Response to interpellation 2022/23:157 on measures against social dumping

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Peter Hedberg has asked me whether I consider social dumping to be a problem and what measures I, in that case, am prepared to take.

Social dumping is a complex issue that spans several policy areas. It involves, among other things, housing and labor market issues and the fact that municipalities interpret and apply the Settlement Act in different ways.

The previous government appointed several inquiries shortly before the 2022 election. One of these was the inquiry Counteracting Social Dumping (dir. 2022:56). The government has conducted a review of all ongoing inquiries and, during a prioritization among these, decided to terminate the inquiry Counteracting Social Dumping. Even though this inquiry has now been discontinued, other work is being conducted that is significant for the issue.

The municipal economic equalization system equalizes for differences in tax capacity and for cost differences which, among other things, are due to socioeconomic factors, for example education and income levels and length of residence in Sweden. The parliamentary committee A Purposeful Municipal Economic Equalization (dir. 2022:36), which among other things looks at the system for cost equalization, has been tasked to analyze whether it compensates to a sufficient extent for socioeconomic factors and shall, if necessary, propose changes.

There are also other government investigations and agency assignments that are linked to the issue of social dumping. The County Administrative Boards, for example, have a mandate to support the municipalities in their work to prevent evictions and counteract homelessness.

The investigation on tightened controls during property acquisitions (dir. 2022:93) shall propose measures to tighten the control of property transfers in order to protect residential tenants against unscrupulous transfers of rental properties and prevent the Swedish property market from being exploited for crime.

The Government intends further to review the settlement regulations in accordance with the Tidö Agreement. Good conditions for reception in the municipalities are central for the integration of newcomers to function.

The Government is mindful that there is a well-functioning cooperation between the municipalities and will continue to follow the issue.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer. I would first like to say that I naturally share the Minister's view that social dumping is a complex issue that spans several political areas. However, I did not quite perceive that the Minister, in his answer, actually answered my main question, namely whether the Minister considers that social dumping is actually a problem.

My home municipality, Kramfors, was one of the first in the country to sound the alarm about the problems with social dumping. It was noticed that suddenly there were many individuals in the municipality with social problems and individuals whose establishment period had expired and who were now seeking social assistance. It also emerged that these people had been urged to move from their previous home municipality through various forms of pressure. This was something that other municipalities also later testified to in investigations and mappings.

From the side of Kramfors municipality, a lobbying effort was initiated to draw the attention of the then Social Democratic government to this phenomenon. This later led to the National Audit Office mapping the dumping and concluding that it exists in various forms.

It is true that an explanation, which the Minister cited in his response, is that municipalities interpret the Settlement Act differently. But the National Property Board also concluded that groups other than newcomers were present, including, among others, persons with substance abuse problems.

Mr. Speaker! Social dumping means that predominantly wealthier municipalities shift costs onto more vulnerable municipalities. It is a real problem. 2 million kronor or 4 million kronor in increased costs for the social services in Kramfors or Sandviken can be the difference between a zero result or ending up in the red.

I also want to make a point at the same time. The municipal economic perspective is of course important. But it is at least equally important to point out the consequences for the individual. The Social Services Act states that interventions shall be based on the individual's needs and life situation. But decisions on the interventions shall not be made over the head of the individual. For example, a municipality may not force persons who need assistance to change their place of residence.

Just as the affected municipalities have, the National Audit Office and the now-closed investigation have stated that the individual's opportunities for establishment on the labor market are hindered. Furthermore, it does not become a dignified reception in or a dignified move to the new municipality.

It has often been families with children who have been relocated. Consequently, there is also a child perspective to consider. How are children affected by being uprooted and moved without it happening in a correct and dignified manner?

I am, just like many others, disappointed and upset that the investigation into countering social dumping has been scrapped. I will return to that in a future post.

I want to go back to what I said initially. I do not perceive that I have received an answer to my main question and therefore pose it again. Does the Minister consider social dumping to be a problem?

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

Markus Kallifatides (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for the answer to both Eva Lindh's and Peter Hedberg's interpellations today. Eva Lindh has unfortunately become ill.

For several years, we have had very good reason to believe that municipalities in our country are counteracting integration, violating children's rights, and subjecting already pressured municipalities to great strain by simply dumping people who need social interventions. We also know that the lack of suitable housing is a very important factor driving certain essentially wealthy and prosperous municipalities that have been under conservative rule for decades to act in this way.

Knowledge of these very serious conditions in our country would now be gathered in a government inquiry. In addition, proposals for measures would be worked out.

The investigation that Erik Slottner and the government have commissioned has managed to submit a letter in connection with the government's decision to conclude the investigation on countering social dumping. In the letter, the investigation secretariat explains that they obviously have not been able to finish working on their reform proposals, but that they nevertheless wish to present two proposed measures.

I read out from the letter: We wish to conclude by highlighting two measures that we assess can counteract social dumping in the near term. Number 1 is requirements in the Social Services Act on the transfer of information from the sending to the receiving municipality if a person with municipal support measures, even recently concluded, moves from one municipality to another. Number 2 is to clarify what is meant by the obligation to, upon assignment, receive newly arrived persons for settlement in the municipality according to Act 2016:38 on the reception of certain newly arrived immigrants for settlement. This would contribute to a uniform application of the Settlement Act in accordance with the intentions of the law as well as counteract social dumping.

My questions to the Minister are: Is the government and Minister Erik Slottner prepared to propose these very concrete changes? If so, how does the Minister view this? If not, why?

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I will begin by answering Peter Hedberg's question. Yes, I think social dumping is a problem. It is difficult to know the extent. There is no objective concept for what constitutes social dumping or not. But we do know that it occurs. We have seen cold, hard facts on that. And it is a problem.

This is a broad question with many dimensions. Hedberg also acknowledges this here in the rostrum. There is an inherent conflict, namely that where there is an abundance of housing, there is often a shortage of jobs, and the opportunities for integration are poorer. Where there is a shortage of housing, the opportunities to get a job are better, and integration goes more easily.

We do not have municipal detention. One is free. The establishment period expires after two years. The state's responsibility for compensation and the Employment Service's responsibility are for two years. Some municipalities have interpreted it as that their responsibility also extends over two years. We cannot forbid people from staying in the municipality they have been assigned to. One has the possibility to move to where there might be housing and where one, for other reasons, wants to live. It is a broad issue.

There are several assignments in the Tidö Agreement that relate to this and which concern the Settlement Act. Among others, three years are mentioned as some kind of national assignment for the municipalities to be able to offer housing. We will have to see where that lands. The assignments shall be investigated. After investigation and customary referral handling, the government will see what we land on.

I note the two proposals from the investigation, which still managed to work for a while. I have met the investigator and the secretariat at a meeting and have received the information and the material they have produced so far. I cannot comment on the two proposals today. They are not even on my desk. The proposals that were read out concern other ministers. But it is naturally interesting to receive and to consider the proposals. They would perhaps imply and lead to greater national equality, which is usually a desirable ambition in other areas.

When it comes to the tax equalization committee, I naturally understand that financial compensation is an important issue for the municipalities affected by this, even though I also understand that the issue is broader than just financial compensation and the economic consequence for the municipalities. I think it is good that the tax equalization committee has a mandate to see if the socioeconomic factors play a sufficiently large role in the cost equalization. If they do not, one should return with proposals for more measures. That also bears on the issue.

It should also be said that migration to Sweden is significantly less now than when the Settlement Act was launched. The reason the Settlement Act was created was that we had very large migration to Sweden. It has fallen now. I believe therefore that the problems with social dumping for that reason will decrease quite significantly going forward. Municipalities with a housing shortage will have greater opportunities to offer housing to those people also in the longer term. The relevance of the issue will hopefully decrease.

It is also important to emphasize that I have ongoing dialogues with both SKR and individual municipalities. This question, among others, is raised there. It is also a way to work with the issue. I believe, in fact, that it also must be handled through bilateral meetings between municipalities.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister now says clearly that social dumping is a problem. That is pleasing. But I have also heard the Minister use the formulation that we do not have municipal detention in Sweden. I do not believe that anyone has claimed that either.

I do not know if we should engage in some kind of seminar exercise regarding the concept, but we can go to what the now-concluded investigation said about how social dumping was defined: as municipal action aimed at ensuring that persons in need of municipal support measures move to another municipality without the person themselves having expressed a clear desire to move.

It is precisely the question of voluntariness or involuntariness that is the core of social dumping. In municipalities such as Kramfors, once again, people who have come to the municipality have often stated that they have been subjected to pressure from their previous home municipality. They have, in principle, been told that they will not receive continued social assistance if they do not leave.

The voluntariness can therefore really be discussed. It is unfortunate that the investigation did not have time to work for more than just over half a year, but as the Minister also points out, it still highlights several serious consequences for both municipalities and individuals.

I am somewhat surprised by the inconsistency in the Minister's actions regarding this. In November, the Minister stated in an interview in Dagens Samhälle that it was good that the issue was being investigated and that they wanted to see more facts on the table. But a month later, they abandoned the investigation.

We already have countless testimonies from municipalities and a very good mapping from Statskontoret. Regarding the investigation of the equalization system issue and that it should solve the problem of social dumping - not completely, I understand that the Minister does not mean that, but partially - I am skeptical, for two reasons. I believe it will be very difficult to accurately calculate how social dumping actually hits, because the number of cases can vary from year to year and municipalities can be affected differently.

Then I do not know if I think it is particularly good that one in practice, within the framework of the system, in some way approves or institutionalizes the right to override the Social Services Act. I think it is a bit problematic because I fundamentally believe that I and the Minister are in agreement that it is important with good establishment on the labor market for both persons with social problems such as homelessness and substance abuse and persons who have recently come to Sweden.

Based on the mandate the investigation had, I think it would be strange to scrap it. It was intended, for example, to promote cooperation and exchange of experience between relevant actors in order to create lasting forms of cooperation. That was partly what the Minister requested, for example, dialogue between municipalities? There, the investigation could perhaps have contributed. I really hope that what the Minister says about reviewing the Settlement Act in some way can include what the now-scrapped investigation addressed and not just the parts that exist in the Tidö Agreement.

In conclusion, I want to say that clear statements from the government are needed in this matter. If the investigation that has now been concluded did not measure up, my question to the Minister is what concrete initiatives he intends to take to ensure that the fact base that is requested actually arrives. Is the Minister prepared to proceed with concrete legislation regarding precisely this issue, i.e., not within the framework of other – perhaps more peripheral – systems?

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

Markus Kallifatides (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to the Minister and the interpellor! I shall keep it quite brief. I have with great interest taken part of a good deal of the material that the now concluded investigation has produced.

In Sandviken municipality, during 2022, at least 43 families were dumped by seven Stockholm municipalities. The names of the municipalities are Lidingö, Järfälla, Nacka, Sundbyberg, Upplands Väsby, Värmdö, Stockholm, and Täby. This concerns 43 families – often young, single mothers of multiple children from the Democratic Republic of the Congo who came to Sweden as quota refugees. I assume that Erik Slottner and I can easily agree that we do not want to exchange fates with any of these families.

I am reading out what the representative for Sandviken municipality has had to say to the now concluded government investigation:

The children are particularly vulnerable. Because the households often just show up, the municipality is unprepared. None of the households with school-aged children have applied for a place in school before moving, instead everyone has applied when they have already moved. This leads to there being no time for preparation. During 2022, the municipality has had to arrange places in school and preschool for almost 100 children. It is a challenge. The primary school has worked hard to be able to offer a school place to all children. The municipality has had to solve places through over-enrollment. The consequence has been that siblings are placed at different schools - sometimes three different ones - which means a logistical challenge for the moved-in family. This in turn can lead to the children having high absence, as the logistics become overwhelming for a single parent who is a quota refugee from Congo.

I thank the Minister for the discussion, accept that this is a complex issue, and urge him and the government to take immediate and powerful measures against social dumping. For a party that might consider nationalizing the entire healthcare system, it should be possible to imagine a bit more clear, state-led governance in this area.

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! First, I want to answer Peter Hedberg's question. Newspaper interviews that are supposed to be about a subject can sometimes be broadened a bit; I won't say that they go off track. In those cases, one answers the questions received from the journalist. I am well aware of the definition of social dumping, but the interview in question was somewhat broader. Therefore, I wanted to emphasize that it cannot always be a problem that people, five years after establishment, live in a different municipality than the one they established themselves in. It can have many different causes. I do not, however, think that social dumping is a good reason for changing municipalities.

Peter Hedberg also asked me a number of questions about whether I was prepared to implement one measure after another. I am now speaking for the entire government and cannot speak for other cabinet ministers. The proposals mentioned here are bills and investigations that, in that case, would be submitted by other cabinet ministers, and therefore I cannot stand here and say that these are things the government wants to do.

It is, however, very good if concrete proposals are submitted, including from those who led the investigation into social dumping. If they have concrete and interesting proposals, I think we should at least listen to them, see if it is something that can be moved forward with, and analyze whether the proposals can contribute to a better order. That is something I am absolutely prepared to do.

We will continue to work on this issue. I want to emphasize how important it is that not only does the government have a dialogue with the municipalities, but that the municipalities have a dialogue with each other. I read an article in the newspaper that Peter Hedberg mentioned where a municipal representative said that they had had problems with social dumping, but that it ceased after they called the municipality that had sent many of its residents there.

I am not saying that it is always that easy for all municipalities, but it still shows something about how important interpersonal contacts are. One does not always have to go through governments, investigators, and legislative proposals, but can also pick up the phone, call each other, and discuss the problem. Maybe that is when a municipal representative listens. In this case, it apparently went well. It perhaps can inspire municipalities that are affected and that have not done this.

I believe, as I mentioned in my previous post, that as migration decreases, this problem will also begin to subside. But the government will, as said, continue to work on the issue.

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

Peter Hedberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! As the Minister surely understands, I still think it is very unfortunate that the investigation has been discontinued. If it had been allowed to complete its assignment, it could have pointed out concrete measures that we could have taken in the short term and in the longer term.

It may indeed be as the Minister says that municipalities need to speak more with each other. But if 58 households have been dumped or moved to a single municipality, that in itself can mean an extensive amount of work for the receiving municipality. I think it would have been desirable to proceed and look more at what the investigation began to come up with regarding increased requirements in the Social Services Act.

The Minister is certainly aware that we will monitor the issue and, hopefully, will also be able to have a continued discussion with him. I am quite certain that the municipalities will also not cease their monitoring of the issue.

I look forward to continued discussions and hope that the government will deliver some kind of result. If it does not, we may perhaps see each other in the chamber again for a slightly fresher and more spirited debate than what we have had today. I nevertheless thank the Minister for a good discussion.

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

Statsrådet Erik Slottner (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Peter Hedberg for the final contribution. I naturally welcome all members to submit both interpellations and questions to me and to press me on various issues. We will have to return to this specific issue.

The government has not been in power for very long. But we have taken initiatives in many issues that are in the very large portfolio that I have as Civil Minister. We will also have to return to measures against social dumping.

I thank Peter Hedberg and Markus Kallifatides for a very productive debate.

The interpellation debate was hereby concluded.

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