Response to interpellation 2023/24:653 on the Institute for Human Rights
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M considers that the role of the Institute for Human Rights remains and that the government sees it as central to monitoring human rights 1. M emphasizes the importance of an independent position 2, that the government takes the assignment seriously 2 as well as that one should strengthen and listen to organizations for disability rights 2. M intends to increase the organizations' influence through systematization and follow-up 3 4 and includes persons with disabilities to shift the focus from perpetrators to crime victims 3. S argues that an independent institute for continuous monitoring is lacking and that the UN recommends that one strengthens the national institute 5. S considers that there is a worrying trend regarding disability issues 6 and that disability rights organizations need more resources as the state grant has been eroded 7. S sees the institute as an important tool to highlight people's equal value and argues that the government should take constructive criticism from an independent body 8.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Per-Arne Håkansson has asked the Minister for Equality and Assistant Minister for Employment if she intends, within her area of responsibility, to take any initiatives so that a national strategy shall be developed to strengthen the work on rights for persons with disabilities.
Per-Arne Håkansson has also asked the Minister for Equality and Associate Minister for Employment if she assesses that the existence of the Institute for Human Rights is secured from a long-term perspective and if she intends to take any measures.
The interpellation has been handed over to me.
The government's disability policy is based on Sweden's international commitments on human rights, including the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and is part of the work towards a more equal society where people's different backgrounds or circumstances shall not determine the possibility of participation in society.
For the follow-up of the national goal for disability policy, there is a strategy for systematic follow-up of disability policy that applies during the period 2021-2031. The strategy implies that the follow-up of disability policy shall be carried out by 29 agencies and that the Agency for Participation shall provide these agencies with support.
The strategy also makes it possible to follow the development and to assess whether the measures taken contribute to the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In this way, development and progress can be followed while deficiencies are identified.
The government's ambition during the mandate period is to, based on the results of the follow-up, prepare a specific action plan for disability policy that can be decided in 2026. This is an important future work that involves the entire government.
In the follow-up of the national goal for disability policy, we have been able to observe progress, among other things, regarding the work to eliminate deficiencies in accessibility within several areas of society. But we can simultaneously observe that the living conditions for persons with disabilities, taken as a whole, continue to be worse than for the rest of the population, even though there are differences between different groups of persons with disabilities.
We know, for example, that people with disabilities are more vulnerable to violence compared to the rest of the population. The Government has therefore given the Agency for Participation several assignments, including mapping and developing support material on violence against children and young people with disabilities, as well as conducting an in-depth mapping of honor-related violence.
The government's ambitions in the area of mental health are also clear. The preventive and promotional work shall be strengthened, the number of suicides shall decrease, and the care and support for persons with mental ill-health shall become more accessible and equitable. In the work, a new national strategy in the area of mental health and suicide prevention shall be developed. Prior to the development of the new strategy, 24 agencies have participated in producing background material, including the Agency for Participation.
Simultaneously, the reform of the leisure card is underway to provide children and young people with increased access to an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others, which naturally includes children and young people with disabilities.
The government has also taken several measures in the school area to ensure that students receive effective support measures at the right time, including through large investments to give schools better opportunities to employ more special education teachers and establish more special teaching groups.
Regarding the question of the Institute for Human Rights, I can state that the institute fulfills an important function for the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The goal of the human rights policy is to ensure full respect for Sweden's international commitments on human rights. In the budget bill for 2024, it is stated that the government considers that the Institute for Human Rights plays a central role in the work by, from a holistic perspective, monitoring, investigating, and reporting on how human rights are respected and realized in Sweden. In the bill, it is clearly stated that the institute's role and mandate remain.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Social Services Minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall for the answer to the interpellation I submitted to Minister for Equality and Deputy Minister for Employment Paulina Brandberg.
This was intended as a follow-up to the debate I had with Paulina Brandberg here in the chamber at the beginning of the mandate period. At that time, the question of the continued existence of the Institute for Human Rights was raised. It was established on 1 January 2022. The Institute, which is based in Lund, was created after extensive investigation and preparatory work in the Committee on the Constitution. When the decision was made, the Moderaterna reserved themselves against it.
Even though we in Sweden in many ways have a very good reputation when it comes to human rights globally and have been proactive and involved in a number of international conventions that have been developed through the UN's auspices and in other contexts, and even though we have had bodies such as the Equality Ombudsman and the Children's Ombudsman for several decades and have had the position of the Parliamentary Ombudsman since 1809, we have lacked an independent institute to continuously monitor the work on human rights. It was this that formed the basis for the initiative and the decision that led to the establishment.
A year ago, the Sweden Democrats, who were previously involved in making the decision on the formation, stated that they wanted to abolish the institute in question. I have also not seen anyone within this party who has contradicted that.
The Moderates are the largest government party, and the Sweden Democrats' influence is crucial for the government's work. From this perspective, I saw the institute's future as extremely uncertain. It was probably not just me who felt that way.
I noted that an open letter was received from 49 organizations in Sweden regarding a clear position from the government that the institute should be allowed to continue its important work with unchanged resources and in an independent position.
Among the organizations acting at the time were Amnesty, Svenska FN-förbundet, Hörselskadades Riksförbund, RFSU, Unicef Sverige, Verdandi and Äldreupproret, all with voluntary, ideologically committed representatives behind them.
It is the independent position that is central to the institute's activities. It shall be able to act, monitor, and contribute to ensuring rights in Sweden in the long term in accordance with the principles adopted in Paris in 1993, where Sweden participated.
It also appears there what tasks such an institution should have, the importance of a broad representation from civil society, and also what working methods can be used. It is based on that work that I, in my interpellation, turned to Camilla Waltersson Grönvall.
This work has just begun. We see that reports are coming in. As recently as March, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Geneva took up the issue, and the Institute for Human Rights was asked to report on the situation in Sweden. Issues were raised regarding the fact that the education level among people with disabilities in Sweden is lower, unemployment is higher, economic vulnerability is greater, and mental and physical health is poorer.
Camilla Waltersson Grönvall says here that an action plan is required and that it should be ready by 2026. I think that things need to happen until then. Does Camilla Waltersson Grönvall intend to take the initiative to follow up on the work until then based on the criticism that has been put forward? Can we count on the institute's work continuing as intended?
Ewa Pihl Krabbe (S)
Madam Speaker! On March 11-12 this year, the government was questioned by the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Geneva regarding how Sweden complies with the rights of persons with disabilities, which the interpellor has set out. It is a rather sharp criticism that is directed at Sweden. Now, after its review, the UN has issued recommendations to Sweden. I intended to focus on a couple of points.
Funktionsrätt Sverige, which I believe brings together 53 organizations within the disability movement, says in a comment: "The UN confirms our view of a negative development in several areas for persons with disabilities in Sweden. Now we need once and for all a disability rights policy that is based on rights and that contains concrete reforms that make a real difference in people's everyday lives."
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has applied in Sweden since 2009, which means that the Swedish state has committed itself to living up to the content of the convention. But the convention has not been incorporated into Swedish legislation. The UN emphasizes in its report that the convention needs to become law in Sweden. There are many examples within schools, in the labor market, and in healthcare where one could begin the work with legislation that protects those persons who have a disability.
Another part that is addressed in the report and which I intended to dwell on is the question of strengthening the role and funding of disability organizations. It is needed to achieve a more inclusive society. I will return to that, Madam Speaker.
First, I would like to draw attention to some quotes from Chairperson Rosemary Kayess's closing speech at the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities meeting in Geneva this spring. She says, among other things, that Sweden has a wealth of resources to draw upon for its law and policy reform. One such resource is the high level of expertise from Swedish organizations for persons with disabilities. It is strong, and this has been shown throughout this entire reporting process. She strongly urges Sweden to carefully consult and actively involve these organizations in your reform agenda. The National Institute for Human Rights is also a potential resource, but it needs to be strengthened and have an expanded mandate with sufficient resources.
I am content with pointing out these two areas. It is strongly recommended by the UN monitoring committee to utilize all the expertise that exists within the Swedish disability rights movement, that is to say, that the disability rights movement must be taken more seriously in Swedish politics. Consequently, one must also take greater responsibility for its funding.
The disability rights movement now has approximately 188 million in state grants, and it perhaps turns over 600 million. But then there are very many other things that it receives money from: donations, lotteries and such. The committee makes the recommendation to strengthen the national institute for human rights.
Therefore, I want to ask the Minister: How does the Minister view these recommendations? Will the government take the criticism to heart and begin a closer collaboration with the disability organizations, and will you strengthen the institute in accordance with the recommendations?
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank Per-Arne Håkansson for the question and for the genuine commitment that the member has for human rights to be respected and ensured across the entire world.
I can assure the member that what was in my initial response is also the answer that applies. It appears very clearly in the government's bill and in the budget submitted in this bill that the institute's role and mandate remain. I also share the member's view that it is extremely important that the institute has an independent position.
I can also tell you that before, among other things, the meeting in Geneva with precisely the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities held on March 11-12, I had extensive meetings with the organizations that were present there and that had also met the committee. The institute was naturally among them. It had also prepared a special report for this meeting. It was part of the material that the government prepared itself with when we met this committee.
I would also like to take the opportunity to thank Ewa Pihl Krabbe for her commitment to people with disabilities. I can think that it is sad. We note that despite being one of the world's leading welfare countries, we see that we have an overrepresentation of people with disabilities when it concerns, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, violence and various types of vulnerability. The situation in school is obvious. That was also raised by the member. It is also about the labor market. There is a great deal to be done there.
I take my assignment with utmost seriousness, and the government takes the assignment very seriously. But it is also important to note that the data for the reporting period that we submitted to the UN in Geneva is also based on the previous mandate periods.
I do not say this with any intention other than to state that a rather heavy responsibility falls on all of us. This perhaps applies particularly to the parties that lead the governments. I feel a great humility before these issues. I believe it is good that also the former government parties feel a great humility before the report we handed over and the shortcomings that were contained therein.
Just as Member Pihl Krabbe says, it is very important that we strengthen and listen to our various organizations that work with disability rights. I take them very seriously. I do so, among other things, tomorrow when I once again meet the disability delegation, which I am very happy to meet a number of times per year. I also try to use it as a way to show how the entire government is involved in working for strengthened rights for persons with disabilities.
It is truly the responsibility of the entire government, just as it has been previously. This means, for example, that school issues are an important part for the Ministry of Education. Another example is, of course, labor market issues linked to the Ministry of Employment.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you also for this answer, Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, and for the response to the posts so far! I perceive that there is a commitment from Camilla Waltersson Grönvall to address these issues.
I still believe it is important that we follow up on this. There is also another side to the matter, namely the unanimous criticism directed from organizations and auditing institutions.
As late as today, we in the Committee on the Constitution had a visit from the Institute for Human Rights, which presented its annual report for 2024, which I believe the government has also received a good insight into. It is emphasized there how the situation for human rights has regressed, especially regarding issues of disability, since approximately 2013 and that this has been a trend throughout Europe. It is a worrying trend and a signal to be taken most seriously.
In the debate, we often highlight the importance of stricter penalties and strong state interventions in various contexts to curb crime and violence, but at the same time, we also need to include the issues of human rights. It is about the institutions and how they function there. It is about the correctional services, where we constantly receive signals about a difficult situation. It is also about everyday issues such as digitalization, for example, how e-identification should be handled from a perspective where everyone can participate.
The Institute for Human Rights also calls for us to review the possibilities of creating an updated strategy for human rights. The latest was adopted ten years ago, and since then, a whole series of reforms have been developed. Among others, the Convention on the Rights of the Child has been incorporated into Swedish law and the Institute for Human Rights has been formed. The importance of increasing knowledge and awareness of human rights is also emphasized. I think that these are issues to have on the agenda moving forward.
I want to ask Camilla Waltersson Grönvall how she views the fact that this needs to be followed up and that it needs to happen continuously. And with all respect for the action plan that is underway until 2026, I believe that many are impatient and want to see things happen in this direction earlier than that.
Ewa Pihl Krabbe (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer and the commitment.
For very many years, in my previous role as a politician in the region and county councils, I have had the privilege of working very intensively together and in dialogue with the disability movement. I am deeply impressed by their work in constantly, and sometimes against the wind, putting forward their views to improve things for their many times very severely affected members.
They do, however, need more financial resources to be able to take into account the members' interests and carry out their interest-political work towards the duty-bearers, i.e., politicians in the municipality, region, and parliament and other decision-makers. As I said earlier, they also have collections, lotteries, and donations as sources of income, but it is not enough, which the UN has also noted.
The state grant has been eroded over the last 15 years, which has resulted in worsened conditions for the movement's work. We must all accept that. In my home region of Skåne, the regional grant allocations of recent years have resulted in, for example, Funktionsrätt Skåne now being back at 2009 levels for grant allocations. It is not about strengthening the organizations, which the UN thinks one should do. In the election campaign, seven out of eight parties declared that they wanted to increase the state grants.
My final question to the Minister is whether the Minister considers that the disability organizations should be given increased influence and more dialogue, and also a higher degree of funding in accordance with the UN's recommendations.
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin by saying that I too am deeply impressed by these organizations, but perhaps above all by all these relatives who daily struggle and work with people who need so much. These parents, siblings and relatives in different ways do a fantastic, great job.
I have the intention to really try to increase these organizations' influence. Therefore, I have also tried to design the Delegation for Functional Impairments in such a way that there is always an opportunity to submit questions and to influence which questions one wants to discuss with which minister.
An example of this was a very good meeting where Civil Minister Erik Slottner discussed precisely the digital challenges, for example the e-identification which Member Håkansson mentioned. In order to be able to participate in a digital society, this is an important issue. We must be honest and say that such a society also implies conditions for increased participation, but there are obvious risks and difficulties that we must identify in order to ensure that all people can be included.
It is exactly how I think one should have this dialogue: One asks those who are affected and those who have insight into and understanding of what this means.
I can assure the members that I am not a supporter of shelf-warmers and a lot of talk. I am a person of action and naturally also want a major change to occur. This notwithstanding, it is important that there is a systematic approach and that we constantly follow up on what is happening in order to be able to implement the right measures.
I am also pleased that we, from the government, in our work to shift the focus from perpetrators to crime victims, include precisely persons with disabilities because they are so overrepresented when it comes to being crime victims. In that shift in perspective, when we now both tighten sentences and strengthen the entire crime-preventive work, it is very clear that these are issues that will provide persons with disabilities with better conditions.
I want to once again point out that on March 22, 2024, we received the concluding observations and recommendations for Sweden from the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We have therefore just received them, and they need to be translated so that we have a greater opportunity to familiarize ourselves with what they entail. This preparation has just begun within the Government Offices. I and the government will return with how we will meet these recommendations in different ways.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank you for the contributions and the discussion regarding these issues. The questions span a broad area. It is partly the question of the Institute for Human Rights' continued existence, and partly the criticism that was recently voiced in Geneva regarding disability rights issues for the Swedish context. It is part of the tasks that the Institute for Human Rights has to follow up on and work with.
But it is about the broad perspective, the equal value and rights of all people, and how we can strengthen knowledge and awareness of human rights and issues regarding this in Swedish society. I see the institute as an important tool to highlight that.
It is also in the nature of the matter that there should be an independent body that can provide sharp criticism of the sitting government. The sitting government may then take it as constructive criticism, out of concern that there should be improvements in these issues of human rights in the long run.
My hope is that this discussion is another step on the way toward us being able to strengthen these issues in the long term and thus that the resistance that has previously existed perhaps will no longer be heard, because this is proving to be a way forward to strengthen these issues.
I hope that we will return to this. We will, of course, follow up on the proposals that Camilla Waltersson Grönvall has presented here, to see if they are correct and if they lead in the right direction.
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, the interpellants Per-Arne Håkansson and Ewa Pihl Krabbe, for your commitment to these important issues!
I want to take this opportunity to highlight that there were also some positive things in the response we received from the committee on March 22. They welcomed, among other things, precisely that Sweden has established the Institute for Human Rights, that we have established an interdepartmental working group with the task of assisting in the implementation of the disability policy, that we have incorporated the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and that we have decided on a strategy for systematic follow-up of the disability policy.
I perceived this from the committee as that it is extremely important that there is a systematic approach in how one follows up and how one evaluates, in order to also be able to ensure that the right measures are taken. But naturally, we have also received a number of recommendations covering a number of policy areas. They are being prepared, as I described a short while ago, within the Government Offices.
An important part of this governance is that we must be able to carry this out by following up and that the results of the measures must be able to be assessed. In that case, it is also important that we as politicians are good role models and work together to see how we can carry this out in the best possible way.
I would therefore like to conclude by thanking you for the debate.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.