more shall be granted support. The problem remains, however, because the deduction is still made in a way that was not intended. Försäkringskassan applies double deductions: first, hours considered to be outside the disability are deducted, and then the flat-rate deduction is made. This in turn leads to that children can receive less assistance than before the legislative change.

Mr. Speaker! Increased assistance allowance is another issue that needs to be addressed. This is something that those entitled to assistance can apply for when the flat-rate allowance is insufficient. This usually occurs when a large part of the working time for the assistance falls on inconvenient working hours.

Until the summer of 2023, virtually all applications where more than 50 percent of the assistance time was scheduled during inconvenient working hours were approved. Since the autumn of 2023, it has become increasingly difficult to get the applications approved, and during the autumn of 2024, it came to a near complete standstill. The processing time was previously one to two months. After the autumn of 2024, it is a full six to eight months, which is completely unreasonable. An explanation must be presented for what lies behind this, and a solution must be developed.

Mr. Speaker! Personal assistance is a fundamental human right and a crucial prerequisite for persons with extensive functional impairments. It enables participation, self-determination, and equal conditions. Despite this, the development has been negative for a long time. The Sweden Democrats therefore want to strengthen assistance with a long-term perspective and argue that all assistance elements for basic needs should grant the right to personal assistance. It is time to see the whole person's needs instead of dividing them into smaller pieces.

The Sweden Democrats safeguard the idea behind LSS, that persons with disabilities and extensive needs for support and service shall be able to be included in the community and live an independent life. The law's original intentions must be safeguarded and upheld.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Mona Olin for the contribution.

The chairman notes that guidance is a necessity in order to be able to live an independent life and elaborates quite a bit on guidance. It is needed to be able to go and shop if one has a visual impairment. It is needed to be able to go to a concert, meet friends, go to the library, participate in leisure activities and so on. It is simply a very important contribution.

At the same time, the member says that the Riksdag submitted a notice nine months ago and that not much has happened since then. That is exactly how it sounded, and that is exactly the case. I assume that it was also for that reason that the Sweden Democrats, in their committee motion within the area of functional impairments, wrote a motion that read as follows: "The Riksdag stands behind what is stated in the motion regarding the urgent handling of the notice to review the conditions for regulating the intervention 'ledsagning' (accompaniment) in a special law, as well as returning to the Riksdag as soon as possible with a proposal."

The only interpretation that can be made of the fact that the Sweden Democrats subsequently withdrew their motion and no longer stand behind this is that they no longer think this needs to happen urgently. We have already heard from the member himself that it cannot be done urgently. This takes far too long.

Then my question to the member and to the Sweden Democrats is: Why is it no longer so urgent to get this law on free accompaniment passed?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Member Bergenblock, for your question! It is important.

Accompanying is also important. It is very important for the Sweden Democrats that this is addressed and resolved as soon as possible. I cannot emphasize enough that everyone must have the opportunity to participate in social life on the same terms, regardless of whether one has a visual impairment or other functional disabilities.

I have pointed out that the Sweden Democrats are driving this issue. When we submitted our committee motion, it was barely half a year after the announcement. We have since received information that preparation is ongoing at the ministry, and according to what is stated in the committee's report, we can expect an answer shortly. Therefore, we choose to continue the discussions with the responsible minister and apply pressure from that direction.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! A benevolent interpretation of what the Sverigedemokraterna say is that they have been deceived by the other parties in the government cooperation. Obviously, this is not happening quickly.

I submitted an oral question this autumn to Social Services Minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall regarding accompaniment. She then said that she would initiate a preparation. When this committee motion was submitted, therefore, hardly any preparation had been initiated.

I asked the same question to the Minister for Social Services just a week ago during the Riksdag's question time and received the answer that a preparation had now at least been started. However, it was not possible to get any clarity on how long it would take. We also heard earlier in a speech from the Moderate MP that no timetable can be described or presented.

Then one wonders: Why is it no longer important to press the government? I am very grateful that the Sweden Democrats stood behind the announcement the Riksdag made in June last year so that that pressure could occur, but why is it no longer just as important to press the government to get a legislative proposal that ensures this can be put in place? Obviously, it does not go particularly fast at the Ministry of Social Affairs. The mills seem to grind very slowly. Compared to other ministries, it is perhaps there they grind the slowest of all.

But why is this no longer so important and so urgent? I think that question to the Sverigedemokraterna remains all the time.

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Bergenblock for the question.

We did not only stand behind the announcement last year, but it was actually our motion that the opposition chose to support. It is worth pointing out in this assembly. We have pushed the issue for many years, and we continue to push it. The issue is important, and we want things to happen quickly. But I am not sure that another announcement would have resulted in faster handling.

As I said, the Tidö parties have meetings, and we honor the cooperation with one another. In that case, one must rely on what is said between the parties. If I am informed that a preparation is underway, then a preparation is underway. There is no timetable, and I cannot control that in their books. But I can continue to drive the issue and press on regarding the timing.

(Applause)

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! First and foremost, I want to remind Member Mona Olin of what the Sweden Democrats always talked about before the 2022 election, which is to take care of one's own before increased immigration.

Asylum migration is now at its lowest in 40 years. How has it become better for Sweden's inhabitants, especially considering the target group we are talking about today – persons with disabilities? How has it become better for that group when the Tidö government's largest support, which is the Sweden Democrats, is involved in governing the country?

I would not say that it has become much better for them. Probably it has become worse in many different areas. They do not even get the right to assistance. If they do get it, they risk being required to repay millions of kronor or having to go through privacy-infringing assessments where they have to state how many minutes they need to go to the toilet, shower, or go for a walk.

Personal assistants across the country are being laid off. If one attends daily activities, in some municipalities one receives a habilitation allowance of 30 kronor per day. People with disabilities are being isolated more and more because they simply are not granted the right to accompaniment, which makes them dependent on relatives or forces them into isolation at home.

How did it become better for people with disabilities thanks to the Sweden Democrats?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the questions from Member Awad.

We are constantly working, and have worked ever since the day we entered the Riksdag, to make it better for people with disabilities. Carina Herrstedt has fought for their rights since day one, and she has also pushed through many different things on the way here. There was not much tailwind from any other party in the beginning, but gradually we have nevertheless managed to push through several things.

During this mandate period, we have, among other things, established a national competence center for issues regarding intellectual disabilities and autism. We have taken a new step to implement national goals for disability policy.

Arbetsförmedlingen has been tasked with improving the conditions for people with disabilities to enter employment. I believe we have come up with several different things that make it better for people with disabilities. All the things that Member of Parliament Awad piled on top of each other regarding withdrawn assistance hours are not things that started in September 2022. This has been going on for a long time, and now we are sitting here with major problems in society and with problems within assistance and companionship and so on. These are things that have been going on for a long time. We in the Sverigedemokraterna are driving these issues, just as you have heard during my previous speech.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! A number of things are being listed here that have been done to enable people with disabilities to be as equally involved in society as everyone else. I am not saying that the Sweden Democrats and the government have done nothing, but I mean that not enough has been done. One needs to prioritize up and down in those issues.

Over the years, it has been part of the rhetorical and political agenda to blame an entire group of people, namely people with an immigrant background, for being the cause of a number of different social problems. Then it turns out that even now, when asylum immigration is at its lowest in 40 years, it has still not become better for those who are considered one's own, for example people with disabilities. It has actually become worse for them under the leadership of the Sverigedemokraterna together with the government.

I have given a number of examples concerning the right to assistance, privacy-violating assessments of the assistance, that personal assistants are being dismissed all over the country, the low levels of habilitation compensation which become slave-like, and that people with disabilities are being isolated more and more. They are also overrepresented among the poor and among those who are subjected to violence out in society. It has not become better with Sverigedemokraterna.

What are the biggest changes that one wants to make for that group?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Awad for her questions.

It sounded a bit different now, that we have nevertheless accomplished something during the mandate period. It is nice that Member Awad actually sees that things are happening and that it is not completely at a standstill.

I must return to the fact that the problems with assessing the need for assistance have existed much earlier. It did not start with any new regulatory letter when the Tidö parties came to power. It is something that has developed over a long period. Instead of making decisions that follow LSS, one chooses to test the law in court. It is an incorrect way to use the law. The law is a rights law, and it should not be tested in such a way that one has to prove their needs. The law shall offer assistance. It is a rights law. One should not have to fight and appeal decisions. It is completely wrong.

If one had abolished all prejudicing judgments and gone back to LSS as it looks exactly right now, one would have avoided many of the problems. It is not the sitting government that has created the problems.

Regarding member Awad's claim that we look out for our own first, we do not look out for anyone first when it comes to those with disabilities. We look out for everyone, and it doesn't matter if one happens to have a Swedish background or another background. Everyone who has disabilities shall receive the help they need.

(Applause)

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Olin, for the speech! It was very clarifying regarding the Sweden Democrats' position in last year's discussion and the decisions that were made then.

The positions led to announcements regarding, among other things, the escort services and that the government should review the conditions for free escort services for persons with visual impairments and for regulating that measure in a specific law. At that time, the Sweden Democrats supported that. So did my party. Vänsterpartiet, Centerpartiet, and Miljöpartiet also did.

In the report we are debating today, the Social Democrats, the Left Party, the Centre Party and the Green Party still stand behind that escorting needs to be regulated in special legislation and be free of charge. It needs to happen promptly.

The Sweden Democrats do not stand behind that this year. Member of Parliament Olin said in the debate that it could have been done but that it would not be constructive. The Member of Parliament also said that unfortunately not much has happened but that it is hoped that something will happen soon.

When I listen to the discussion, I wonder why the Sweden Democrats have suddenly laid down flat on this issue. We here in the chamber know that it is a fact that the government we have today can go to Rosenbad every day entirely depending on the Sweden Democrats giving them permission to do so. It is the Sweden Democrats who legitimize the policy pursued by this government.

The question is therefore why this is no longer of importance for the Sweden Democrats.

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Sundin, for your questions!

I understand that it can feel frustrating that there is no announcement this time either, and I understand that the opposition parties stand by their reservations.

As I have already explained, these are issues that we are not letting go of in any way or do not consider important. We think they are very important, and we want to see a solution when it comes to both guidance and indexing of flat-rate settlements.

Just as you say, perhaps not much has happened. But why would more happen just because it becomes an announcement? It is like the teacher asking the same question once more when the student still doesn't answer. Then we have to try other ways, and that is what we are doing now by discussing with our Tidö colleagues and trying to push it in that manner.

These are very important issues. No one wants more than I do to see that decisions are lacking on both the escorting and the flat-rate issues.

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

Karin Sundin (S)

Mr. Speaker! Members of the Committee! I want to emphasize that it is not an announcement in itself that is of importance here, even though it is a powerful signal.

What I believe many hear in this discussion is exactly the opposite of what Member Olin says. It sounds exactly as if the question of guidance has been dropped. It is said that it is important, but it is said that one wants to take that discussion directly with the government. The question then is in what way one does that. The signal in this chamber, that one does not stand behind the same decision as one did last year, is that one is not pursuing the issue.

What, more specifically, do the Sverigedemokraterna intend to do to ensure that we get an investigation aimed at ensuring that accompaniment shall be regulated in a specific law and that it can be free of charge and thus accessible for those who need accompaniment? What do the Sverigedemokraterna intend to do?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Sundin, for your questions!

We want these four issues to be resolved as soon as it is ever possible. But we all know that it can take time in the departments. There are many things that have been languishing under previous governments. It can take time even during this government term. We have pushed through more decisions during this mandate period than many governments have done during several mandate periods. Hard work is being done to resolve issues.

We think the guidance is very important. And I think it has emerged with all desirable clarity where the Sweden Democrats stand on the issue. And it is precisely the same with the standard replacement. We want it to be driven, and we want it to move forward as soon as possible.

How we manage our discussions within the Tidö parties is definitely nothing that I am going to stand here and account for in this chamber. It is something that is done in our chamber.

We stand behind these issues being driven forward and that they shall reach completion. We also expect that they do.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! A piece of news that was hardly noticed at all last year was the 2022 review of how Sweden complies with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In the report, a considerable amount of criticism is directed at Sweden's work to fulfill the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities over the last ten years, since the previous review was conducted.

The report is unfortunately not a cheerful read for those who care about the rights of persons with disabilities. Some areas highlighted in the report were, for example, the gradual return in many areas to the medical model of disability, particularly within social insurance and the support systems for persons with disabilities.

Furthermore, it was noted that there is an inequality regarding what support one receives depending on where one lives, and that coercive and restrictive measures are used in different forms of residential environments.

One can still say that Sweden is good compared to many other countries. For example, we were the first to introduce a rights-based law for support and service, LSS. But we also live on old merits. Despite the fact that we ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2008 and adopt disability policy goals in this Riksdag every year, we are perhaps a bit better at words than at action. And we have been that for a long time.

Mr. Speaker! It is therefore very welcome that the Agency for Participation has been tasked this year with developing a national action plan for disability policy. In that, the observations and recommendations that the UN has submitted to Sweden shall be taken into account. I look forward with great anticipation to December 1st, when the assignment is to be completed.

We really need to increase the pace in giving people with disabilities the opportunity to live a life like others. There is much that works well in Sweden. For example, one could hear the other day about Daniel Belge, a 43-year-old in Huskvarna who is completely blind. He told that he is going to run a race in Svalbard. He has even had the race named after him. Previously, he has also climbed Kebnekaise, cycled Vätternrundan and run marathons. Daniel seems to be able to live his dream, which is absolutely fantastic and exactly as it should be.

This stands in stark contrast to another man's fate which was depicted just a few days earlier on the same P4 channel. That report was about Johan Nyström, a formerly active tennis player who became blind in adulthood due to cancer. He has not been offered support and help to be able to continue his active life. Instead, he has been offered a place in a nursing home. This 55-year-old now spends almost all his time in his room and only comes out every other day for a half-hour walk. It is quite frankly shameful and a proof of exactly the inequality that the UN noted and which we really need to ensure does not occur in Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! Another issue highlighted in the UN report was the use of coercive measures, for example, in LSS residences. Ivo also reached the same conclusion when they reviewed 90 group homes according to LSS and found that 64 percent of the operations had unauthorized coercive and restrictive measures, for example, forced physical interventions, restrictions on freedom of movement, and surveillance of the residents. This is one of the reasons why the Liberals are pushing for an LSS inspection that can strengthen the individual's rights, ensure high quality, and prevent this type of mistreatment.

But more than an inspection is needed. We also need to work preventatively, and therefore we are very pleased that a national competence center for intellectual disabilities and autism will now be established. This will raise the competence of staff working at LSS residences and increase the understanding of and knowledge about disabilities. In this way, the residents can be met in a good manner, and the use of prohibited coercive and restrictive measures can be prevented. The competence center can also provide municipalities and regions with valuable knowledge that can be used in the ongoing continuing education work at the workplaces.

Mr. Speaker! Another important issue to ensure that people with disabilities are entitled to a life like others is personal assistance. With personal assistance, one can decide for oneself where, when, and in what way one should receive assistance.

LSS and personal assistance have always been and will always be a priority issue for us Liberals. Over the years, we have pushed to patch and repair the reform that we initiated once upon a time. When breathing and tube feeding were no longer counted as a basic need, we pushed for change. When the reassessments caused several thousand to lose their assistance, we pushed for a reassessment freeze. And when people now no longer dare to move from the municipality where they have received a decision because they risk losing the decision in another municipality, we have pushed for an investigation into a state ownership. Such an investigation is now complete and is being prepared in the Government Offices – this wonderful expression!

We do, however, hear a great deal of concern among those entitled to assistance regarding the current move to transfer the principal responsibility from the municipalities to Försäkringskassan. The concern is not due to it becoming a state responsibility, but rather due to the application of the law, which has become increasingly narrow when it comes to basic needs, which is the basis for qualification to receive personal assistance. This is part of the gradual return to the medical model, which the UN report testified to. Therefore, it is important for us that when this investigation is now prepared, it also looks at how basic needs should be assessed going forward.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, a few words on accompaniment. Here outside, I met today, as did several others here, young people with visual impairments. They had a completely fantastic sign with them, where it said: We would have been more, but no one else received accompaniment. They had a similar sign last week where it said: We would have been more, but no one else received transport services. They obviously wanted to draw our attention to the dramatic changes occurring in the municipalities regarding the application of accompaniment according to LSS.

The Liberals argued from the beginning that more people with visual impairments should be covered by LSS, but now we see the opposite instead: those who were previously covered are losing their assistance. Therefore, I do not rule out that we may now need separate legislation – despite the fact that we would like to have a coherent LSS legislation and a coherent investigation that reviews LSS as a whole – in order to deal with the rather acute problems with assistance that we see today. We will definitely look more closely at the proposal that Socialstyrelsen has submitted when this is now being prepared in the Government Offices.

I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! In this exchange, I did not intend to debate as I have done previously, but I shall be a bit more questioning and a bit more curious about what Member Malin Danielsson's perception is of the government's work regarding living up to LSS and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. I think the statement accounted very well for how the Member views Sweden's compliance with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and how different governments have lived up to their obligations according to that convention. It is not only this government that has received criticism for this, but also previous governments – that is how it has actually looked.

I know that the member has both in the parliamentary debates and in the media mentioned the importance of changing the needs assessments and that one needs to see those assessments in their entirety. My question is whether Malin Danielsson from Liberalerna is satisfied with how the government in this situation prioritizes when it comes to this issue, or if one would like to reprioritize and prioritize up the issue.

The second thing I would like to ask about is the LSS inspection, a proposal that the member has mentioned several times. From the Left Party's perspective, we can definitely see that this could become a reality or that Ivo could receive more specialized expertise in various issues regarding LSS. I wonder if the member can mention anything about what the work at the Government Offices looks like regarding this.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Awad, for the questions!

Priorities are always exciting. I would most of all like to see that the authorities who make decisions regarding personal assistance and LSS interventions today actually followed the intentions of the law; that would have been the very best. Then we would not have needed to push for a new investigation on basic needs or what the Liberal Party thinks, that we need a comprehensive review of LSS. If one had gone back to the intentions instead of pursuing legal processes, we would not be in the situation we are in today.

In the legal processes conducted by municipalities, Försäkringskassan and others, it is not about ensuring the individual's best interests; rather, it is about getting a receipt for what one must do – not what one can or may do, but what is the minimum one must do to still remain within the framework of the law. Nothing in the LSS legislation today says that one is not allowed to give more. This is my dream and my priority.

But since we do not see that the development is heading in the right direction, we are, of course, pushing so that when we are to introduce a new principalship, we will also look at this issue regarding basic needs. Therefore, it is perhaps a bit frustrating that this is still being prepared in the Government Offices and that nothing has yet emerged regarding the principalship investigation. It is because we need to do it right from the beginning. We do not want to make mistakes and then have to redo them, which we unfortunately have done time and again when it comes to LSS.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer! I would like to start by returning to the first question – it concerned the needs assessments and that these are still being prepared so that they are done correctly, so that one avoids proceeding with a proposal that one later considers incorrect or becomes strange in some way. Can it be seen that this could become a reality, that you change the needs assessments, before the 2026 election? Can the Member say anything about that?

Then I still wonder about this matter regarding the LSS inspection, but I understand that Malin Danielsson did not have enough time to answer that question.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Nadja Awad, for the question and for the reminder about the LSS inspection – I missed that question there at the end.

Regarding time plans and so on, it is always difficult to give an answer. It will eventually appear in the government bill list, just as usual.

I think like this: The principalship investigation clearly pointed out that a further investigation of basic needs needed to be conducted. This means, in that case, that one needs to appoint such an investigation and look at those parts before one can present anything. What that timeline will be and whether it will be before 2026, I do not dare to promise, but for me it is important to look at the issues in parallel, just as the disability organizations have also said.

The most important thing is what is happening here and now. In Västerås, where I visited a while ago, very many people have been deprived of their contact person with reference to the fact that they have a residence or a daily activity. Nadja Awad can well do her homework herself and speak with the Vänsterpartiet member who is the chairman of the committee there and say that this is actually not okay. According to law, one must provide a contact person. It is a very small saving one makes by withdrawing this.

This matter regarding LSS inspections is also an issue that we will continue to pursue. I mentioned the report from Ivo where the group homes have been reviewed. Ivo does a lot of great work in the area, but I believe that more muscles are needed, and we need to focus on these issues. There are far too many who live under poor conditions today with some LSS interventions. We must catch this in a much better way than today.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Malin Danielsson, for the speech! As always, it is a good speech when it comes to disability policy, but I also always get the feeling that the member is more in opposition than in the majority. There is a lot of will and a lot of things that should be improved, but in the name of honesty, very little is actually happening from the government's side within disability policy.

The Prime Minister herself said that we are probably a bit better at words than at action. I do not know if she meant everyone in the Riksdag, but I see it primarily as a description of the government: there are very many words but not as much action.

Then we come to the question I intended to discuss, namely state ownership for personal assistance. The ownership investigation was submitted in March 2023. After that, it was under consultation for half a year, and it has now lain for quite a long time on the government's desk for implementation. The bill has been delayed. It has been difficult to find out how the work is progressing. When we had a meeting with the Minister for Social Affairs on December 11, where both the parliamentary parties and the disability rights movement were represented, it was stated that we need to look at the needs assessments, i.e., the assessments of basic needs, so that we can dare to proceed with a nationalization of personal assistance. This was primarily a request from the disability rights movement.

My question now, after having listened to the member: Will there be an investigation into the basic needs before we proceed with a nationalization?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I do not believe that neither I nor Member Bergenblock will ever be satisfied. We are engaged in these issues and want very much, so we will probably never appear satisfied, regardless of the government.

What I was referring to was the last ten years. There, we are probably all equally good at acknowledging that we are not doing enough. We have been satisfied because we have been world leaders in these issues, but now we are starting to lose ground, and then it is time to raise the level of ambition again.

I want to object to part of Christofer Bergenblock's description that nothing is happening. Some things that have happened in the recent past are, for example, a national competence center regarding autism and IF, and we will now finally get a national action plan regarding disability policy and not just goals. We are producing better underlying data regarding students with disabilities in school. We have expanded the support for students with disabilities in school.

We have a clearer prioritization within the labor market policy when it comes to persons with disabilities, with a number of assignments to Arbetsförmedlingen, for example a campaign to employ persons with disabilities and also that one should be able to obtain a coding to receive support more quickly. We are investigating Samhall. The other day, Myndigheten för delaktighet received a new assignment to look at violence against children and young people with disabilities.

So, quite a lot is happening in this area with this government.

When it comes to the principle of accountability, I, just like the member, listen to the concerns of the disability rights movement. This is something that we are now discussing further in the handling of the accountability inquiry.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! In the investigation on the state ownership, the objective was stated to be able to introduce this starting on 1 January 2026 and then implement it over a period of one year. When I listened to the Minister for Social Services in the autumn, she stated quite clearly that there was no possibility of carrying it out by 1 January 2026 and that that train had left, but that 1 January 2027 could be a possible date.

After that came the point that we also need to review the needs assessments. This should by no means have been news to the Minister for Social Services, but in some way it appeared to be so. The answer was that it might take a little longer.

What was expected after the meeting on December 11 was that the Minister for Social Services would initiate a departmental inquiry or appoint an individual investigator to look into basic needs in the needs assessments regarding personal assistance. Now it is March 13, and nothing has happened.

It may certainly happen that this is prepared in the Government Offices, i.e., that people sit and talk to each other there, but I am quite convinced that a formal investigation into basic needs needs to be conducted to obtain a basis – either a department investigation, which can proceed relatively quickly, or an investigation by an individual investigator, which takes considerably longer.

My question to the Liberals is: Will the Liberals support a nationalization of personal assistance even if the issue of needs assessments is not resolved? As it stands now, it does not seem like there is any solution in sight.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Christofer Bergenblock, for that question! I believe I have said it several times during this debate and during similar debates: It is better that it takes a little longer and is correct than that we do it quickly and incorrectly. In that case, we sometimes need to deliberate on matters, talk to each other and find the right way forward in the issue.

The very best thing that can be done in this situation is for all of us here at home – all our municipal politicians and all the authorities who work with LSS decisions daily – to go back and read the legislation and look at the intentions within it, instead of constantly testing the limit of how little one can give. The law today provides room for basic needs. It provides room to give more. No one is going to appeal someone else's hours, but only the authorities that grant them themselves. That is where we need to go back. This is the solution that we can achieve here and now and very quickly.

It could have helped Mattias in Vårgårda. It could have helped Evelina in Piteå, who has now received a good decision again, which is really nice. It could have helped, for example, Wandi in Tynnered, who after 30 years has been deprived of the assistance according to LSS that he has had for 30 years.

I believe that the best thing we can all do is to go back and remind our own colleagues to do the right thing here and now and read the intention of the legislation again.

Then we will continue to push forward, just as I have said several times before. If this legal development continues, and we see that it does, we probably need new legislation from the ground up to reset the practice. It is a message from the Liberals: We will push this all the way to the end.

(Applause)

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Government is responsible for following the LSS legislation, which promises that one shall have a life like everyone else with good living conditions, and for following the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which in Article 28 recognizes the right of persons with disabilities to have a satisfactory standard of living, like everyone else. The Government must also ensure that municipalities, regions, and administrative courts do not misinterpret LSS.

But it is very obvious that the government is not taking responsibility for living up to LSS or the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and that the government is not working sufficiently expeditiously so that one can live up to LSS or the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Vänsterpartiet is convinced of that.

Cuts are being made regarding LSS interventions across the country that prevent people with disabilities from full participation in social life. This applies to assistance, accompaniment, and the right to a contact person. Daily activities are not designed today so that everyone develops based on their own ability, regardless of the degree of disability. The staffing density has decreased in daily activities. Speech therapists and occupational therapists – important professions – are becoming increasingly rare in daily activities despite the fact that their knowledge is necessary to maintain a good quality in the intervention.

Many municipalities block the possibility of combining daily activities with studies or internships. Nor do all those who participate there receive habilitation compensation. And the compensation differs between municipalities, from 30 to 150 kronor per day, which are purely derogatory amounts.

The state assistance allowance lags far behind the collectively agreed wage development and the general cost development. It affects the wages of the personal assistants. It means that they receive lower wages, worse working conditions, and a worse working environment. Fewer people are seeking the profession, but there are also many who have been forced to be laid off due to the municipalities' poor finances.

The cost perspective on LSS measures continues to dominate. Cuts and depriorittizations are occurring because governments in succession have provided too little state funding and budgeted too little. Försäkringskassan and municipalities then make more restrictive assessments, where fewer and fewer needs and diagnoses qualify for LSS measures. Basic needs are broken down and calculated by the minute instead of being seen as a whole. This fragmentation is a central tool for implementing austerity measures in personal assistance. The Tidö government is no exception in allowing the cost perspective on LSS measures to dominate.

Cuts in LSS measures also mean that the responsibility is forced to be shifted more and more onto already exhausted relatives, many times women. This is so despite the fact that one has the right to receive this measure from society.

Today, more and more people are receiving rejections of their application for an LSS measure, which leads to the number of appeals constantly increasing. If the individual would want to appeal decisions on LSS measures and be able to get justice in a higher instance, the individual often must drive a very complicated legal process that requires special legal competence, and many do not have the means to hire a lawyer.

Statistics from the Swedish Courts Administration show that the individual only wins in about 10 percent of cases when it comes to appealed decisions. It is a criticism from the UN that the government does not strengthen the individual's ability to assert their rights by introducing legal aid.

The principle of continuity shall characterize a decision on a granted LSS intervention. This means that the individual must be able to rely on and feel security that the intervention is provided as long as the needs exist and does not suddenly cease or change. A reassessment shall only occur if the need for the intervention changes significantly. But what Försäkringskassan or the municipalities consider to be significant has proven to be quite unclear and difficult to predict.

Changes, for example changing schools or moving to another location, have been assessed in different ways. Re-evaluations are also generally very strange and most often completely unnecessary, as persons belonging to LSS-circles have lifelong disabilities and needs for support that do not change over a few years.

The municipalities' reassessments have become a huge problem as they are used by the municipalities to be able to issue a rejection at a later stage when they have discovered that one of the administrative courts has ruled to the disadvantage of an applicant in another municipality. It is also always an abuse of power to force marginalized persons to apply for their LSS interventions every year or every other year. It creates unnecessary anxiety for the individual and unnecessary extra work for a relative or a legal guardian.

The Social Insurance Agency's demands for repayment, amounting to millions, have started to increase again. This puts those entitled to assistance into debt. Many have probably heard about the DN reporting on February 19, regarding 34-year-old Maria who has a CP injury and therefore has personal assistance. After the Social Insurance Agency assessed that she had received too much assistance for ten years, a demand for payment of 1.1 million kronor has now been sent.

Activity compensation is one of the compensations where the clawbacks have increased significantly. It is a serious development. People with disabilities are becoming increasingly indebted, and they already have worse economic conditions than the rest of the population. One in four lives at risk of poverty. At the same time, the economic gaps in society have increased and will likely continue to increase, which means that people with disabilities, especially those who are women, run a greater risk of living in poverty.

They are also more worried about and more vulnerable to violence. To ensure that serious quality deficiencies, neglect, abuse, and other conditions of poor treatment within LSS operations are scrutinized, supervision fulfills an important function. The need for supervision is also evident in that the number of lex Sarah reports is increasing. The need for supervision when it comes to LSS operations is much greater than what Ivo can manage to meet.

IVO's supervision and knowledge of LSS must be developed to strengthen the individual's rights, ensure quality, and prevent mistreatment. It becomes increasingly important when persons with disabilities are forced into certain housing and living arrangements and thus live in institution-like environments. It can mean that one must share the people who provide support and service with others and that one lacks control over who provides the support, when it is given, where it is given, and in what way it is given. It is a very sad development, Madam Speaker.

This occurs in a society where a lack of a disability perspective excludes the group from the social security system, the labor market, and the education market, which places these individuals in poverty. Persons with disabilities also rate their health as worse to a greater extent than the rest of the population.

Now the government and the Sweden Democrats must prioritize and reprioritize the work to live up to LSS and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It is both about how they budget and about ensuring that municipalities, authorities, and administrative courts do not misinterpret LSS.

Finally, in this debate, I want to move for the approval of reservation 15, which concerns the fact that the government must strengthen the right to a free escort for persons with disabilities and that the measure shall be regulated in a special law. Escort services have decreased by more than 30 percent over 13 years. It increases isolation and prevents the group from participating in social life like everyone else. It is completely unacceptable that they are excluded from society in this way, which occurs when they are not granted an escort to go for walks, visit friends, or participate in activities. They are forced to become dependent on a relative when they actually have this right. I hope that the government prepares the proposal very quickly.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Initially, I would like to move for approval of reservation 15, regarding the right to a companion, under point 9 in the report on support for persons with disabilities.

This is the third year in a row that I stand here and give a speech on Swedish disability policy. I must admit that one feels a bit like a gramophone playing on repeat year after year. One might ask why, and it is because I raise the same questions constantly because far too little happens. The little that is done is not enough.

Today's debate is about the policy regarding persons with disabilities, but what we should really be debating is perhaps the government's performance deficit. If there is anything that is lacking, it is the performance within the area of disabilities.

Let us look at the list again this year. In March 2023, the Main Responsibility Inquiry's report on personal assistance was submitted to the government. The inquiry points out the need for a state main responsibility within personal assistance and proposes that Försäkringskassan should take over the responsibility so that we can achieve a more equal and coherent assistance across the entire country.

It has now been two years since the investigation was presented, and there is still no government bill. What is worse: the question of how the needs assessments should be conducted has still not been investigated. Earlier today we talked about that a prerequisite is to look at how basic needs are assessed, in order to then potentially be able to proceed with a nationalization of the assistance.

Personal assistance needs a state head of responsibility, but this also needs to happen in a legally secure manner, and for that, we must first have reached a conclusion on how the basic needs shall be assessed.

More changes need to be made within the assistance. The right to assistance needs to be strengthened, for example, in connection with hospital stays or school stays. The standardized parental deduction needs to be reset while waiting for the government to review the current legislation – something that, as far as is known, has not even been started yet. The compensation for the assistance needs to be indexed, which the Riksdag has made an announcement about. I assume that this will become a reality now in the autumn budget.

Another issue that has become increasingly clear is Försäkringskassan's reclamation activity, which is directed at both assistance providers and assistance recipients. This appears to be a legal seesaw. The method is that one looks ten years back in time and concludes that the assessment of the need for assistance made at that time was too generous. One notifies that the individual or their assistance provider should have realized this and notified Försäkringskassan, and finally, one sends a bill that often amounts to millions. So, it naturally cannot work. The responsibility to manage the own authorities – with legislation, ordinances, or regulatory letters – lies with the government.

In June 2023, the National Board of Health and Welfare presented a report on the right to a companion for persons with visual impairments. It was stated that this right has been almost completely eroded over the last ten years. New assessments resulted in two out of three who had been granted the right to a companion on the basis of being included in person group 3 according to LSS losing the right. Instead, they were referred to measures according to the Social Services Act, which are often subject to fees.

The Riksdag was also forced for that reason to make an announcement to the government last summer regarding new legislation for free accompaniment. According to the Minister for Social Services, this is currently being prepared, but it is unclear what approaches are being taken. No official timetable exists.

Madam Speaker! In March 2023, Trafikanalys presented a report on the state of the Swedish transport service. It was noted that fewer and fewer people are entitled to transport service and that the transport service is not designed according to the individual's needs. Here too, the group with visual impairments is identified as particularly vulnerable because there is currently no door-to-door perspective and many are simply denied transport service. The question is what the government has done with this investigation. There was actually a debate on this in the Transport Committee last week, and the answer during that debate provided nothing.

In March 2022, the interpretation services investigation landed on the government's desk, and half a year later it had been processed through the referral process. The investigation proposed strengthened rights for deaf, hearing-impaired, and deaf-blind persons. This was notably about making it easier to enter the labor market by moving the responsibility for work-life interpretation to Arbetsförmedlingen and expanding the right to work-life interpretation to 20 hours per month.

This presupposed a new law and subsequently an addition in the magnitude of 430 million kronor. Now, the government has indeed allocated 30 million kronor in the budget for 2025 to support work-life interpretation, but it is less than 10 percent of the actual need according to the investigation. What was supposed to become a major reform instead became a pittance.

Investigation is piled upon investigation without the government doing anything – or at least without the government doing enough. That things are being investigated in the Government Offices is of no great help to the person in need of personal assistance to go to the toilet, for the person who needs accompaniment to go shopping, for the person who needs transport services from door to door when there is snow and ice outside, or for the person who could have obtained a job if they had only been entitled to an interpretation service.

Recently, the government received a new investigation concerning activity requirements for those who are outside the labor market. Now, the government's ministers, state secretaries, or political experts are hardly without work, but an activity requirement would still have been a minimum requirement for those who are part of the government – at least within the area of functional disabilities.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of reservation 11 under point 7, regarding the right to personal assistance during a hospital stay. We naturally stand behind our other motions and reservations – including those we share with, among others, C, S and V, which are reservations 15 and 16 – but we move for the approval of only reservation 11.

Support for persons with disabilities is an issue that is very close to my heart personally. I want to start by saying that I am very happy and proud to be a part of our Swedish society where I, as a person with a disability, with need for help and personal assistance, nevertheless have the opportunity to be here, participate in the debate and be involved in voting and deciding on the same terms as you others.

But I have also seen how it has become tougher. We are talking about a marginalized group of people with both physical and mental disabilities. These are groups that are often overrepresented when it comes to mental ill-health, economic marginalization, and exclusion in society or in working life. There is a lot that would need to be done, and I thought I would start with personal assistance.

I remember myself when, as a newly injured person at the hospital, I had to meet a caseworker from Försäkringskassan who was to assess whether I was entitled to personal assistance. It was difficult for me then to know what needs I had in my life as a person with a disability. The caseworker had received medical reports and met me to talk and see what I needed. She said: Nils, I think you certainly need an hour to get help from assistants with undressing, showering, shampooing and such. We set that as a basic need.

Then she calculated a decision, and it became clear. That was what made it possible for me to focus fully on getting back into life. The assistance is absolutely crucial for me. It is thanks to it that I can function here today.

I have, however, seen how it has changed. Successively, the assessments have become stricter. New guidelines have been issued. More and more cases have gone to court and become precedential. Successively, the assessment has shifted from the original intention in the legislation.

In 2011, it was time for me to have a reassessment. Then, suddenly, it was a hunt for minutes. How many minutes did it take for my assistant to undress me? When I sat in the shower and the water ran, it was no longer about basic needs. But then they asked how many minutes it took for the assistants to soap me and shampoo my hair.

It was by a hair's breadth that I managed to keep my personal assistance. Honestly, the bill felt a bit offensive. It came so close.

In 2017, it was time for a new reassessment. It was paused, which was fortunate because the guidelines had been further tightened.

As I see it, this is worrying. We need to take a new approach. We must look at the needs assessments again in order to return to the original intention. We must begin to see, above all, the basic needs in their entirety. This must be done before we move on to the question of a principal. I share the view that we need a unified state principal for personal assistance.

There has been a lot of talk about the clawbacks. It is clear that even I as a user, just like so many other users but also organizers, am worried. This can involve matters that change lives – it can, for example, have to do with work and not with the need for help itself. They remain, but just because changes concerning other things have not been reported, there is a risk of clawbacks and payment. This places both users and organizers in a precarious situation.

Assistance during hospital stays is also something we need to change. When one works as a personal assistant, one works very closely with a user, and one naturally becomes personally engaged. Furthermore, one knows the user's needs for assistance very well. But suddenly, perhaps the user becomes seriously ill and ends up in the hospital. In addition to worrying as a fellow human being about how it is going for the user, one suddenly finds oneself without a job. It is as if the job has called in sick. This would have been completely unacceptable in any other work situation whatsoever.

Add to that the situation for parents who, for various reasons, are forced to pause what they were doing previously to instead be personal assistants to their own severely disabled children who have ended up in the hospital. That as a parent to sit with such an anxiety, while the job has been put on sick leave and one does not even get to apply for childcare, is unacceptable. The assistants had also been a great relief; they are there. Here, it is about people who are in great need of help even when they are in the hospital. We would like to change this system.

When it comes to the parental deduction, we can observe that the legislative change that has been made has not led to the changes we hoped for based on the intention that existed. Still too narrow assessments are being made. We must remember that when one applies for personal assistance for a child, one applies for the help the child needs due to the functional impairment, that is to say, such as exceeds a typical child's need for help. Then, a parental deduction is subtracted from that. We think it is strange, and it is something that needs to be changed.

When it comes to assistance, I finally want to bring up the indexation of the assistance allowance. I am pleased that the government is now investigating this, but the flat-rate allowance must be raised before we can even perform an indexation. It has been way too low for way too long. It makes it almost impossible to provide good and reasonable working conditions for personal assistants over a longer period. Here we need to see a substantial increase.

I also want to say something about escorting for people with visual impairments and, above all, what has happened for them. It is another example of how the assessment of laws has changed. In the LSS Act, which came in 1993, severe visual impairment was a reason for support. This right has been progressively eroded, just as for assistance, through assessments, landmark court cases, etcetera. This has made it almost impossible today for many with visual impairments who do not have other functional disabilities to obtain the right to such an important intervention as escorting.

The accompaniment is important for them so that they can be included and be able to do ordinary things such as go shopping, take a walk, participate in leisure activities or, as in the well-known case, regularly go to her husband's grave to take care of it. These are things that for the rest of us are self-evident.

Support for persons with disabilities

These people often instead receive very deficient accompaniment under the Social Services Act, which is also often costly. This can be an explanation for why very many people with a disability suffer mentally worse, are more isolated and live alone in their homes.

We now want to see – we hope and demand – that the motion for announcement is now approved. We must establish a new law regarding the possibility of free-of-charge accompaniment. Then there is other work to be done regarding the transport service, but I leave that debate to the Transport Committee.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 19 March.)

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