Response to interpellation 2022/23:289 on more accurate subsidized employment
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns making subsidized employment more cost-effective and accurate 1. L argues that the government is working towards a more efficient job policy where nystartsjobb and introduktionsjobb lead to regular employment 1. L wants to counter fraud by letting unserious actors be affected by the law's usual arm 2 and is positive about the commitment to reduce fraud and errors 3. S argues that extra services have been important to provide language and work experience 4. S wants to exclude unserious companies from future subsidies 5 and considers that there is a lack of answers on how controls should be improved during cuts at Arbetsförmedlingen 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! Sofia Amloh has asked me if I intend to take any measures to increase the accuracy of the subsidized employments. Furthermore, Sofia Amloh has asked me if I intend to take any measures to ensure a better return on the economic resources invested in this type of measures and what initiatives I intend to take to prevent over-exploitation and fraud regarding the subsidized employments.
The Government is working for a more efficient job policy and assesses that there is room for efficiencies in precisely the labor market policy. The Government prioritizes effective measures that are close to the workplace and that contribute to a high level of job-seeking activity. This involves, among other things, using existing workplace-based measures, including subsidized employment, to make the labor market policy more cost-effective and designed so that more people get into work.
Subsidized employment - if properly designed - can have clear positive effects on the opportunities for establishment in the labor market, especially for the long-term unemployed and newly arrived people.
Arbetsförmedlingen has been tasked in the agency's regulatory letter to strengthen and develop its work with labor market policy interventions and employer contacts in order to contribute to an improved and more efficient skills supply. Arbetsförmedlingen shall also specifically develop employer contacts to support those job seekers who are far from the labor market.
Since the extra services were abolished, there has been an increase regarding new-start jobs and introductory jobs, both for women and for men. These supports have a lower subsidy rate than the extra services. During 2022, the measures have also been directed to a greater extent towards job seekers with long periods without work. This is assessed by Arbetsförmedlingen to have been a contributing cause to the transitions to work increasing for the long-term unemployed.
It is central that payments from the welfare systems only occur to those who are entitled to support. The Government highlights the work against incorrect payments in the Swedish Public Employment Service's (Arbetsförmedlingen) regulation letter. The agency has, among other things, been tasked to report on the achievement of goals, measures implemented to reduce the incorrect payments, and an assessment of the effects of the measures. The work to counter incorrect payments includes both countering criminal use and errors that are not due to crime.
Since 1 December 2022, Arbetsförmedlingen has had better opportunities to deny payments to unserious actors. This includes, among other things, an expanded possibility to check employers before decisions on subsidized employments and a more efficient processing of personal data.
I will closely monitor the developments moving forward, both regarding fraud and incorrect payments and the outcome of subsidized employments, and I am prepared to take further measures if necessary for a more effective job policy.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! Every year, Arbetsförmedlingen pays out around 20 billion kronor in wage subsidies. But the risk of abuse is great, especially after the "steel bath" that Arbetsförmedlingen underwent four years ago, where every third employee was laid off and half of the local offices were closed.
Sweden invests large resources in subsidized employment with the simple argument that it yields positive effects regarding the transition to unsubsidized jobs, especially if the subsidies have targeted groups with weak ties to the labor market.
It is against that very background that I have posed my questions and this interpellation to the Minister. I would, of course, like to thank for the answer given here today, but I would still like to begin by commenting that Pehrson criticizes the extra services, which have been removed, and argues that they have been inefficient. But as far as I know, there is no specific published report or any impact assessment stating that they have been inefficient. It depends on what one compares them with. Often, the extra services are compared with the new start jobs, which this government has largely doubled.
It is a bit of a comparison of two completely different things. Comparing extra services with start-up jobs is directly unfair. The extra services are aimed at a target group that is very far from the labor market, in contrast to the start-up jobs where a fairly high proportion, if I don't remember incorrectly, over 60 percent, would have entered the labor market again even without subsidized employment. We are therefore talking about completely different target groups.
The extra services have nevertheless ensured that those who have stood very far from the labor market have come in and gained language and work experience that they did not have before. Furthermore, they have done great use in the workplaces by being a resource.
I also want to note, Madam Speaker, that Pehrson, in his response, emphasizes heavily the measures that the S-led government implemented, such as improved control conditions for Arbetsförmedlingen and mandates in the agency's regulatory letter. We naturally think that is good. But how are the controls to be secured when Arbetsförmedlingen undergoes further cuts? The Minister answers that more and better controls shall be carried out, while at the same time cuts shall be implemented. To me, that becomes quite contradictory.
Even when controls are carried out and fraud is discovered, no measures other than that the companies become liable for reimbursement are taken. Some examples of fraud are sham placements, requirements for the employee to pay back a part of their salary to the employer, and that one shows Arbetsförmedlingen that the insurance premium has been paid but neglects to pay after the subsidy has been granted.
There is a reason why the Swedish National Audit Office has initiated an audit. It is not groundless. Would it not be consistent of the Minister to also ensure that these tax funds do not go towards fraud and the exploitation of people?
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! First, I want to say that I share Sofia Amloh's passionate commitment to ensuring that the right support goes to the right person. We shall counter fraud and errors and ensure that we conduct an effective labor market policy. I am very pleased that there is support for this from Sofia Amloh and in the Riksdag.
It is correctly described that the up to 25 billion that we use for subsidized employment is an expression of a quite important thought about solidarity. We know that, for example, people who work within AB Samhall get a much more meaningful and functional everyday life. These are people who go to a job, meet colleagues, and feel that they are doing something useful. This means a lot for the individual, but it also means a lot for others around a person. It can be about children who are happy that mom or dad goes to a job, or parents who see their son or daughter doing something during the day, where the alternative would be exclusion and long-term unemployment.
The measures that have been taken by Arbetsförmedlingen and the tightenings that have been made to ensure that no labor market crime occurs around the subsidized employments or anything else are important efforts that we continue to pursue and which we are strengthening, not least through the opening of centers against labor market crime. But much depends on, as Sofia Amloh pointed out, what Arbetsförmedlingen does.
I was at Arbetsförmedlingen in Örebro yesterday and met committed colleagues who felt that they have so much they want to do to focus on ensuring that the right person gets the right support. It is about conducting an effective labor market policy with a focus on ensuring that all healthy adults work.
If one, for various reasons, has a need for a subsidized employment, it is also important that one receives that support so that one has a job to go to. We know that nothing is worse for the individual than to be unemployed for a long period.
We have made the assessment that the extra services, which in practice have meant that employers, not infrequently public, have employed large numbers of people in their operations for a very small own contribution, own cost, have had people there who have not really had the focus on getting a job at that workplace. It can be in municipalities, for example in Gävleborg, it can concern other parts of Sweden and it can concern companies.
We see, above all, that both the introductory jobs and the start-up jobs, which can have a very high subsidy rate, can nevertheless more often lead to regular employment. That is why we advocate for that form of subsidized employment instead.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! In four minutes, the Minister chooses to devote himself to talking about the different subsidized forms of employment without actually explaining, describing, or concretizing what should be done so that they hit the mark better. He has also not spoken about the fact that there are companies that use subsidized employment by cheating. They take out tax funds and use them to stack the subsidized employments on top of each other and systematically use sham employments, not pay into occupational pensions or wage dumping - year in and year out. Is that how tax funds should be used? Is that how we help people into the labor market in a more accurate way? I do not think so, and it should not be so for the Minister and the government. It cannot be effective job policy.
In the investigation report *Det ska vara lätt att göra rätt* – an investigation commissioned by the Alliance government in 2013 – there are wise proposals. I know that several different Social Democratic labor market ministers have chosen to implement some of the proposals. But why is it not an option to exclude unserious companies from future subsidization and prevent people from being exploited again?
The Minister points out that Arbetsförmedlingen during 2022 received better opportunities to deny payments to unserious actors. This is good, not least in terms of companies that have previously submitted "incorrect" information to the authority and then do so again. But the authority has interpreted it as meaning that assessments should be made in each individual case, which means that companies that have submitted false information can still be granted subsidies in future cases. Is it not clear that stricter rules are needed? Examples of fraud have emerged many times, not least in the media.
Set requirements and let the authorities carry out thorough controls so that unserious companies are punished. The abuse and over-exploitation affect serious companies negatively. The employers' organizations are just as engaged as the interpellator themselves regarding the distortion in the industry. There are few industries that have many subsidized employees, while other industries have none at all. Why not set those requirements, why not have just collective agreement-like requirements, to ensure that the Swedish model is protected all the way?
If one is to be tough and hard against the unemployed, I think the Minister should also be that towards the companies that exploit people and cheat with tax funds. It would be consistent.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! We are making very large investments in both the Swedish Economic Crime Authority, the police, and the prosecutors, who follow up on these shady figures who engage in crime in the area. It is not unknown that there are people who are currently temporarily detained awaiting trial or to be permanently locked up who have engaged in that type of crime. One must hold back the money and ensure that unserious actors do not get new chances to conduct that type of activity based partly on subsidized employment, or in the worst case, almost exclusively. They must not be allowed to continue.
The ten employment agencies I met in Örebro yesterday were fully convinced that it is an important task to manage the state's resources and ensure that all effort is directed toward those who are entitled to a subsidized employment at a serious company, a serious organization, or municipality. It should not just be a matter of hiring hundreds for extra services but then having no greater thought that it should lead to regular work. They follow up on this closely and are incredibly committed.
In the question regarding the police, we must ensure that the unserious actors are hit by the usual arm of the law, that is, they shall be prosecuted and receive a punishment for the crime they have committed. That is how we solve this.
I assure Sofia Amloh that I have no other intention than to increase the efficiency and power in ensuring that the right company gets the right support and the right person gets the right subsidy. The individual shall receive the right unemployment insurance at the right time or follow instructions for either education or work. This also means moving. It is something we will pursue with all our might. I welcome that there is such a strong commitment from Sofia Amloh to rectify the problems.
Those I met yesterday feel an enormous relief, now that the spring sun is appearing even in the chamber, because unemployment is decreasing. It is fantastic.
There may be hope in Swedish business regarding the efforts being made to tackle crime, which also hits serious companies terribly hard, and also the investments being made in long-term sustainable energy policy, where investments are to be made throughout Sweden - and that electrification can provide power.
There can be much positive in this which means that despite a tough situation in our world with war in Europe and high inflation where everyone is becoming poorer, there is hope. It also means that unemployment is decreasing, which I think is worth highlighting, and it leads to the fact that the employment agencies in Örebro or elsewhere can focus even more on those people who unfortunately are still unemployed.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! I believe the question remains as I have posed it repeatedly and have touched upon, and I am trying to get more clarity than the answers that have been given so far.
The work against fraud and crime should be done by other authorities, absolutely. But it actually stands completely free for the government - as far as I can see, there are no obstacles to it - to ensure that the companies that have committed these obvious errors do not end up on Arbetsförmedlingen's table again to be reassessed and go through the same process - where then one should not take into account how many times they have previously cheated and used tax money, not to get more people into work but to exploit the system. The government should be able to do something about that, and it does not need to go into any other larger loops than that.
In the investigation I mentioned earlier regarding making it easy to do the right thing, there are also proposals about sanction fees. But the only thing that exists today is that one is only liable for repayment. One has to go through the entire process again, can be granted it again and can repeat it.
I think there is more to be done here. But since the cuts at Arbetsförmedlingen nevertheless remain and are to be implemented, there are not enough answers on how the controls will become more numerous and better in order to get a grip on these companies.
That is why I mean that it would be effective job policy to use tax funds for what they are for, for the people who actually need them, because we need more people in jobs - even though unemployment has gone down, which is good.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! I am directly positive about the commitment that Sofia Amloh shows here to ensure that we reduce cheating, errors, and laxity in the system. I think that needs to be embraced.
I will really take another look at all those measures and even more the authority dialogue that I have with Arbetsförmedlingen to ensure that every single one of its nearly 11,000 fantastic employees who sit in offices all over Sweden and wear Arbetsförmedlingen's proud emblem gets a chance and opportunity to drill into this so that one does not incorrectly provide support in the form of subsidized employment.
A subsidized employment - which is so important for socially vulnerable people, fragile people, so that they can get a better foothold or perhaps take their first step into the labor market - should not be granted incorrectly. And it is not any employment service provider who wants to do that, but it is in that case if some fraudster returns and one misses it.
But now it is easier to do the right thing. A somewhat increased appropriation has been granted during the current year in the bill that was presented yesterday.
I also want to say that when we are more successful and when the hope in Sweden is the light at the end of the tunnel - and the light is not a train rushing towards us with a lot of misery with crime and a wrecked energy policy and unclear rules for what applies from the government but instead one feels clarity - it also means that those who work at Arbetsförmedlingen today have tens of thousands fewer unemployed and can focus even more on those people who unfortunately are still unemployed right now.
Let us return to the question! I do not believe that Sofia Amloh will in any way let go of the question of an efficient, legally secure, and fraud- and negligence-free employment agency, especially not when it concerns the companies that are granted subsidized employment.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.