Response to interpellation 2023/24:677 on matching services
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 L wants to prioritize cost-effective, workplace-proximate measures and regular training to strengthen the work line 1. L wants to use taxpayers' money effectively and see opportunities to increase the number of participants in internships and labor market training. 2 L believes that companies can play an important role and that control should take place through tough regulations 2. 3 L argues that the government maintains the level it was the year 3 and that resources are moved to well-proven training where private actors are welcomed 3. 4 S argues that the government's budget implies massive cuts and lowered ambitions 4. 5 6 S advocates that the state should take back control and do more on its own 5 6. 6 S believes that private matching companies can be a good complement for certain groups, but that most need robust measures 6. 6 S argues that the eagerness for privatization has led to incorrect payments, bonuses, and cheating 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! Teresa Carvalho has asked me what the reason is for the government proposing a reduction of the grant for matching services by a corresponding 2 billion SEK in its budget bill. Furthermore, Teresa Carvalho has asked what I and the government have done for a consequence analysis of the fact that Arbetsförmedlingen receives reduced grants in 2024 compared to 2023, while at the same time the ambitions for the private matching actors are also significantly reduced.
The Government assesses that there is room for efficiencies within the labor market policy and intends to prioritize cost-effective measures that are close to the workplace and which contribute to a high level of job-seeking activity and transitions to regular work and studies.
The results of recent years show that the appropriation for labor market policy programs and measures has been high-budgeted. Funds for programs and measures have not been fully utilized. At the same time, the appropriation for labor market policy programs and measures 2024 is at the same level as Arbetsförmedlingen's consumption of these funds for 2023.
It is Arbetsförmedlingen that decides which measures are to be given to whom based on what is labor market policy justified. Despite that the estimated levels for matching services for 2024 have decreased as a result of the budget bill for 2024, the number of participants in the measure during the current year is expected to be in line with the levels during 2023. This means that matching services will still, aside from wage subsidies, be the measure that by a margin covers the most unemployed among the measures that Arbetsförmedlingen has at its disposal. At the same time, the government assesses that there is room to increase the number of participants in other measures such as internship and labor market training.
More unemployed people also need to educate themselves within the regular education system to obtain the skills that employers demand. For that reason, the government prioritizes investments in more places within both the universities of applied sciences and the vocational adult education. There is also an opportunity for the unemployed to study within the regular education system with activity support. The government has also, in Arbetsförmedlingen's regulation letter for 2024, given the agency a new goal concerning the agency improving the matching and supporting the skills supply on the labor market.
The Government closely follows Arbetsförmedlingen's work and the development of the labor market policy measures. A more effective, active labor market policy contributes to more transitions from unemployment to work, and it strengthens the work line.
Teresa Carvalho (S)
Madam Speaker! In many ways, the government's and the Sweden Democrats' budget bill for 2024 is a natural consequence of last year's budget. The common thread is massive cuts and lowered ambitions in labor market policy, despite the fact that the labor market is now declining. One element, however, is new, namely Johan Pehrson's notifications regarding the private matching services.
In the SD government's first budget bill, that is the budget for 2023, they cut the labor market policy by billions. This primarily concerned appropriation 1.3, where the active measures including the private matching services are located. The private matching services were pointed out as an activity that should be shielded from the cuts. They were to be expanded instead.
In its next budget bill, that is the one for the current year, 2024, the Minister for Employment has obviously reconsidered in precisely this part. Once again, we find substantial savings on labor market policy in general and the active tools for getting more unemployed people into work in particular. But this time, the private matching services are specifically pointed out as something that savings should be made on. No closer justification can be discerned. On the grounds of this change, I have asked Minister for Employment Johan Pehrson what the motive is for the government, in its budget bill, proposing a reduction of the grant for the matching services by a corresponding 2 billion kronor.
I heard the Minister for Employment's answer here, but honestly, I still do not know what the motive is. The answer can be summarized as something along the lines of that is how it becomes. But the thing is that this is not just something that becomes. It happens because Johan Pehrson is steering in that direction. Johan Pehrson is the responsible minister and has wanted to achieve this development. It is not too much to ask that the minister explains the grounds for the movement.
I also think the question is highly justified because the cuts to the private matching services within the labor market policy run completely contrary to what the Minister for Employment and the other government parties have said, done, and thought until just a few months ago.
The Minister for Employment also implies that the cuts are due to surpluses, but the minister knows that there has been money left over from the active measures because the government has put Arbetsförmedlingen on a starvation diet, which means they can neither or do not have time to refer job seekers to active measures in a sufficiently high degree. It is obviously a strategy from the government's side to stifle the job policy in this way.
Madam Speaker! The common thread in the government's and the Sweden Democrats' job policy is massive cuts, but on one point, it seems they have reconsidered. It seems to have flown a bit under the radar. It concerns the fact that last year the private matching services were to be spared from cuts – but now it is precisely them that Johan Pehrson is going to save the most on. Then one wonders if the government has woken up and realized that the eagerness for privatization has gone too far, or if they are cutting back on the private matching services because there simply isn't much else left to save on.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! The grounds for the motion were requested. The ground for the motion is about holding firm and taking responsibility for the funds that come from the taxation of the Swedish people's incomes and which we use in this chamber. Every single krona that we use in the labor market policy has been earned by the Swedish people. People have gone to work and paid taxes, and they expect that these 90 billion are used in a good way.
Madam Speaker! With that said, we are convinced that it is a good labor market policy to direct resources to vocational adult education and universities of applied sciences. It is something that is in great demand from the companies, public employers, and organizations that need new skilled employees. Then we shall provide the opportunities. That is the mission of the Public Employment Service.
Under the Social Democratic government, quite large tax cuts on labor were implemented. I was myself a contributing cause to them, and I believe, of course, that they contribute to more jobs being created. But it was also the case that major changes occurred at Arbetsförmedlingen during the Social Democratic government. One of them was that the system with private actors who can perform active matching and active placement was created. That activity is at a very high level, and it continues this year to be at the same high level as last year.
It is a correct description that we imagine that this effort can be expanded even further when we know more about its effectiveness. It continues to be a high level. We also see a need to carefully monitor how these resources are used effectively, in a legally secure manner and correctly in accordance with the intent of an effort of this type; it remains the second largest. But what I understand is that Teresa Carvalho is against this effort. Or is she for it? One must be careful not to use the term crocodile tears. I do not know who it is you are crying for. In that case, I do not turn to Madam Speaker but to the interpellor.
Teresa Carvalho (S)
Madam Speaker! I want to begin by praising Minister for Employment Johan Pehrson. He says that these savings on the private matching actors are due to respect for the taxpayers' money. Very good! It was almost a clearer and better answer than I had expected.
I also want to clarify that my question is not at all prompted by any kind of concern over the government cutting back on the private matching actors. As a Social Democrat, I am not critical of saving on this. But our alternative is to simultaneously take back control and do much more in our own capacity to equip the unemployed with the competencies and skills needed so that more people can enter employment and also set demands.
What the Sweden Democrats and the government are doing is not to reform policy but only to cut back. It is neither hacked nor ground down with Johan Pehrson. Nothing happens. That one does nothing when unemployment rises will contribute to Sweden being worse off equipped when it turns again. It is bad politics, Madam Speaker.
I also do not think the minister really answers the question of whether this is because there is not much else to save on. But it is simply rather the case that the reason is that it does not quite feel right in the gut to pour more money into the private matching services.
Let me then test another theory, which perhaps fits a bit better. Could it be that this situation is due to the fact that Arbetsförmedlingens internal audit has shown that somewhere between 140 and 400 million kronor are being paid out incorrectly to the matching companies?
Why is the government backing down and starting to save on the private matching services? That was my opening question. I want to summarize some alternatives. Is it because the right has realized that the zeal for privatization has its downsides? Is it because the government has cut so drastically on labor market policy that there is not much else left to save on? Or is it because they have taken to heart Arbetsförmedlingen's review, which shows that very much money is being paid out incorrectly to the private matching companies?
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! There it is. Take back control! That was a favorite slogan for the Tory party in the UK a few years ago. Take back control! I hope that everyone who reads this, listens to this, or in some other way takes part in this debate understands that "take back control," when Teresa Carvalho says it, is about the Social Democrats being the ones to decide over people's lives.
I, the government, and the Liberals know that companies can also play a role when it comes to delivering important services to citizens or the public according to a mandate and ensuring that resources are used effectively. We just had an interpellation debate on labor market training. Then Teresa Carvalho sang the High Song, more or less, about how fantastically good they are, and they are operated almost exclusively by companies – companies that do good things.
With that said, there are great differences between us. "Take back control" means for me to provide opportunities, establish regulations, and then control. I believe that fraud and cheating occur. Organized crime can occur within both public and private activities. We shall do what we can to make it difficult for the individuals who commit this crime by establishing tough regulations. Then we shall hunt them. We shall drive out all types of persons and representatives who, regardless of the form of activity, commit criminal acts and should be engaged in something else entirely, for example, being locked up in some cases. That is a difference between us.
Another difference concerns the concept of labor market policy, which for the Social Democrats means that Arbetsförmedlingen should always have even more resources. We do not need to be at all secretive about that. The Social Democrats argue that Arbetsförmedlingen alone can solve the problems that exist in the labor market.
We mean, for our part, that regular education is much more crucial. It is important that tens of thousands of young people do not leave school without being employable. We want to ensure that people who come to our country get to study Swedish and quickly enter employment - or into regular education if needed. It is about providing support but also setting requirements. That is the way forward.
Arbetsförmedlingen also has the opportunity to increase the requirements, and the government has shown that. I have mentioned it before. It is about ensuring that people are prepared to broaden the area where they seek jobs. One should seek jobs not only where one currently lives but also in other places, because there are vacant jobs in Sweden.
That is where we focus. Rusta och matcha has contributed in many ways, and we are now evaluating this. We are closely following the review that Arbetsförmedlingen is conducting, which I cannot anticipate, but also what other actors have delivered. As recently as this week, I had a meeting with these very actors to ensure that it works even better.
Finally, Madam Speaker: The level remains and is just as high as last year.
Teresa Carvalho (S)
Madam Speaker! If one wants to compare the Social Democrats' and the government's budgets for regular education, one is very welcome to go into our budget tables and compare. One will then see that it is not the case that the government prioritizes this more than we Social Democrats do, but rather the opposite.
But now that is not what the debate is about, rather it is about labor market policy. But in the usual order of things, the Minister for Employment tries to evade discussing just labor market policy. The difference between us that the Minister for Employment tries to account for is not entirely correctly described, I would however like to add.
If we now agree that we should not accept that money leaks out incorrectly, the difference is that we Social Democrats are prepared to do something about it, something effective, and not just say that we do not accept it and that we will build out extremely expensive control mechanisms. It is about actually taking back control and doing more on our own initiative.
For us Social Democrats, the January cooperation with among others the Liberals involved a great deal of positive but also painful compromises, and not least in the area of the labor market. The private matching companies can be, in response to the Minister for Employment's question, a good complement aimed at certain groups. But for the vast majority, it is entirely different measures that are needed, robust measures.
The zeal for privatization within labor market policy has led to the situation we see today, which can almost be compared to the Wild West. It is incorrect payments and bonuses at the expense of inadequacy and inaccessibility. It is cheating and trickery instead of accurate and means-tested measures.
Politics needs to take back control. I am not ashamed in the slightest to say it.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! There is talk of taking back control. No reflection is being made here that this is a concept used by the parties who wanted to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union. It has led to a train wreck for prosperity, welfare, and for people's opportunities to be able to live a good life in the United Kingdom. It is a rhetoric that is astonishing. I just want to have it on the record, Madam Speaker.
This interpellation concerns the private matching actors. The Government is clear that we maintain the level it was at last year. There have been notifications that it would increase.
We are looking closely at the efficiency of procurement of private activity, in this case with LOU. We look at it carefully, so that everything shall be correct. We are careful that it shall be correct when it is matters that are carried out by a public authority or by Arbetsförmedlingen itself.
It does not say so in any opposition. The difference is that the Social Democrats are against those actors, but in this interpellation, they are very concerned that a significant increase is not occurring. I do not quite understand that.
The resources we use, we instead move over to well-tested and well-researched education, such as vocational adult education, not infrequently in combination with SFI. There, we make large facilitating efforts to combine this type of education with just SFI, combined education programs.
It concerns in particular the professional higher education, which has a very good hit rate. There are also many private actors there who make great efforts to fill the skills gap. I welcome them. But I promise that we will also look at ensuring that the authorities under the government do not make any mistakes either and that the money is used effectively.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.