Response to interpellation 2022/23:422 on the possibility for municipalities to cooperate

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Response to interpellation

Madam Speaker! I have asked the Minister for Finance how she will act to ensure that necessary changes to the Public Access to Information and Secrecy Act are made to increase the possibilities for cooperation. The interpellation has been handed over to me.

I want to first just say that trust in the public sector and in common institutions is one of the cornerstones of a well-functioning society. It is fundamental for the citizens' trust that the public sector fulfills its obligations in an efficient and legally secure manner. In order to be able to do this, the authorities need access to data that is correct, current, and relevant. Data that is available at one authority can be crucial for another authority to be able to perform its mission in an efficient way. An increased exchange of information between authorities is therefore a high-priority issue for the government.

A well-functioning exchange of information between authorities is often a prerequisite for different forms of fraud, regulatory violations, and crime to be prevented, investigated, and combated. The same applies to preventing and detecting, among other things, incorrect payments.

Authorities that come into contact with children and young people also need to be able to share and receive relevant information in order to be able to take measures to protect children and young people who risk being harmed. This can involve children who are exploited in criminal contexts, where authorities and other actors need to act to prevent the children from being lured into a lifestyle characterized by crime.

An investigator has been tasked with evaluating the possibilities for increased information exchange between authorities, municipalities, and unemployment insurance funds. The purpose was to ensure that these actors have access to the information they need to make correct decisions regarding benefits from the welfare systems and to counter crime in the labor market. The Government Offices are currently preparing proposals that the investigator submitted in the departmental report Utökat informationsutbyte.

The Government has also decided on additional directives for the Investigation on improved opportunities to exchange information with law enforcement agencies. The additional directives mean, among other things, that the investigator shall consider how a general rule can be introduced in the secrecy legislation, which means that the agencies and other actors covered by the assignment shall be able to exchange information with law enforcement agencies when needed to prevent and combat crime.

Furthermore, the government sees a need to take an even broader grip on the issue of the authorities' possibilities for information exchange. Therefore, the government considers that the prerequisites for a general regulation that enables a greater exchange of information should be investigated. Shortly, an inquiry will be appointed which will be given a broad mandate to strengthen the possibilities for cooperation and information exchange between authorities.

In summary, I fully share Eva Lindh's description of the problem and of the trade-offs that must be made. I can simultaneously state that the government is already acting in several ways to ensure that the authorities will be able to exchange information to a significantly greater extent than today. I am convinced that this can be done while ensuring that individuals' privacy is given a satisfactory protection.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! In order to be able to combat crime, cooperation between different parts of society is required. Today, the criminal gangs take advantage of the fact that authorities do not have sufficient opportunity to cooperate. The criminals have no secrecy.

With my background as a social worker, I have long seen the need to develop the possibilities for cooperation and to review the secrecy legislation. It is frustrating not to be able to support a child or youth in the best way with early interventions because we cannot cooperate.

It is naturally important that there is a secrecy legislation that protects personal privacy in our contacts with authorities. But the value of privacy must be weighed against the possibility of detecting and combating crime and ensuring that children and vulnerable persons receive the best help. In that regard, secrecy is unfortunately an all-too-great obstacle in many cases today.

We are now seeing an escalating crime wave in Sweden. Many sentencing increases have been developed, as well as many new ways for the police. The number of people within the police has also increased. That is good. But if we are truly to be able to break the gangs and tackle the increasing crime, it requires that we also stop the new recruitment with early interventions so that those who are about to be drawn into crime do not do so. When different parts of society hold their own piece of the puzzle, it is crucial that they can cooperate. That is when we can get the best interventions. A unified picture can mean that the right support is given to prevent a child or a youth from ending up in difficulties or crime. When it comes to vulnerable children, the care for the child's best interests can sometimes be prevented because information exchange cannot occur and correctly tailored interventions are given.

Secrecy also affects the possibility of tackling the crimes that threaten the sense of community, for example welfare crime in the form of incorrect payments and fraud. Now, the welfare payments of municipalities and regions are also being attacked, for example to health centers, HVB homes, sheltered housing, and foster homes. When no permit is required to establish an operation, there is an increased risk.

Some health centers have been shown to send false invoices to the region or tamper with medical records. It is difficult to detect this type of fraud and inaccuracies. Therefore, it is required that we can cooperate. An increased risk of detection is demonstrably a good way to prevent criminal acts. Here, the risk of detection is low, and in that case, changed confidentiality rules can facilitate.

Those who want to exploit society or involve children in crime, as has been said, have no right to privacy. We need to change the legislation so that we can do something about it. Just as Minister of Justice Strömmer said, an investigation has been prepared, and my question is completely honest: When can we have a changed legislation in place so that we can see better cooperation? I really want to know that.

It is urgent now. So much negative is happening. Therefore, we need to help each other to curb the crimes and get young people on the right side.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! Many thanks to Eva Lindh for both highlighting these important issues and describing them in the light of her own practical experience of working with social prevention!

I completely agree with the introduction regarding secrecy barriers. We must, of course, safeguard personal privacy, but secrecy barriers whose primary effect is that authorities in a good society cannot share information with one another in order to effectively help children and young people away from a beginning criminal path – or for that matter, other major concerns that may be linked to it – are rules that we must change and remove. That is one thing.

Proposals will come at the end of October regarding this, i.e., a slightly simplified interaction between the police, social services, and school. We added supplementary directives when we took office to really clarify that we want a new main rule that says "share" and not "do not share."

The goal that I have heard many social workers, teachers, and police officers agree on when they describe this need is that they want to achieve an arrangement where police, school, and social services can sit around the same table and pour out everything they know, also ask other actors who hold important information if they can come to the table and share what they know about a specific individual, and then jointly implement interventions with great precision.

With full awareness that there are privacy aspects, not least within social services, youth psychiatry or whatever it may be, it is the target goal that we work from. I am convinced that we will be able to find a way that accommodates the interest in being able to share information and work together precisely and powerfully in a completely different way to meet these concerns without compromising important privacy values.

The second main current, one could say, is the broader issue of sharing information between authorities. There, I also think it is very good that Eva Lindh raises the extensive economic crime which now, even to a greater extent than narcotics, constitutes a main source of income for the criminal networks. There are, of course, all the noted and terrible frauds against elderly people, but there are also systematic frauds against our welfare systems. I also noted the latest about criminal actors apparently opening health centers.

We spoke in the Committee on Justice earlier today about defector activities. I know that municipalities purchase those services from companies, many of them serious, but that there also, actors have found their way in who in different ways have connections to criminal networks with extensive money laundering and an unpleasant infiltration of the world of sports with various intricate ways of laundering money.

The bottom line is that there must be better cooperation and a different interaction at all levels. The reason why this ended up with the Minister for Finance is perhaps that the other main stream here is an investigation that has been conducted with the Ministry of Finance as the client, which aims at everything concerning maintaining law and order in the public welfare system. There, a payment authority will arrive in the near future – great! Sharp proposals will come from the Ministry of Finance during the autumn regarding tearing down some of the confidentiality barriers. We will want to go even further and therefore return with an additional investigation which shall, to an even greater extent, move the positions so that all actors in the public sector who must be able to share information in order to protect the taxpayers' and citizens' money and, in the long run, the trust in the public welfare, get the tools they need to be able to work effectively together.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Minister of Justice, for the answer!

It is really so that many of the times I have been most frustrated when I have worked as a social worker is when we have a complicated or complex problem picture and we need to be more who can collaborate, when I as a school counselor or a social secretary feel that there are others we need to collaborate with and we feel great concern for a child or a youth.

We do have a paragraph that applies if there is a risk that someone will enter into crime, but what we are talking about here are the early interventions so that the child or youth does not even get there. That is what we mostly want – that one should not even be in the risk zone of ending up in crime. There we need to find better ways to cooperate, and there, secrecy is precisely a real key issue.

I also know that we have come quite far when it comes to looking at labor-related crime, which is also a terrible crime because it exploits people in vulnerable positions. It is hideous images one gets of what is happening. It is about the people but also about large sums, as the Minister for Justice is pointing out. It is believed that this costs approximately 26 billion in lost tax revenue.

Welfare crime also costs large sums - some estimate 9 billion and some estimate 18. Regardless, it is very large sums that we are talking about.

All of this is fundamentally about the fact that we cannot cooperate and talk to each other. We are sidelined when we do not have the opportunity to talk and cooperate.

Then it is obvious that those who are not affected by an issue should also not know. We should also be stronger there, I think, because it means that even if one finds out something within a certain agency branch, one should obviously not be there looking out of respect for privacy. It should not go anywhere other than where it is needed. But in order to save children and save young people, it is important to review this.

I also think that more and more people have been highlighting the need to look at secrecy. One sees that there is a lot that can be done individually, but that it is secrecy that is the obstacle. I think that has become clearer and clearer. Since I have been involved in this issue, I have followed how the conversation and discussion about it has shifted.

Now there was an investigation on the table where changes could have been made, because even though the investigation that the new government has appointed will come with a report or its memorandum at the end of October, it is not the case that it becomes law then. What is the thinking here? Is there any way to proceed where one can start? If one could make reality of the investigation that was completed last year, one could make concessions and changes that could already now make a difference regarding quite large parts, is my assessment, of the obstacles that we are talking about. Then one could take a step further when the new government's investigation arrives. What is the timetable?

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Eva Lindh, for the follow-up questions!

To first take the timeline, one can say that the investigation that came with the results of its work earlier, the one that the Ministry of Finance ordered, is complete and will lead to two main streams.

One is a bill to the Riksdag, and the intention from the government's side is to come to the Riksdag now during the autumn with that bill based on that investigation.

That investigation has also resonated a bit more broadly, one could say, regarding additional needs than those explicitly covered by the mandate, in order to be able to go even further than what the investigator actually proposed. In those parts, the government's assessment is that we must conduct a supplementary investigation, hopefully over a shorter period, to obtain sufficient grounds to be able to realize everything that the investigator pointed out. We shall also do that in the near future, so it will now become a sequence with sharp legislation to the Riksdag - or proposals to the Riksdag that will become legislation - and the next step in light of what the investigator points out.

In addition to that, an investigation is also underway. It is the one that will be released in October, and it specifically concerns the relationship with the law enforcement authorities. There, I believe we will land very much in the middle of what Eva Lindh highlights between social services, school, and police at the local level, and how to bring in youth psychiatry, healthcare, and other actors in an effective way without compromising the privacy values that they, of course, must safeguard. I have reason to believe, because I have received a small preview, that that is going to be able to become really good and very offensive.

I also take note of what Eva Lindh describes and perceive that a small shift has occurred, in a positive sense. Previously, perhaps different professions entered with quite different starting points in these issues, given that one's primary mandate is to monitor different interests. I think that this to a large extent is starting to disappear because we all realize that we are in the same boat, not least when it concerns young people on the slide. Without great transparency between those who are involved in the matter and can influence the situation, it will be very difficult for us as a society to effectively take responsibility for and improve the existence of, not least children and young people in vulnerable situations.

This consensus, I hope and believe, will also characterize the political handling of the proposals. I envision that we will be able to achieve very broad majorities in Sweden's Riksdag for these proposals. I do not assess this to be a party-politically divisive issue, but here I believe that we will be able to find rules of the game that will hold for a long time, regardless of shifts in government power. I believe there is a broad insight into the importance of taking these measures and creating long-term solutions.

I also want to say last of all that another important starting point when changing the rules is that it must be easy to do the right thing for the person who is concretely going to use the rules. I believe this is perhaps one of the major problems with today's regulation. One experiences, at least as practitioners in the field, that the risk of making a mistake is great, and therefore perhaps one refrains from acting in a situation where one actually could do so—because one does not feel a sufficiently clear legal basis for the measures and steps one would like to take. We must change this, and I feel that we are on our way to doing so now.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! We find ourselves in an exceptional time. Sweden faces great challenges when it comes to combating crime and criminality in all its forms. Just as the Minister for Justice touched upon in the response to my interpellation, I believe that what is truly threatened is the social contract and the trust in our society – and in that regard, we are in a bad position. Everything we can do to prevent the wave of crime that is now escalating is therefore important to do, and in that, this is a very important piece of the puzzle.

I look forward to receiving these proposals so that we can actually move forward. I mean seriously that it is important that we highlight this and do something about it. I know that there are many out there who would really like to do more, but just as the Minister for Justice also points out, many feel a concern about not doing the right thing and therefore stay a bit on the safe side and do not share information despite the fact that there might be some possibility to do so.

We must put an end to this, because cooperation is incredibly important to maintain trust and save all those children and young people who risk being forced into crime. We must secure them, even for our own sake. When these crimes occur, it creates an incredible amount of fear and insecurity. But it is also about saving serious companies so that they do not become unserious. There is, therefore, a breadth when it comes to why this is important to do.

I really hope that good proposals will come so that we can address secrecy and ensure cooperation moving forward, for the sake of society.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! Once again, thank you, Eva Lindh, for giving us the opportunity to discuss these important issues today! I truly take note of Eva Lindh's great commitment to the issues and everything important that has been highlighted in substance in this discussion.

I am fully aware that, despite everything, it is a matter of difficult trade-offs and that different actors, given their primary professional mandates, may come in with slightly different starting points or points of emphasis in these issues. But I think that when we look forward, it feels very promising to know that there is still a much greater consensus regarding these issues today than there perhaps ever has been – between police, teachers, social workers and other actors who are present primarily around children and young people and who see the need for us to remove obstacles so that all the good forces in society can work effectively and together to create a proper pressure in all processes that can affect the situation for children and young people who find themselves in vulnerable positions.

I also perceive that this, which we both have touched upon during the course of the discussion, is reflected in the political atmosphere here in the chamber. I envision that we will be able to do this with broad support both from the citizens and from the various professions affected by this legislation and, as it is called, across the aisle here in the chamber, across block boundaries, with broad support for important reforms. Indeed, there is no doubt whatsoever that it is not possible to effectively implement measures against children and young people if there are no real conditions for good cooperation between all the different actors who can influence the situation. I believe that we can achieve this with joint forces, in the near future.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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