Support for people with disabilities

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the report SoU15 Support for persons with disabilities. It is an area that encompasses many important issues and is of great significance for people's everyday lives.

To live a free, independent and dignified life is something that everyone should be able to do, whether one has a disability or not. All people shall have the same opportunities to study, work, form a family and participate in society.

For a long time, we have seen how the original intentions behind LSS have gradually been eroded. The assessments have become narrower, fewer people receive support, and many testify to legal uncertainty – vital interventions can be changed or disappear. This is a development that we must take seriously.

Mr. Speaker! When LSS was introduced, the intention was clear: persons with extensive functional impairments should be able to live a life like others, with self-determination and the opportunity to participate in society. That perspective must be re-established. The support from society shall be precisely that, a support, not a hurdle or a system to fight against.

In the debate, there is often talk about costs, but there are also other perspectives. Research and analyses show that LSS interventions often create significant socio-economic values. When people receive the right support, they can work, study, and live more independently themselves. Investing in people's independence is not a burden for society – it is an opportunity and an investment in both quality of life and the socio-economy.

Mr. Speaker! One of the biggest challenges today concerns the long-term sustainability of assistance. The assistance allowance has for a long time not been adjusted in line with wages and costs. The result has been a growing underfunding that affects both the quality and the stability of the system.

Assistansanordnare lack reasonable conditions to plan long-term. When the compensation does not follow the cost development, it becomes difficult to raise wages, recruit staff, and work with competence development and quality work. In the long run, there is a risk of losing experienced staff.

It also creates great uncertainty for those who are dependent on the assistance. People's ability to plan their daily lives, their studies, or their work is directly linked to the assistance being stable and secured in the long term. For providers, staff, and above all the people who are dependent on the assistance, this creates great uncertainty. Therefore, a long-term sustainable funding model was needed.

I can only state that we are here once again talking about the indexing of the standard amount. The Sweden Democrats argue that an indexed model for the assistance allowance must be introduced. The allowance needs to follow the actual cost development in society, in the same way as many other public allowances. It is about creating predictability, ensuring stability, and not least providing security to the people who are dependent on personal assistance in their everyday lives.

Increased assistance allowance is another issue that I want to draw attention to again. It is the extra allowance that can be applied for when the standard allowance is insufficient. Most often, it concerns the fact that a large part of the assistance is performed during inconvenient working hours. Previously, in principle all applications were approved when more than 50 percent of the assistance time fell on inconvenient working hours. Since the autumn of 2023, it has become increasingly difficult to get applications approved, and during 2024 it practically came to a standstill.

I had contact with an assistance provider as recently as yesterday and was then informed that no applications are now approved by Försäkringskassan. They claim that inconvenient working hours of up to 80 percent must be accommodated within the flat-rate compensation. They have not received this figure in either a regulation or a regulatory letter; rather, it concerns their own internal rules. Since almost all applications are rejected, many now refrain from even applying. One can ask what the goal is. We are talking, after all, about an entitlement law, LSS.

Mr. Speaker! Now I want to raise the situation for persons with visual impairments and the issue of guidance. In order for persons with visual impairments to be able to live an active and independent life, functioning guidance services are required. It is about being able to get to work, shop for food or meet friends – things that many of us take for granted. Being involuntarily isolated in one's home affects a person's quality of life negatively.

Unfortunately, it is precisely this that more and more people with visual impairments experience today. The right to assistance has been progressively weakened, not through legislative changes but through changed interpretations of the law. Persons who have had assistance for many years have their measures withdrawn even though their needs remain unchanged. The only thing that has changed is how the law is interpreted. When a blind person is denied assistance on the grounds that she can move herself, it becomes obvious how unreasonable certain interpretations can become. The problem is not the legs; it is that she cannot see where she is going. It is high time that the conditions for fee-free assistance are regulated in a specific law.

Mr. Speaker! The situation for the deaf also deserves greater attention. For the deaf and many with hearing impairments, sign language is not just a tool, but it is their language. It is a language that is recognized in Sweden but which, in practice, does not receive the status it should have.

Access to sign language interpretation varies, and obstacles often arise in encounters with authorities, education, and working life. Within healthcare, the consequences can be very serious, for example when a deaf woman does not have access to a sign language interpreter when she is going to give birth, which actually happens in some regions. It can also happen that a deaf patient before a complicated heart surgery does not have access to an interpreter and therefore cannot ask questions or receive information about their own treatment.

This violates both the Patient Safety Act and the Patient Act, and furthermore, the individual is discriminated against. Furthermore, a non-conformity report is not written when an interpreter fails to appear for a booked meeting within healthcare. There is therefore a lack of statistics on this.

This is not only wrong and illegal. It is unworthy. If sign language is to be a living language in Sweden, society must also ensure that people can actually use it, through education, interpretation, and accessible community information.

Mr. Speaker! Another important issue is safety. Persons with disabilities are often in a position of dependency on those who work in health and social care. Therefore, it is crucial that we protect them from abuse and mistreatment.

The Riksdag has recently decided on expanded opportunities for register checks during employment in municipal activities, including for work in people's homes. This is an important step, so that people who are dependent on others' help can feel safe in their own homes.

Policy for persons with disabilities is fundamentally about something larger than individual rules. What I am talking about is the most obvious: freedom, participation, human dignity, and the right to live a life like others and not a life governed by society's conditions.

The Sweden Democrats will continue to work for a system that is legally secure and long-term and that puts the individual's needs at the center.

(Applause)

In this speech, Sara-Lena Bjälkö (-) agreed.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the member for a very good speech. Much of what the member points out is indeed something that we have also pointed out. One could almost believe that we were hearing a speech from an opposition party.

But now the Sweden Democrats are a central part of the Tidö agreement and the government we have. Much of the criticism we have is directed precisely at the sitting government and the Tidö parties. Therefore, it would be interesting to know how the member sees these issues and what the Sweden Democrats are doing to get the government to act.

We can start with the accompaniment. Something that has been a major problem for a long time is that people with visual impairments suddenly do not belong to any personal circle in LSS when the assessments are made. They lose the right to a completely decisive accompaniment. There are many media-covered cases, for example Emelie Pålsson from Helsingborg, who is both blind and wheelchair-bound but is still denied all forms of accompaniment, or Nicolina Pernheim, who won at the Paralympics, who has had to fight because she lost accompaniment according to LSS. We see case after case.

The Social Democrats and the Sweden Democrats were part of the announcement we made. Why then do they not support us in the opposition and put even more pressure on the government so that we can get a guidance law in place?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Nils Seye Larsen for the question.

These are questions where many parties actually feel and think very similarly. It is true that we are a Tidö party, but we are not a governing party. In this specific issue, we are not coordinated – the leadership is not a point in the Tidö Agreement.

I can only regret that the government has not taken hold of the announcement made in 2024. Last year, when we had this issue up in the committee, I want to remember that the government said that they were working on it and that it was being prepared within the department. I am as disappointed as many others that more has not happened there. I think it is terribly sad that this issue is not moving further up on the agenda at the department.

This is a problem that has persisted for a long time. During the previous parliamentary term, nothing was done to solve it. During this parliamentary term, a notice has been issued, but unfortunately, it has not yielded results. We in the Sverigedemokraterna have pushed and asked the minister questions about this several times without the matter moving forward.

The only thing I can say is that a new party was needed in the Government Offices.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I understand, but I am not quite satisfied with the answer nonetheless. The Sweden Democrats are, after all, the largest party in the Tidö agreement. They actually have the largest office in the government's coordination office and should have the opportunity to push forward. And if they do not feel satisfied, they are more than welcome to join the opposition when it comes to pressing for this and supporting our motion.

It has now almost been four years, and we still have not gotten anywhere regarding this. We need a companion law. It is absolutely crucial for people with visual impairments, who lose the right to life-saving companionship according to LSS.

But let me take up another issue, which concerns an area where you are actually in agreement. It concerns the budget that has been adopted. The member spoke well about assistance and the erosion of it. But the budget nevertheless implies a double betrayal. It is partly about the fact that the promised indexation was omitted – it is completely necessary for the assistance compensation to be able to keep up with wage developments – and partly about the fact that the assistance compensation is not increased by more than a modest, or rather catastrophic, 1.5 percent. For my personal assistants, who are completely invaluable to me and my life, who already have a low salary, it perhaps means a few extra kronor per hour. I wish I could give them more.

I wonder: Does the member consider this to be a good and reasonable level? Because I do not interpret that as what the member said.

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the question! No, I am absolutely not satisfied with 1.5 percent. I think, just like Nils Seye Larsen, that it is catastrophically low.

But when it is four parties that have to agree on a budget, it is a matter of give and take. We had an increase of 3 percent the year before. Therefore, we simply had to stand back on this issue this time. I think it is terribly boring.

That the indexing was omitted was something that many of the parties in the Social Affairs Committee did not even know about before the budget arrived. It was also a very big disappointment. We truly believed and had a certain conviction that an indexing would come, but Camilla Waltersson Grönvall claims, therefore, that it did not manage to be finished in time. That one can, in and for itself, respect, because it is better to let it wait and ensure that it becomes really good than to throw in something half-finished that still has to be redone later. I agree that it should be indexed. That is how it is.

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

Agneta Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I intend to continue to ask questions about what Nils has just asked about. It concerns the assistance allowance.

The Sweden Democrats are cooperating with the government. How will the Sweden Democrats work for the assistance allowance and the indexing in the future? The Sweden Democrats have stated that they intend to work for it. Will they do so ahead of the autumn budget?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Agneta Nilsson for the question – it is also a very good question.

When it comes to how we are working with the assistance allowance before the supplementary budget, I can only confirm that the Sverigedemokraterna have worked very hard to ensure that an amendment is included in the supplementary budget. Whether it will happen or not, I cannot answer. I neither know about it nor am allowed to speak about it. But I can guarantee that we have fought very hard for there to be an amendment in the supplementary budget when it comes to the assistance allowance.

We in the Sweden Democrats will continue to work to ensure that there are reasonable increases and an indexing that makes it possible for everyone who needs the assistance to live with long-term plans and goals.

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

Agneta Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Mona Olin!

I will continue with the Tidö agreement. Just as the member said earlier, there is nothing about disability and disability policy in the Tidö agreement. There are very many other large areas in the Tidö agreement. I wonder then: Does Mona Olin know why this area did not come into the Tidö agreement?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Agneta for the question.

I was not personally involved in the discussions regarding the Tidö Agreement. I was completely new to the Riksdag and truly was not in a position where I had the opportunity, knowledge, or mandate to raise those issues. Why it was chosen to pursue other issues in the Tidö Agreement, we will probably have to discuss with those who are higher up in the food chain.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Mona Olin, for an outstanding speech!

I believe I agreed with virtually everything that was raised in the speech. The member put the disability policy into perspective. She spoke about how important a functioning disability policy is when it comes to studies and work and so that one can live a life on equal terms. The member spoke about the erosion that has occurred of the disability policy during the last ten years and about where we stand today.

But the question one still asks is: Are the Sweden Democrats in the majority or in the opposition in Sweden's Riksdag? They are, after all, part of a Tidö cooperation that has a majority. Furthermore, the Sweden Democrats are the heavy-weight party in the Tidö cooperation. It is the largest party, which to a large extent decides which issues are prioritized and what is important. But nothing of what the member highlighted as important regarding disability policy has gained traction in the Tidö cooperation.

I am thinking about the underfunding of assistance, where the standard rate needs to be raised and an indexing needs to be introduced. Nothing has happened there. I am thinking about the accompaniment, where we need new legislation. Nothing has happened there. The interpretation service investigation has become a joke.

The member states that one is not a government party – one is a Tidö party. But it is completely obvious that the party the member represents, Sverigedemokraterna, has chosen not to prioritize disability policy. Even if the member himself is committed, the party obviously is not, for then this would have stood higher up on the agenda. Why is it that way? That is what I wonder, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Christofer Bergenblock, for the question!

After the last election, when the Tidö Agreement was made, there were enormous problems in society. This was due to many different factors. We had crime, unemployment, immigration and integration problems, and so on. The Sweden Democrats then chose to focus on the most acute things, that which needed to be addressed so that one could begin to turn the ship Sweden back in the right direction again.

I myself would have wished that the disability policy had been placed higher up, but this was how it was chosen to be done. One had to "pinpoint" a few areas, which were the most important at that very moment.

Then I can say that when it comes to what is not in the Tidö Agreement, that is, all areas not touched upon in the Tidö Agreement, the Sweden Democrats are free to join with the opposition or not. Together with the opposition, we saw to it that there was an announcement regarding both guidance and indexing in 2024. Last year we did not take that line, but instead, we tried to have discussions with the ministry.

It is almost time for the election. I truly hope that the voters realize that a different party is needed in the Government Offices. Neither the previous term nor this one has succeeded in implementing any of these measures.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! It is not just another party that is needed in the Government Offices. A completely new government is needed in the Government Offices if we are to be able to turn this ship around again, because that is how much has gone wrong during this mandate period. It is so much that would have needed to happen during the mandate period that has not happened. This applies in particular to the disability policy, where we have gone through a number of areas where we really would have needed to see changes.

The Speaker points out that this is not part of the Tidö Agreement and that one therefore has the opportunity to support the announcements. I would then like to tell those listening to this that even after today's debate, there is an opportunity to support the announcements that have been proposed by the opposition, for example, regarding demanding once again that an investigation into legislation on accompaniment be conducted.

It is true, as the member said, that it is an issue that the Sweden Democrats, together with the opposition, pushed through an announcement regarding in June 2024. No workshop has been established there. Now, instead, the government has tasked the National Board of Health and Welfare to prepare a knowledge base for the municipalities. But we all know that it will not lead to a change, because practice has established itself in a completely different way.

What the Sweden Democrats, on the other hand, have a direct impact on – and where the coalition parties must reach an agreement – is the budget. Many of these issues fall into budget issues. In that case, it is still interesting that the member says it is a priority to raise the flat rate and achieve an indexing. But obviously, it was not so much of a priority that it became a reasonably increased flat rate this year. Why?

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

Mona Olin (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question, Christofer Bergenblock!

As the member says, we had a great deal to rectify after the previous parliamentary term or the last ten years of mismanagement of Sweden. Now the member stands here and says that there is even more to rectify now. I question that. We all know that a failed immigration policy has pushed many things to the limit in this country and has made it difficult for many to get by. People have had to endure crime and so on. I think it is important to address these issues.

Regarding the budget, we are four parties that must reach an agreement. We must reach a goal. Last year we got the flat-rate amount up by 3 percent. If it is only one party that demands something, it is very difficult to get it through in the budget, because it is four parties that must agree. One has to give and one has to take. That is how a cooperation looks. How the discussions have gone in those negotiations, neither do I know nor can I speak about here.

I say as I said before: the Sweden Democrats were needed in a government for solutions to these issues to be realized. The governments during the last two to three terms have not brought them to fruition.

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

Agneta Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating support for persons with disabilities, the Social Affairs Committee's report number 15.

Influence, accessibility, holistic view, self-determination, participation and continuity are the core principles within LSS, the Act on Support and Service for Some Disabled People. The meaning of the words is that persons with disabilities shall be able to live like others. LSS is a freedom reform that we must safeguard so that everyone, from children to adults with disabilities, shall be given the best opportunities to live a free and equal life.

To live freely, to be able to work, travel, study, and simply participate in society and do what one wants is something that we without disabilities do without a thought of being dependent on others' help if we do not ourselves want the help. But a disability can happen to any of us at any time. One can be involved in an accident or get a disease that forever changes the life one has lived. One can have a close relative, friend, or colleague who lives with a disability. Regardless of who has or gets a disability, it is important that society's safety net is there and is sustainable for us humans so that everyone can get the chance to live their dream life, regardless of what circumstances one has.

Mr. Speaker! Today I would like to raise some areas concerning support for persons with disabilities – first, a state ownership for personal assistance.

An investigation was commissioned by the Social Democratic-led government to examine whether it was possible to introduce a state ownership. It was completed in 2023, and it was proposed that the state should take over full responsibility for personal assistance and that it should not be as it is today, where it is divided between double owners.

State ownership would provide equivalent, more legally secure assistance across the entire country. It could also strengthen the work against welfare crime. We Social Democrats stand behind the commission's proposals. The government also says it is in favor of state ownership, but so far nothing more has emerged than that they intend to consider measures with the goal of transferring the entire ownership of personal assistance to the state. However, it is a major transition that will require time and resources to implement. Therefore, work should have already begun to introduce state ownership. It should not only be a goal.

Mr. Speaker! In June 2024, a decision was made in the Riksdag regarding an announcement that would change and create opportunities for a more sustainable financing of the hourly rate for the assistance allowance. A review of the calculation model was to be conducted. We Social Democrats, together with several other parties in the Riksdag, succeeded in having an investigation into the assistance allowance appointed.

The level of the standard rate is important for both quality and for good working conditions for personal assistants. In recent years, the increase has remained below the wage cost development, which has pressured operations heavily, and operations are still under pressure.

In recent years, there have been many turns within the government and the coalition partner SD regarding this parliamentary decision. Promises have come and gone, and then new promises have been added within some of the government parties. After nearly two years, the announcement is that they are investigating the introduction of an indexing, but there is no timetable. I note that SD and the government parties do not seem to be in agreement on this issue.

Mr. Speaker! Assistance for persons with visual impairments is also an area where it is not functioning as intended. In June 2024, the Riksdag urged the government to initiate work to make the assistance free of charge and to review the conditions for a specific law. The reason was that in recent years, fewer and fewer persons with visual impairments have been granted assistance, and it is worst among the young. In order for them to be able to go out and move in society, the assistance is important, otherwise their freedom risks being significantly restricted. There are clear examples of how people with visual impairments have suffered from exactly this, including a well-known case where a young woman in Helsingborg was not granted assistance according to LSS.

Socialstyrelsen has recently received a mandate from the government to produce support material for the municipalities regarding LSS with a focus on accompaniment, which will certainly serve its purpose. But that was not what the Riksdag's announcement was about; rather, the decision was to review the conditions for legislation regulating the right to accompaniment.

Mr. Speaker! These are three areas that have been present during this parliamentary term and which concern persons with disabilities. I can only state that delivery in these areas has been lacking from the government and the coalition partner Sverigedemokraterna. Despite it having been highlighted by many affected, the government has not taken its responsibility but instead prioritized other areas. Tax cuts to primarily high-income earners, which they themselves have led the way in, and the welfare has had to take a backseat or even moved backward.

The government has talked a lot, which they seem to be good at, but there has been a lack of ability to do anything in these areas. The principal responsibility investigation is still an investigation after three years. The announcement regarding assistance compensation and accompaniment has been waiting for nearly two years for something to be delivered.

It is witnessed daily that people with different disabilities are affected by their lives becoming narrower and narrower. People are forced to put their lives on pause because support and help have been denied or withdrawn during this mandate period. It is not worthy of people in a country like ours. The meaning of the words in the core principles of LSS fades. But there is still time for the government to address these areas.

Mr. Speaker! I naturally stand behind all our reservations, but I move for approval of reservation 3, Calculation of assistance compensation.

(Applause)

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

Malin Höglund (M)

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

Sweden shall be a country where all people have the right to live an independent, secure and dignified life, regardless of functional ability. It shall be a society where no one is left behind and where every human being is given the opportunity to participate, contribute and develop based on their own circumstances. It shall be a society where disability must never be an obstacle to living a life with freedom and faith in the future.

However, we know that reality often looks different. Many people with disabilities still face obstacles in their everyday lives. They do not always receive the support they need, and they may have to wait far too long. They face difficulties in the labor market, limitations in education, and a society that is not yet fully accessible. It is a failure that we as legislators have a responsibility to take most seriously.

Mr. Speaker! Something that the Prime Minister said in his government statement on 18 October 2022 is just as relevant today, and I therefore want to return to it. He said: People with disabilities shall be able to be fully included in society without being subjected to discrimination. To integrate the perspective of disability rights in more policy and social areas continues to be in focus.

This is not just an ambition but also a promise. It is a promise that must be translated into concrete policy and into reforms that are felt in people's everyday lives.

Mr. Speaker! We clearly see what challenges exist. The processing times for LSS and assistance compensation are often long and are perceived as unpredictable. The assessments differ between municipalities and authorities, which creates legal uncertainty and frustration. Many are forced to appeal decisions time and again to receive the support they are actually entitled to. At the same time, unemployment among people with disabilities who have reduced work capacity is significantly higher than among the rest of the population. Far too many who want and can work are not given the chance. It is a waste of people's drive and society's resources.

The government has implemented or initiated several important reforms. The right to personal assistance has been strengthened, not least for children and persons with extensive care needs. The state grants to the municipalities have been increased so that more people can access LSS interventions and support in everyday life. We have invested in assistive devices, housing adaptation, and digitalization so that more people can stay in their homes and live a more independent life. New technology creates new opportunities, but only if it is available to everyone.

Mr. Speaker! Work and education are crucial for independence and empowerment. Therefore, the government has, in the budget bills, put forward several important proposals regarding, among other things, interpretation support and educational support. The rules are simplified for persons with disabilities who want to start a business. The special educational support for studies at folk high schools has been strengthened. For many, the folk high school is a crucial path to work, studies, and strengthened self-confidence.

Mr. Speaker! The Government also takes the importance of sports seriously. The Centre for Sports Research has been commissioned to analyze the conditions for grassroots and elite sports for persons with disabilities, with a particular focus on children and young people. Sport is about health, but also about community, inclusion, and faith in the future.

At the same time, the investigation into an EU disability certificate and a common EU parking permit is extended until August 15 this year. For many people, this is about the possibility to travel, work, and live freely throughout Europe.

Mr. Speaker! Despite all this, we are definitely not there yet. The differences between municipalities are still too great. Access to assistive devices resembles a postcode lottery today, which several of us have been present to hear about. It is unreasonable that needs should determine where one lives or whether one chooses to move.

We Moderates want to go further. We want to see faster and more legally secure processes, more tailored jobs and simpler paths from daily activities to work. We want to see a society where employers see potential and competence, not limitations.

Mr. Speaker! If we do not continue this work, we risk ending up with a society where more people fall into exclusion, isolation, and dependency. That must never be accepted. Every human being has a right to participation, security, and the opportunity to shape their own life. We Moderates and the government will therefore continue to push for change, for freedom and independence, and for a society that holds together. It is such a Sweden we want. It is also such a Sweden we shall build together.

(Applause)

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the speech.

It is not the first time we have heard this quote from Ulf Kristersson. True enough, it is nice, but it rhymes very poorly with how things look. People talk about full participation, but it becomes nothing more than fine words if one does not live up to it in practice.

We have talked about the accompaniment. The National Board of Health and Welfare has said that progress must be made with a new accompaniment law. There is also a declaration from the Riksdag. Still, nothing is happening, even though this has devastating consequences for people all over Sweden who lose the right to absolutely crucial accompaniment.

The same applies to the transport service. More people with visual impairments will not be entitled to transport service because that part is not included. It is not enough that people can use their legs, they must also be able to orient themselves.

When it comes to the assistance, it was, as said, a double betrayal and double disappointment in that the indexation was omitted and the adjustment was so catastrophically low. We are talking about an adjustment of 1.5 percent of wages that were already low.

Despite the kind words, I cannot interpret it in any other way than that the government's priorities in the budget are very clear. Large investments have been made in tax cuts. On the other hand, investments regarding assistance, escorting, and other matters have been omitted.

What is happening, and why is it so?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Nils Seye Larsen, for your questions!

As the previous speaker mentioned, this government had to take over quite a few challenges – one could say there was a to-do list. The Tidö parties have a good cooperation based on the agreement that exists. However, everything cannot be done at once, which I believe Nils Seye Larsen understands.

We who have this assignment in the Social Affairs Committee are passionate about these issues – it concerns everyone, from all the different parties, who sit in here. Naturally, we want these issues to be prioritized highest. That is what I am trying to influence. There are four ministers at the Ministry of Social Affairs, and naturally, we influence them as much as we can. However, everything cannot be done at once.

The government has, together with all the Tidö parties, held government power for three and a half years now. It is not possible to do everything at once. When the government took over, there was much to do that was priority one, but these issues have absolutely not been forgotten.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I understand that one might make different priorities based on what one considers to be most important. I can – despite the fine quote – state that this has not been a prioritized area for the government.

We are, as said, still waiting to move forward with the companion law. As long as we do not do that, the devastating consequences continue for people who are completely dependent on, for example, companionship. It is the same thing with the transport service.

When it comes to assistance, we are at a critical stage. I believe it is quite unique, but both SKR, assistance providers, and Vårdföretagarna have come out and said that it will soon be a crisis. We are in a situation where our assistants, who are absolutely crucial for me and the other 15,000 users, already have tough wage conditions today, and we cannot even offer them any more kronor in wages, even though they are completely invaluable. That is not how I will be able to retain my assistants, and the situation is the same for many users.

We would need to move forward. As long as we don't do that, it will just be fine words, and it stings a bit in the eyes. I must nevertheless ask the member something. One can compare the calculation of 1.5 percent with the increase of the fee for us members of parliament, which was 3.5 percent, which perhaps corresponds to the wage development in general. Is it really reasonable that the assistance is only to be increased by 1 percent?

Much remains to be done, but I feel disappointment as long as I do not see any practical reality.

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Nils Seye Larsen, for your supplementary questions!

In the best of worlds, we would have done everything directly, but as a member of parliament, I know that the government's work does not function that way.

When it comes to, for example, the assistance that we have discussed here, the government gave a special investigator a mandate to look at how personal assistance can be made more resilient against welfare crime and more predictable for the person entitled to the assistance. The investigation was commissioned in April 2025 and is to be completed in 2027. Everything is not a quick fix.

It was one of the ministers who said that enacting legislation is a test of patience. It is also that. We who sit here are passionate about the issues and want them to be answered quickly.

When it comes to the accompaniment, I naturally share your concern, but we also have ongoing work in the Government Offices in that regard.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

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

Enacting legislation is testing of patience. Debating the same issues year after year without seeing anything happen is also testing of patience, and sitting in the gallery here and listening to the same debate repeating itself year after year must be even more testing of patience. The truth is, Mr. Speaker, that not much has happened within disability policy during this parliamentary term. In the name of honesty, almost nothing has happened.

On the other hand, there have been plenty of investigations to base it on. The Moderates do, after all, hold the office of Minister for Social Services. We have a minister appointed solely to work with social services issues. There are many issues within that area, but it is still a relatively limited area of responsibility that the Minister for Social Services has. One of the important areas that the responsibility concerns is disability policy.

In June 2023, the report on accompaniment was released. In March 2023, Trafikanalys' report on the transport service was released. In March 2022, the interpretation service investigation's report was released, and after it had sat with the Socialdemokrater for half a year, it ended up on this government's desk. In March 2023, the assistance investigation's report was released. None of them have led to any concrete action or any major changes.

One wonders who is the brake in the Tidö parties' politics? Is it the Moderaterna?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! The government consists of three parties, but as the member knows, we also have a cooperation agreement – the Tidö Agreement – in which the Sweden Democrats are also included. If the Moderates had received more than 50 percent of the votes, it would naturally have made a difference. Regardless of which party is the absolute largest and which has received over 50 percent of the votes, it gets all its matters through.

I think that a lot has happened anyway regarding what the government has come up with. As I said earlier, we care extra much about these issues, and we naturally want it to go significantly faster.

The member highlighted the various investigations that have been completed. Some matters have also been extended or changed. I just brought up the investigation on assistance compensation, which is to be completed in 2027. Some matters need to be supplemented. There is an investigation requirement when things are to be changed, which the member knows very well.

When it comes to the progress, I had naturally wished that it had gone significantly faster. We have a minister who works with the issues and who has the role of Minister for Social Services, which is a newly established role. How did it look under the previous government? This government has nevertheless focused on these issues and presented many new things, including the new Social Services Act.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Expectations have existed for the government precisely because it has a specific Minister for Social Services, but the results have not been particularly extensive in this area.

Let us dwell on one of the points. Since a large number of representatives from Synskadades Riksförbund are sitting in the gallery here today, we can delve into the issue of guidance specifically.

A report from the National Board of Health and Welfare was issued in June 2023 pointing out a major problem. According to the report, two out of three people with visual impairments had been deprived of their assistance because they were no longer considered to belong to person group 3 within LSS. After that, nothing happened.

One year later, in June 2024, the Riksdag gave a notice to the government that it must act and produce new legislation to strengthen the right to accompaniment. After that, nothing happened.

In December 2025, a mandate was given in a regulatory letter to Socialstyrelsen to prepare a knowledge base for the municipalities so that they can make better assessments. At the same time, everyone knows that case law has not changed and that it will not lead to any change in reality.

The legislation that has been requested ever since the National Board of Health and Welfare submitted its report in June 2023 has not materialized. How can it be so?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Christofer Bergenblock, for the supplementary question!

I think the knowledge base for the municipalities is good, because it has looked so different. I believe that has been necessary.

I had naturally hoped that we had reached a conclusion regarding the accompaniment, as it is very important for the group in question. But we are not there just now. The matter is being prepared in the Government Offices.

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

Agneta Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the speech, Malin Höglund!

I was reflecting during the speech on this issue of work. As it has looked during this government's time, unemployment has actually become higher, not lower, especially for people with disabilities. How does this government intend to solve that problem moving forward?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Member Agneta Nilsson, for the question!

The question is very relevant. Everyone who can work shall work. I spoke in my speech about the folk high school, which has had and has a contributing role so that one can move forward and then be able to take a job.

I actually know several visually impaired people who have jobs, regular jobs, today, and who also manage to get to and from their work.

I heard a story about two girls in southern Sweden who both have visual impairments and who manage to get to and from school by themselves. They have naturally learned to do this, but they manage nonetheless.

Naturally, we need to do significantly more in this area, as I also said earlier, and the issue is being prepared and worked on in the Government Offices.

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

Agneta Nilsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Malin Höglund!

Then I am wondering about the principalship investigation. It has been completed since 2023, and a committee initiative was submitted to the Social Affairs Committee in the spring of 2025 by the Socialdemokraterna, Vänsterpartiet, and Miljöpartiet. It was rejected with reference to the fact that the work is ongoing. Why then do we hear nothing about the work being ongoing, for example, in the member's statement today? Is it still only a goal that something should happen?

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

Malin Höglund (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Agneta Nilsson, for the supplementary question!

Work is ongoing regarding this issue. We all agree that it should be transferred to the state. We heard that here earlier as well. We think it is good to do that. But how the regulatory framework and all such things should look, we must return to – or the minister must return to. But the work is ongoing; that I can say.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Since we have some cases of illness in Vänsterpartiet, I have had the honor of serving in the Social Affairs Committee's debate today, even though my normal residence is in foreign policy. However, I am happy to serve in this debate, as one of the proposals we are debating today is the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD, was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2006. Today, 164 states have signed and 192 states, including the EU as the only region, have ratified the convention.

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is among the central conventions on human rights but does not in itself create any new rights, rather its purpose is to remove obstacles to enjoying human rights for persons with disabilities.

The Convention's starting point is that disability is a social construction and that it is barriers in society, not the individual's impairment, that lead to exclusion. Persons with disabilities shall be considered full-fledged rights holders and a part of human diversity.

The convention is the first that has been developed together with representatives from the group concerned, that is, the rights holders. It requires an independent monitoring institution.

Mr. Speaker! In Sweden, this rights perspective has not gained sufficient traction, I believe. Knowledge of the convention and what obligations exist from the side of society is still very low. The convention is rarely used as a basis for decisions in courts or by authorities, and persons with disabilities generally lack the prerequisites to assert and demand their rights in accordance with the convention. There is a lack of a long-term strategy to increase awareness of rights for persons with disabilities.

Despite the fact that Sweden ratified the convention in 2008, it has not been incorporated into Swedish law. The gaps in the existing legislation have not been identified, and there is a lack of systematic follow-up and analysis of the convention's practical application.

Vänsterpartiet believes that a rights perspective should permeate the regulatory framework and policies for persons with disabilities. In order to seriously implement the convention, it is required that the state adopts a rights-based approach towards the rights-holders and ensures accountability.

The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the CRPD Committee, exists to review how the states that have ratified the convention comply with it. The Committee receives and investigates complaints from individuals and groups, prepares comments and interpretations of the convention's articles, and every four years publishes a report on the respective state party's compliance with the convention's articles.

The disability movement's analyses here in Sweden have clearly shown that the Swedish government does not follow the recommendations from the committee's reviews.

The Left Party therefore considers that the government should investigate how the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities can be incorporated into Swedish law. Sweden has already done so with the Convention on the Rights of the Child and should be able to do so also with this convention. Such an investigation should base itself on the national reviews from the UN committee and clarify what role the committee's recommendations and reviews should have for future Swedish legislation. The investigation should also submit proposals on how sufficient funding can be ensured so that the commitments in the convention can be complied with.

Therefore, I want to move for approval of the Left Party's, the Green Party's and the Centre Party's reservation number 1.

I also want, Mr. Speaker, to say something about the discussion on assistance that we have heard. I have sat in this Riksdag for many years and must say from the sidelines that it is a pity that we have not come further. I think I hear exactly the same debate as I have heard ever since I was a municipal politician 15 years ago.

It is truly clear that we must do more so that people have the right to assistance, but also to provide those who work within personal assistance with reasonable working conditions. This feels like a group that we politicians always only use as an economic regulator and do not take responsibility for.

Otherwise, Mr. Speaker, I refer to the Left Party's position in this report and to previous debate contributions in these debates by our regular member in these issues, Nadja Awad.

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by moving for approval of the Social Affairs Committee's proposal regarding support for persons with disabilities.

We are debating today issues that concern people's everyday lives, freedom, and dignity. It is about the right to live one's life like others – to be able to work, study, start a family, and participate in social life on equal terms.

For us Christian Democrats, this is not just a budget issue or an organizational issue. It is also a question of the view of humanity. Our policy stems from the conviction of the human being's inviolable and unique value. Every human being is more than their circumstances and more than their limitations. Society's task is therefore to remove obstacles, not create new ones.

That the issues regarding disabilities are important for us Christians are also clearly visible in our internal work. When we had the party congress in November, it turned out that just over 10 percent of the approximately 650 submitted motions had a connection to the area of disabilities. That says something important. There is a broad commitment within the Christian Democrats for issues regarding accessibility, participation, and the right to support. It is not a niche issue but a central part of our view of society.

The goal of the disability policy is clear. Persons with disabilities shall have equal living conditions with others. This requires improved accessibility, a strengthened right to education, and better opportunities to establish themselves in the labor market. It also requires that we see the hidden disabilities. Knowledge of neuropsychiatric and intellectual disabilities must increase so that the support becomes legally secure, early, and accurate.

Mr. Speaker! Personal assistance is a freedom reform. It gives people power over their own everyday lives. Therefore, we in the Christian Democrats have for a long time worked to save and develop the assistance. One of our most important proposals is that the state shall be the sole primary provider for personal assistance. Already in 2020, we, together with the Moderates and the Left Party, took an initiative for a committee initiative here in the Riksdag. This won a majority and led to an investigation into state primary providership. The investigation is now being prepared in the Government Offices.

This is an important step forward. A state head of responsibility would strengthen equality and legal certainty. The right to assistance would not be affected by which municipality one lives in. It would be based on the individual's needs and not on the registered address or municipal finances.

At the same time, we must safeguard the long-term sustainability and legitimacy of the assistance. Organized crime within the assistance sector is a serious problem. Fraud and criminality risk undermining confidence in the entire reform. This must be combated forcefully but without restricting the right to support for those who truly have extensive needs.

That is why it was important that the government in April 2025 gave a special investigator a mandate to submit proposals for measures to ensure that those entitled to assistance have their needs met and that the system becomes sustainable over time. The assignment is to be reported in January 2027. It is a central task to strengthen the reform's legitimacy.

Mr. Speaker! Mapping shows that knowledge of guidance varies between municipalities, and this creates inequality. That the National Board of Health and Welfare now intends to produce support material for the municipalities is therefore welcome. Increased knowledge and clearer guidance contribute to greater equality across the entire country.

Much is underway, but we know that we must never rest on our laurels. Behind every paragraph, every investigation, and every budget item, there are people – a child who wants to be able to participate in school, an adult who wants to work, or an elderly person who wants to live an independent life. The Christian Democrats will continue to work for a society that sees, embraces, and includes other people and a society where support is given based on need and where human dignity always stands at the center.

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

(Applause)

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Dan Hovskär, for the presentation! When one listens to these presentations, one could actually believe that we all belong to the same party and that all parties in this chamber are in opposition to the government – or at least in opposition to some party in the government that governs the disability policy.

This applies regardless of whether it is the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates, or the Christian Democrats, and I imagine that the Liberals will also likely give a speech about how important the disability policy is, about how much one wants to implement, about the great ambitions one has, and about how it is someone else's fault. It is someone else who is holding back.

It is, however, the case, Mr. Speaker, that the decisions made in the government are collective, and those that the government prioritizes to implement and drive forward are also implemented and driven forward. Disability policy does not belong there.

The Chairman speaks warmly about how important the assistance is and that we must now work to save the assistance – and yes, we must do that. The fact is that a primary responsibility investigation was presented in March 2023 which, by this point, could have been decided in the Swedish Riksdag. Now we are in March 2026, and nothing has happened as a result of the investigation. Nothing has happened regarding the decisions that need to be made to create an equivalent and equal assistance throughout the country and to strengthen the assistance.

Why is it the case that issues regarding functional disabilities are constantly being deprioritized in the Tidö cooperation?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much for the questions, Christofer Bergenblock!

I do not think one can say that these issues are deprioritized. A number of investigations are underway, and a great deal of work is being done. The principal responsibility investigation is an important issue, and I believe everyone agrees on that. We Christian Democrats believe that this needs to be implemented as soon as possible, because it can make a big difference for many of our residents who could then receive more equal assistance.

There is also a discussion about various problematic parts that have been found along the way, regarding how certain assessments should be made. This is being investigated right now, and they are looking at how this can be implemented. Much is, therefore, in motion.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Many investigations are underway and have started, and many investigations have been completed. The truth is that the investigations have been piled up throughout the entire parliamentary term: the interpretation service investigation, the transport service investigation from Trafikanalys, and the assistance investigation, to name a few.

In the end, however, it is not the number of inquiries that measures whether the government has prioritized these issues and whether the government has succeeded with these issues. It is the result – the workshop and what became of the inquiries – that counts, and there it was a pittance. There have been small, small changes to the disability policy, but the big changes and the big reforms have been missing.

Just assistance is part of what we have perhaps debated the most in the chamber. As I said, the investigation into a state ownership came out in 2023. It has since been established that we also, in order to be able to carry out this investigation in a legally secure manner that does not erode the assistance even further, need to review basic needs.

I have not seen any investigation regarding basic needs, however, but it is a prerequisite for being able to proceed with the nationalization of the assistance. We first need to be able to ensure that the assessments made by Försäkringskassan do not kick people out of the assistance but ensure that one can remain and retain the assistance one is entitled to. Furthermore, we from Centerpartiet want reinforcements of the assistance beyond that, but the investigation has thus not been completed.

It has now been two years. When can we expect results in the assistance issue?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the supplementary questions, Christofer Bergenblock!

I and the Christian Democrats think that the principal responsibility investigation is one of the most important, and we are pushing to get it realized. The basic needs are part of what has been discussed, and in agreement with actually all parties, it has been concluded that one might need to look at the basic needs before the principal responsibility investigation is carried out. Many have thought that it is the right way to go.

What I understand is that such an investigation is underway in the near future. The matter lies with the Ministry of Social Affairs, and the government is currently looking into this. I therefore feel quite confident that a proposal on this will be coming in the near future.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for a fine speech, once again. The member shows that the Christian Democrats quite clearly understand the challenges that actually exist, both regarding persons who have a visual impairment and lose the right to completely decisive guidance and regarding the assistance, which is being eroded and where the situation is critical.

At the same time, the member is a representative of a governing party, and I must admit that I am not getting it. The Christian Democrats, therefore, understand the challenges but are simultaneously in a government that chooses to prioritize completely differently in its budget and which piles up investigations on top of each other without them leading to results. The Sweden Democrats are disappointed, but they are not in the government. They say it would have been a workshop if they had been in the government. The Moderates say that things take time but that it is not the Moderates who are the bottleneck. So, who is it that is governing in these issues?

What we can state is that we do not see any effect and that it is indeed needed. It is, after all, an almost desperate situation, because it is people who are affected. It concerns people with visual impairments who today lose the right to completely decisive guidance. They are also denied travel services because they, so to speak, can use their legs, but then they cannot orient themselves. This is something that would need to be changed.

When it comes to the assistance, the indexation disappeared, and the assistance calculation is catastrophically low. This makes it impossible for serious actors to provide assistance, and it makes it impossible for us who are entitled to assistance to retain our staff because the wages are so low and we cannot give them more in salary.

I am just wondering who it is that is in charge. If the Christian Democrats now think that this is so important, why do we not see more concrete, real action?

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the questions, Nils Seye Larsen!

These questions are important, but then it is always about priorities between different parts. This is about important issues, and they are being investigated and need to undergo a review so that it becomes right and correct.

If we got the principal responsibility investigation in place, several of the issues would gain stability and a more equitable design. I believe that is one of the most important things to get in place in order to be able to raise this entire part and ensure that it does not differ as much as it does in Sweden. It differs between different municipalities, which means that people might not even dare to move and so on. So we cannot have that, and therefore this needs to be put in place.

When it comes to the assistance allowance, I am aware that it is low. There, perhaps the opposition parties should be a bit self-critical and look at how it looked during the eight years when, among others, Miljöpartiet was involved in governing. Percentagewise, we have increased the allowance more than was done during eight years at that time, so it might be good to look in the rearview mirror and, so to speak, compare.

Since then, I am not satisfied with the outcome; it could have been significantly higher. But it is also important to try to look forward and see what is in the works, and when it comes to investigations, there is a lot going on regarding several of these issues.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I believe in daring to be honest and clear, and it is completely true: When Miljöpartiet sat in the government, unfortunately, a sufficient increase was not made, so we also have a homework assignment to do. I do not want to shift the blame there.

Then there are always explanations – for example, it was a somewhat different inflation situation, and the government at that time nevertheless presented budgets that were in balance. The thing with the budget that is now being presented is that Sweden is borrowing 100 billion and it is so obvious that the priority is tax cuts. This has been sidelined, and we have to continue waiting for them to come out with, for example, a guidance law and indexation of assistance.

The main responsibility investigation is of all honor, but first we would need to get an investigation of the LSS Act in place. There, the outcome is very far from what the intentions were. The needs assessments should be redone so that one sees the needs for help in their entirety and does not sit with the minute-hunting that one does now. That is what makes us so worried.

We would therefore like to see more action. I also want to add one thing that worries me, and it concerns the report on welfare crime. Welfare crime exists everywhere, and the assistance is not exempt from it. But why do we not go more clearly after the owners? In this case, there are many investigation proposals that are more directed towards users and assistants.

I do not understand, for example, why in this situation one chooses to proceed with an investigation regarding relatives and to limit relatives' opportunities to assist both as assistants and as guardians. Relatives usually do not do it because they absolutely want to, but often because they have to – because there is no one else who can be there. I would very much like to get an answer to that.

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

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Nils Seye Larsen for further questions. Now I only have two minutes of speaking time left, and there were several major issues that perhaps actually require a significantly longer exposition.

If we are to start somewhere: This government is investing an enormous amount in giving people more in their wallets. It is not about tax cuts for their own sake, but about people being able to be more involved in society and influence their own lives. It also affects, for example, families with children and people with disabilities. It is therefore an important part.

We are also investing heavily in healthcare. New figures for the care queues have now been released, and they have decreased by 28 percent since we took over compared to how it was when the previous government was in power. We are, therefore, working very hard on issue after issue.

When it comes to the needs assessments, I can agree with this regarding the "minute-hunting." No one thinks it is good, but one must see the whole. The important thing is to see the individual before the system and try to find what is good for the individual. Sometimes one has very square boxes and tries to push things into them, but the perspective must constantly be turned back to the individual. We work hard for humanity in those parts.

Nils Seye Larsen also mentioned crime. There, it is a matter of seeing in which different parts the criminals actually steal tax money and take it from those who really need it. We must try to target organized crime; it uses no means are off-limits, and it is appalling. However, it must not affect those who really need the intervention.

There, my two minutes of speaking time has elapsed.

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 4 under point 4 regarding accompaniment.

Now we have the final debate of the mandate period on disability policy. Rightly so, many are disappointed and frustrated with what this mandate period has brought about, which is to say, for the most part, nothing. Despite everything, there were hopes for a turning point – that rights that had been eroded would begin to be reinstated and that disability rights issues would once again begin to be taken seriously. That was not the case – not for personal assistance, not for companionship, not for interpreting assistance, not for transport services, not for assistive devices and not for the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Mr. Speaker! Today, the Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired has stood outside the Riksdag and spoken with us Members of Parliament. Now they are sitting up in the gallery listening to the debate. They are rightly frustrated over the situation. During the last ten years, two out of three people with visual impairments have lost their assistance. 24-year-old Emelie Pålsson from Helsingborg is both blind and a wheelchair user but has been denied all forms of assistance. 57-year-old Katarina Hahr, known from the P1 program Katarina Hahr möter, went from 165 hours of assistance per month to 29. Deaf-blind Evelina Lindberg in Piteå had to fight for one and a half years to get back the assistance that the municipality decided to withdraw. It should not be like this.

In June 2023, the National Board of Health and Welfare presented its report on how the right to companionship has been eroded and how persons who previously were considered to belong to person group 3 according to LSS have slowly but surely been deprived of their rights. Despite the report, the government did not react. A year later, the Riksdag submitted a notice to the government to develop new legislation. Still, there was no reaction from the government.

In December 2025, the government suddenly wakes up and decides, through a regulatory letter to Socialstyrelsen, that a new knowledge support shall be developed for the municipalities to help them in the assessments. If the government had been responsive, it could have demanded this knowledge support in December 2023 and proceeded with the preparation of a new law, which was actually needed in the area. The problem is that the knowledge support will not help particularly much, because the municipalities lean on the case law that has been developed. It clearly shows that what is needed is new legislation. The disappointment of those sitting in the stands here today is great. We in Centerpartiet will continue to press on in the issue.

The issue of special transport (färdtjänst) is equally poorly managed. Trafikanalys presented a report in March 2023 showing that even this right has been eroded over time and that specifically the visually impaired were particularly hard hit. This is not least about the fact that a door-to-door perspective is still lacking in the assessments. The report proposed legislative changes. After a three-year period of consideration, the government has now decided – what? Yes, to appoint a new inquiry to investigate the same thing once again. No change to the special transport service is in sight, and the issue is buried for the time being by a government without ambitions.

Mr. Speaker! If we go back another year, we arrive in March 2022, when the interpretation services inquiry landed on the desk of the then Social Democratic government and was quickly shelved in a bureaucratic drawer. When the Tidö government took office, the inquiry remained there. Small improvements have been made, but the far-reaching proposals regarding a new interpretation services act and a strengthened right to an interpreter in the working life have been omitted. Deaf, hard of hearing, and persons with deaf-blindness are still excluded. The Center Party will continue to push forward even on that issue.

The great disappointment of the mandate period has, however, been the personal assistance. In March 2023, the Huvudmannaskapsutredningen submitted its final report. The investigation pointed to the need for a state primary responsibility to achieve more coherent assessments and increased equality across the country. Now, three years have passed since the investigation was presented, but the government is still fumbling. A prerequisite for being able to present a proposal is ensuring how the assessments of basic needs are made, but not even that has the government managed to achieve.

At the same time, many of the assistance providers are on their knees, because the compensation has lagged behind in recent years. Both Vårdföretagarna and the municipalities, as well as those entitled to assistance, have sounded the alarm that this is no longer sustainable. The risk is that, in the end, only unserious actors will remain, because it is no longer possible to provide assistance on reasonable terms.

The hopes were therefore great that the government would present the proposal for the indexing of the assistance allowance in the autumn. The frustration became all the greater when it turned out to be a well-studied bluff: an increase of 1.5 percent and no index in sight. It took the wind out of many within the assistance sector. Many are now considering closing down their operations.

It is quite obvious that disability rights policy has been put on the back burner during this mandate period. The right to live a life of participation and on equal terms is far from self-evident. The development in Sweden has gone in the wrong direction for a number of years. We have also received scathing criticism from the UN for not meeting the requirements of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. From the Center Party's side, we are therefore positive about looking at the possibility of making the convention into Swedish law in the same way as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Experiences from the Convention on the Rights of the Child clearly show that this provides an increased focus on the issues, something that is definitely needed when it comes to disability rights issues.

Mr. Speaker! In summary, it can be said that it has been four wasted years in disability policy. Investigation has been piled upon investigation. New investigations have been commissioned. But the action, the workshop, and the results have been missing. This means that the frustration is great, both among those of us debating the issues against the Tidö parties here today and among those sitting up in the gallery or in front of a television set watching the debate. Of course, one should be able to live a life of full participation and on equal terms in Sweden in 2026 even if one has a disability, but unfortunately, that is not the case today. Sweden can do better than this. Sweden must be able to do better than this.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Now that the parliamentary term is beginning to draw to a close and this is the last time we are debating a broad and general disability rights report, I would like to take the opportunity to highlight a few things that are actually moving in the right direction in the field of disability rights and which the Liberals have been involved in pushing through.

Let us begin with the wallet issues. To strengthen the economy for persons with disabilities, the so-called disability tax has been removed. This is important, not least for all those who lack work capacity and who have lived with very small margins for a long time. On average, one will have 1,800 kronor more per year left in the wallet with this tax reduction. We have also strengthened the right to vab for chronically ill children and made it easier to let sickness and activity compensation remain dormant during studies. These are two reforms that will facilitate everyday life for many.

Within the school area, it is primarily a new support system in schools, an investment in more special education teachers, as well as reinforced student health that will be the reforms that have the greatest impact on students with disabilities and the possibility for them to manage school better than today.

We have also given a mandate to get a better overview of how it is going for students with disabilities. Moving forward, we will be able to have statistics on how the students are doing, which will be crucial for being able to implement the right measures in the future.

In addition to this, a reinforcement of educational support is being made to facilitate education for persons with disabilities attending folk high schools. Funds are being added for sign language training aimed at students who are themselves deaf or hard of hearing and who are in primary school, and also for parents who need to learn sign language to be able to communicate with their children.

In the area of the labor market, it has become easier to start a business if you are a person with a disability. We have finally begun to unravel the difficult issue of the interpretation service and given the Agency for Participation the mandate to establish a national function for the coordination of the interpretation service, even though there is much left to do there before we reach our goal.

In the more general disability rights policy, we have a new national action plan consisting of 119 points that need to be implemented. It is a matter of moving from words to action in disability rights policy. Previously, we have only had goals. Now we have an action plan with concrete measures. A national coordinator for disability policy will also be appointed, and the disability rights organizations have also received increased state grants.

Mr. Speaker! I believe that those of you who have heard me speak here in the rostrum before have not missed that one of the Liberals' great core issues is the LSS freedom reform. It is also the issue that occupies more than half of the report we are discussing today. There are few reforms in modern times that have meant so much for so many. It has given people power over their own lives during the more than 30 years that have passed since it was introduced.

Many have been arguing here that different parties are needed in a government to get things done. I can state that the last time a major functional rights reform was carried out in Swedish politics, it was a liberal who was the minister and responsible for it.

At the same time, we Liberals have, in any case over the last 15 years, raised concerns regarding the development of the interpretation of LSS. It has become more difficult to obtain personal assistance due to case law. We see coercive measures and a lack of competence in LSS residences, and we have insufficient supervision. These are some of the worrying trends that we have raised.

That is why it has been important for us to prioritize LSS during this mandate period. It was also the case during the previous mandate period, when we cooperated in a different constellation. It will also be important for us going forward.

Some of the improvements that we are proud to have succeeded in achieving during this parliamentary term are that a national competence center for autism and IF will be established and that replacement services according to LSS will be made more flexible. Funds are also allocated within the Äldreomsorgslyftet so that staff in LSS activities and at LSS residences are given the opportunity for competence development during working hours.

Furthermore, an investigation regarding LSS inspection is currently underway. The purpose of it is to ensure that the rights that persons have according to LSS shall be guaranteed and that there is quality in those interventions. One should also be able to reach those who exploit the system for criminal purposes in a more efficient way.

An investigation will also be appointed regarding assessments of basic needs. This needs to be reviewed before we proceed with a nationalization of the management of personal assistance. We need to ensure that no more people lose their personal assistance when the state takes over the responsibility completely.

We also need to ensure that the interpretation of LSS returns to the basic intention that these people should be able to live a life like others. We need a renewed legal text on basic needs that resets the case law that exists today. It is completely unreasonable to, as it is today, have assessments based on minute- and second-counting instead of looking at the needs as a whole.

Mr. Speaker! One might ask if what has been achieved during the mandate period is sufficient. No, it is obviously not sufficient. Many have been here addressing the issue of accompaniment, and it needs to be resolved.

From the Liberals' side, we have said that we are open to a specific law regulating exactly companionship, even though we would much prefer that a holistic approach is taken with a new LSS reform that also regulates the possibility for persons with visual impairments to live a life like others through assistance.

We believe that this could have been clarified with new legislation. But we are, of course, open to specific legislation. Until then, there is, just as many have pointed out here, a mandate to produce a manual for the municipalities so that they can make better assessments in this area.

An indexing of the flat-rate replacement is needed. I do not need to elaborate further on that. You have heard me speak about it many times.

Another issue that has been on the table for a very long time is the issue of assistive devices. Now, a national strategy with an associated action plan is coming, which is currently being drafted. We will follow this closely to see if it really is sufficient.

Finally, I also note that there are more parties that now Liberalerna wants to see the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities become Swedish law. I truly welcome that, even if it does not yet gather a majority here in the chamber. But who knows! We may reach that during the next parliamentary term.

Mr. Speaker! Unfortunately, there are still many obstacles remaining to be removed so that people with disabilities can live a life like others. There are, as is well known, also many solutions.

The Liberals will continue to tear down barriers and find solutions. We hope that more people want to be involved and ensure that the issues reach the top of the agenda ahead of the upcoming elections. I believe that guarantees change moving forward. I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Malin Danielsson, for the speech and for the various points raised here!

I am, of course, aware of the Liberals' great commitment and interest in LSS issues. Therefore, I intend to stick to those issues. During the mandate period, two major issues concerning exactly LSS have been debated, and the results have remained outstanding. One issue concerns the accompaniment, and the other issue concerns the assistance.

We can start with the accompaniment. As has been mentioned earlier in the debate, the investigation from Socialstyrelsen in June 2023 regarding the situation with the accompaniment was released. It did not result in any change or activity from the government's side. After that, an announcement was made in June 2024 which the Liberalerna voted against in the Riksdag. That neither resulted in any change.

In early December 2025, a reaction came from the Minister for Social Services. It was to task the National Board of Health and Welfare with developing better knowledge support for the municipalities. That possibility was already mentioned in the investigation from the National Board of Health and Welfare – both that possibility and the need for legislation.

Now it feels like the government intends to hide behind the fact that they have given this assignment, and then they can set the legislation aside. My question to the Liberals is: Will you push for new legislation?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Christofer Bergenblock, for the question, which is incredibly important!

I would like to go back a bit further in the chronological order that the member is now describing. I would like to go back to 2011. It was then that precedential cases came in the Supreme Administrative Court that began to narrow the right to accompaniment.

Then perhaps not much happened in the coming years after that. But since then, we have seen that the practice established in 2011 began to be utilized by the municipalities to a greater extent. This means that accompaniment is granted to a much lesser extent than before, which does not align with the intentions of LSS. One could have, therefore, done something as early as 2011. The Liberals have for quite many years pointed out the need for a new LSS reform that takes the whole thing back to the basics, and the possibilities for accompaniment for persons with visual impairments have been one of our lines of argumentation.

We have now opened up to the possibility of separate legislation because we have not been able to get either the previous government – we made a very strong effort during the January agreement – or this government on board regarding obtaining a comprehensive investigation of LSS where accompanying also is included.

In that case, I believe there is a point to the assignment to the municipalities. Very many municipalities today hire consultants who are skilled at showing how decisions can be narrowed down as much as possible. If the National Board of Health and Welfare provides support and instructions, I hope that it will carry more weight than the consultants and that it will in that way become more efficient and better as soon as the support material arrives.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! The decision on the support base could have been made as early as in the government's regulatory letter in December 2023. But now, instead, it has been pushed forward for a long time and the assignment is only now, as we approach the election, being put forward. At the same time, we do not see anything happening when it comes to producing separate legislation for the escort intervention.

Personal assistance also belongs to what has been investigated during the mandate period. The long-awaited investigation came in March 2023 with its proposal to take a holistic approach to personal assistance with a state ownership.

After referral and discussion, it has emerged that basic needs also need to be investigated. But this is not news in the spring of 2026, it is something that we were largely in agreement on in December 2024 between the disability rights movement, the parties in the Riksdag and the Minister for Social Services. Nevertheless, no investigation has still been commissioned regarding the basic needs.

This leads to the question: How low of a priority is this actually in the government? Now we have heard that all parties in the Tidö agreement are pushing to make these changes and secure the state assistance. Obviously, it is always someone else's fault that nothing happens.

Why, Mr. Speaker, does nothing happen when at least the Liberals are so passionate about the issue?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you again, Christofer Bergenblock, for the questions!

We begin with the issue of the regulatory letter. It was a fairly short time from the moment the National Board of Health and Welfare presented its mandate until the regulatory letter was ready for a decision. That is probably the main reason why there was a one-year delay. The regulatory letters are taken once a year, so it is not so strange. One could have wished that the wheels of bureaucracy turned a bit faster, but sometimes one has to contend with those types of realities.

Regarding basic needs, I am incredibly pleased that there is now such a high degree of consensus in this chamber that this needs to be looked at. That is not how it has always been. We have for many years fought to get an investigation that looks at basic needs. It will make a big difference for those who today have a need for LSS interventions, and above all for personal assistance, not to have to undergo privacy-intrusive examinations and report their needs and have them studied in detail, in minutes and seconds.

The investigation directive will be presented quite soon, and it is truly a prerequisite for us to be able to safely proceed and carry out a nationalization of personal assistance.

I think it is good that these questions are now being raised in very many parties and that many of us are pushing forward. Then there is also an opportunity for change ahead.

We Liberals have felt quite alone for quite a few years in pushing forward on these issues. I hope that Christofer Bergenblock will keep the flag flying high during the election campaign and hold many debates on this so that we together ensure that disability rights issues are prioritized on the election campaign's agenda moving forward.

(cont. § 6)

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