Response to interpellation 2023/24:707 on the funding of the Finnish Cooperation

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! Åsa Eriksson has asked me if I intend to take any measures so that the financial coordination associations shall also continue to have funding and be able to expand their activities.

The so-called Finsamlagen makes it possible for Försäkringskassan, Arbetsförmedlingen, regions and municipalities to finance coordinated rehabilitation efforts through coordination associations.

The Act on Social Insurance has remained largely unchanged since it entered into force in 2004. In recent years, several instances have expressed views that the Act on Social Insurance needs to be reviewed. The Swedish Pensions Agency, ISF, has specifically pointed out the need to review the financing of the coordination bodies' activities in the form of the cooperating parties' allocation of funds and other financing such as funds from the European Social Fund, ESF.

The Government has therefore, Mr. Speaker, on March 27, 2024, given Försäkringskassan a mandate to analyze the need for changes in the Finsamlagen and submit legislative proposals if changes are deemed justified to achieve a purposeful use of resources and effective support for persons who need coordinated rehabilitation measures to return to work.

The assignment shall be carried out in consultation with Arbetsförmedlingen, Socialstyrelsen and Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, as well as in dialogue with the coordination associations and the National Network for Coordination Associations, NNS.

In addition to this assignment, ISF has been tasked with evaluating the effects of coordination fund-financed interventions on individuals' livelihood situations.

Both assignments shall be reported by no later than 2 December 2024.

I am very much looking forward to receiving the reports of these two assignments in December.

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

Åsa Eriksson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to start by thanking you for the assignments that the Minister concluded his answer with. They have actually been given following our latest debate on the coordination associations, which my colleague Eva Lindh initiated. It is absolutely excellent that the authority has received the assignment and that ISF shall look into this with follow-up. I also look forward to the reporting of those assignments.

Already in March last year, 2023, we, Mr. Speaker, had an interpellation debate here in the chamber about the follow-up system SUS, whose purpose was to follow individuals in collaborative efforts, how they develop over time and to what extent efforts are effective and lead to self-sufficiency.

Already then we noted that since January 2023 there was no possibility to see what happens with individuals in collaborative interventions. That it still, more than a year later, is not possible to follow at an individual level what our invested tax funds lead to is nothing other than a scandal. It is urgent, Mr. Speaker, to establish a system that allows us to follow the money and see how individuals' development is progressing.

The National Network for Coordination Associations wrote a letter to the Ministry of Social Affairs in November 2023 and pointed this out. Furthermore, Försäkringskassan wrote in its budget proposal as early as 2022 that SUS needed to be phased out, and they requested 31 million kronor from the government to develop a system. What has the government done?

Mr. Speaker! The level of the state's co-financing of Finsam has remained stagnant for far too long. It sets a ceiling for the other two participating parties in the coordination unions because the funding model stipulates that all four parties shall contribute equal amounts of money. It should not be the state that sets the ceiling, Mr. Speaker.

I mean that the state must provide more money so that municipalities and regions can do the same. Both the government and I know that collaborative efforts with all involved parties are socio-economically effective and that it is this we need to do so that more people who are far away from the labor market and who have complex issues can return to work.

The reason for today's interpellation debate is that it is still not possible for the coordination associations to apply for external funding. The Government itself urged this at the NNS conference last year, but now Försäkringskassan says that the coordination associations are not allowed to apply for ESF funds, even though initiatives with ESF funds amounting to more than half a billion kronor are underway. They make a huge difference, and yet one is now not allowed to apply for new such funds.

Mr. Speaker! The message to the coordination associations is urgent. One cannot wait for an investigation in December and potential new legislative proposals, which we know take time. There must be a system in place so that one can follow how it is going for individuals in cooperation. It is urgent to provide a message to the coordination associations on how they can increase their grants when the state sets a ceiling on how much money they can have. What does the Minister intend to do about this?

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! On February 27 this year, Minister Tenje responded to an interpellation that I submitted. The response pleased me. The Minister also said then: If it should be the case that even after this debate there are certain things that are unclear, I shall immediately address them and in the best way possible try to clarify them further.

That is why I wanted to jump in now, when Åsa Eriksson has so honorably submitted this interpellation, to hear if we can get some further answers about how the country currently stands. I am, like Åsa Eriksson, very happy that a mandate has been given to investigate how the Finsam legislation can be developed. I think that is good.

But the questions we are now raising are also about here and now. Until this is completed, one must actually be able to continue working. There are a number of things that are truly urgent.

Mr. Speaker! Let me provide a little background on the coordination unions, because I believe that quite a few who are listening to this do not really have a grasp of what they are. Briefly: the coordination unions truly conduct an important activity, according to the Finnish legislation. They are independent authorities. Financial and practical cooperation takes place between Arbetsförmedlingen, Försäkringskassan, municipalities and regions. One targets people who need help from different actors to regain their work capacity and receive support for self-sufficiency.

The need for interventions from the coordination unions is great, not least now when sickness absence is increasing and more people are heading towards unemployment. They are needed not least just now, but naturally also in the future.

As I have pointed out, this is of course important for individuals when it comes to taking steps closer to getting into work and having the opportunity to have an independent life. But it is also a very important way to find methods and forms of work. There, follow-up and evaluation are really important. There is a need to find new forms in order to be able to support and help those who are in need of this. A good deal of these important projects also then enter into the regular operations, and that is really good.

In order for the coordination agreements to be able to be an engine for development, follow-up and evaluation are required. It truly cannot be overemphasized how important that is. Now that follow-up is not possible and the possibility to follow up at the individual level has been stopped, I and many with me are very worried that we actually cannot see which interventions truly make a difference.

Another thing, of course, is the financing, which Åsa Eriksson has touched upon. There is a concern regarding this, partly because municipalities and regions are having a tough time right now, and partly overall.

Part of the salvation for some is that they have been able to seek funds from outside. Now that possibility is blocked. Above all, it is the so-called ESF fund that has been an important part for the coordination associations, but which they now cannot seek funds from outside. It is a bit strange because each one can do it, but not when they cooperate and coordinate in this way. That they should not be able to do it is concerning.

Since Anna Tenje said that we could return to this if it is not arranged, which pleased me, I ask the question again: What is happening, and how does the Minister proceed?

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

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the interpellator and Member Lindh for further contributions to the debate.

We have quite a lot of common ground in these issues, not least when it comes to the importance of being able to carry out follow-ups and evaluations of the measures being taken so that one knows that the taxpayers' money is truly being used in the most effective way. But perhaps above all when it comes to working out methods that can help more people all over the country to go from exclusion to finding their way back to work again. I definitely share that.

As I indicated earlier in the interpellation debate with Member of Parliament Eriksson, it is also the case that the work of reviewing the legal parts in the follow-up and in the evaluation at the individual level is currently underway. Furthermore, we have given ESF an additional assignment to continue the follow-up that they have already begun.

It is important to be able to follow up at an individual level, because we definitely differ as individuals. It is important to see which methods yield the best effect and can help more people. At an aggregated level, it is possible to follow up, and there it is not as sensitive, because we are not entering into privacy-infringing parts. There is a lot of sensitive information in these systems. It is important to be able to follow up and evaluate, but it is also important that we protect personal privacy and that we have a legally secure system. I believe both members share the view that it is important that it is done correctly and properly. That work is ongoing.

I also want to be clear and point out what we have touched upon a bit, namely the question of how the country stands. The country stands very differently when it comes to the coordination unions. Today, almost all municipalities and regions in Sweden are part of one of the 72 different coordination unions that exist around the country. A few individual municipalities are not included. I hope that more will join, because I believe it is good if one coordinates the efforts but above all if one cooperates, especially if one is a smaller municipality.

It looks very different, then. I have visited several of the coordination unions, Mr. Speaker, and it looks different in every coordination union I visit. Yesterday I visited the Kalmar County coordination union. It is a collaboration that, despite the fairly large geographical spread, works exceptionally well – twelve municipalities, the region, Arbetsförmedlingen, and Försäkringskassan. There, they have also been reached by the news that one might not be able to apply for the ESF funds from the coordination union's side, but that has not stopped them. There, instead, the hub, the municipality, has applied for the funds.

It is not that the money from the ESF funds is burning up now in the sense that one cannot access the money, because that is possible. On the other hand, Försäkringskassan has stated that coordination unions cannot apply for these funds. Each one as a principal can, however, do so.

It is this question we need to highlight in connection with the fact that we are now conducting a review of the Finsamlalagen (the Association Act). The Finsamlalagen has, as mentioned, been largely unchanged. No review has been conducted at all for 20 years, despite the fact that quite a few proposals have come through over the years, especially in recent years, that a review should be conducted.

That review is being conducted now. I will be notified later this autumn. I have also been tasked with submitting constitutional proposals so that this does not need to be put on the back burner if it turns out that things can be done to get moving and solve the problems faster.

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

Åsa Eriksson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.

That the participating parties can apply for ESF funds - good. But I believe we have, on repeated occasions, agreed that one of the keys to reaching further than the participating parties have done themselves is precisely cooperation, through the coordination unions.

Last week, I participated in a research network that had asked to meet us Members of Parliament here in the Riksdag. Representatives from M and C also participated. Several important things that we had been aware of could be substantiated. One is that cooperation between the involved parties comes in far too late for an individual. It has often been many years before the tool of cooperation is used, which I think one should do directly when one notices that an individual has complex problems and needs support from several.

Unfortunately, that is not how it works today. This leads to very great suffering for the individual, who is bounced around between different authorities and instances and does not receive sufficiently good help. Researchers testify that very many of these individuals have also given up. They do not believe that they will receive support and help, because they have experienced so many failed interventions that have led nowhere and have not given them what they need. It takes time to make them understand that here there are actually people who will hold your hand all the way out to self-sufficiency and to being able to stand on your own feet permanently.

The researchers have also concluded that one of the first things that is prioritized away when resources are lacking is cooperation. One then goes to their core mission and deprioritizes cooperation. And this, Mr. Speaker, is connected to the cuts at Försäkringskassan that the government is making. This, together with Försäkringskassan's new, stricter view on what is permitted in cooperation, means that many coordination associations can now no longer continue with the successful interventions they have had.

Mr. Speaker! The appropriations that Försäkringskassan has been allocated in recent years have not even been sufficient to fulfill the core mission. The agency itself states this in its budget proposal to the government. It states that Försäkringskassan must also this year, 2024, take significant cost-saving measures, which, according to the agency, entail consequences: increased processing times, which we have debated previously, poorer accessibility and service, which we have also debated previously, as well as slowed development activities. And, Mr. Speaker, I want to add impaired cooperation to that list.

This and Försäkringskassan's new sharp tone towards the cooperation associations' attempts to find external funding, find solutions, modernize the cooperation, and increase efficiency have clear consequences for the individuals every week. Furthermore, in the last few weeks, we have received signals that Försäkringskassan says no to the coordination associations when they want joint follow-up research. Now that we, since a year and a half ago, have no system for following the individuals, it would be very good, Mr. Speaker, if we could at least have a well-functioning and efficient follow-up research to see which interventions are most effective.

How on earth are the agencies supposed to develop their operations, get better at following up on results and identifying what is most effective when Försäkringskassan constantly blocks all attempts at development?

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much for the debate, Minister!

Then my first question, just to clarify: Is the message to the coordination associations that each one should apply, or is the Minister still trying to work so that the coordination associations can jointly apply for external funding?

It is important to know how we are to proceed. Based on my knowledge of the coordination agreements, I think it is always much better if one can apply together. Then one also shares the responsibility together.

I think it was good that the Minister raised the local methods of working. I really agree with that. All that we are talking about here now – to follow up and evaluate – is not about that the coordination associations must do the same. It is also good that one can work in slightly different ways, depending on what the conditions look like at home. It is, however, important to follow up so that one knows which effects lead to what is best for the individual person. That is, of course, fundamental.

I really want to emphasize what Åsa Eriksson pointed out, namely that one needs to work early in the process when it is discovered that people have complex issues. I have seen this very much during all my years as a social worker. We know that it is a bit more difficult when individuals have needs for help from several different sides. The Finsam legislation is a good prerequisite, and here we should work faster.

Then I really want to emphasize the insufficient funding of the basic organizations. When municipalities, regions, Arbetsförmedlingen and Försäkringskassan receive too little money, it affects the coordination and the coordination unions. We have already seen that it is so.

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

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think it is important and good that we are given the opportunity to speak about this important issue and not least about ESF funds and the financing of the Finland cooperation.

This issue has been on our table for quite some time, and NNS, SKR, Arbetsförmedlingen, Inspektionen för socialförsäkringen, Försäkringskassan and several others have addressed it. The issue has not emerged from some kind of vacuum since the government took office, but it originates from the fact that the law has remained largely unchanged for two decades since its entry into force.

The Social Democratic government, from which both members originate, has had eight years to implement concrete measures and update the legislation but chose to completely set the issue aside. The government did not address the issues that came from several coordination federations, NNS, ISF and, not least, Försäkringskassan, which had been part of the discussion.

I have now tasked Försäkringskassan with analyzing the need for changes in the Finsamlagen in accordance with the views submitted by the various institutions and, if necessary, to submit concrete legislative proposals if changes are deemed justified in order to achieve a purposeful use of resources and effective support for persons who are in great need of coordinated rehabilitation efforts to enter employment. I also wish that this work had been started a long time ago – several years ago, when the views began to arrive, primarily from the coordination associations.

It is clearly important that we clarify the ambiguities that arise regarding the legal conditions for coordination associations to apply for funds from ESF, among other things. That Försäkringskassan and the national council, of which Försäkringskassan is a member and holds the chairmanship, no longer recommend that coordination associations apply for ESF funds based on their own assessment. It is now important that we, through the assignment to Försäkringskassan, clarify the ambiguities that exist regarding the financing through ESF funds.

Mr. Speaker! I believe I have said before from this rostrum that I think it is a pity, unnecessary and not an efficient use of resources when we let money sit and do not use it when it could be used to help more people back to work.

With this said, it is possible to apply for ESF funds as it is now. It is not the case that they are just lying there and that Swedish municipalities and regions cannot use them. They can, and most coordination unions do as well. I still think it is important that we have a law that follows what we think and that it is properly clarified how one can proceed according to the law when it concerns just coordinated efforts in coordination unions. That is exactly why I have given a mandate.

It is important that we have earlier interventions. There are many hurdles, and it is not only the Finsamlagen that is problematic in this regard. Just as Member Eriksson says, in many cases it takes far too long before interventions are made. Not least in school, we perhaps have lower age limits where significantly better and larger interventions should have been made earlier to counteract the number of stay-at-home people, so that more people get a chance not only to return to work but to enter employment entirely from the beginning.

I don't have time now, but in my closing remarks later I can tell an anecdote about Kalmar county. It concerns a new group that has appeared, which I think is very interesting and which we should definitely discuss more.

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: A cliffhanger in the chamber is not a common occurrence.)

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

Åsa Eriksson (S)

Mr. Speaker! When we talk about Finsam, there are always new cliffhangers, because the positive examples never end.

We have already stated several times, Minister, that we are in very much agreement regarding the importance of cooperation when we speak on an overall level. I do, however, think that a great deal of concrete measures are missing from the government.

I am one of the first to admit that measures should have been taken earlier. The Finsam legislation should have been changed, something that I myself have motioned for. Now, however, Försäkringskassan has warned that the SUS system, which is used to follow up on individuals, cannot continue to be used. That was already done in the autumn of 2022, and now it is the government's party that sits in government position and must take responsibility.

Mr. Speaker! I was pleased when I read a debate article in Altinget by the Minister for Pensions and the Minister for Employment. There, it was written, among other things, that one should seek solutions rather than obstacles. That is exactly what it is about when we cooperate. But I do not see that this governance has reached down to Försäkringskassan.

On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, things that the coordination associations have been able to do for 20 years, which have worked well and have been effective measures, can no longer be done for Försäkringskassan. Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, no legislation has changed, only the interpretations made by Försäkringskassan, which are directed by the Minister through the regulation letter.

Mr. Speaker! My final question is: What steering signals has the Minister given Försäkringskassan in the regulatory letter regarding follow-up at the individual level in cooperation and when it concerns cooperation via the coordination unions?

Thank you for the debate!

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

Statsrådet Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! I must begin by thanking you for the debate. I see that Member Lindh would have liked to get up and make another contribution. It is good that this issue engages so much. I think it is pleasant, given that we have a common interest and quite similar positions. More should have been done earlier, and more should be done now. I believe we can summarize it that way in that respect.

I think it is important that early interventions come earlier. I believe that coordinated interventions yield results and that focus should be placed on them to a greater extent. In some cases, it may be the municipalities that are driving and doing more themselves. In other cases, it is the regions that are at the forefront. Sometimes it is also the state authorities that are pushing. It is best when everyone is on board.

I thank you again for the debate. We will probably have every reason to return, not least in December, when both of the two assignments that I have spoken about today will be reported to me. I expect that we will receive sharp proposals, so that we can also have legislation that keeps up with the times. It is 20 years since we last conducted a review of this. During that time, exclusion has also changed. The needs have also changed.

There is definitely more to be done in these issues. In that case, we need to have a law that keeps up. We definitely need to be able to evaluate and follow up, so that we know we are doing the right things for the taxpayers' money. All these things are now initiated, and I really hope for results, so that we can also get more people into work.

Mr. Speaker! Member Eriksson mentioned that it is always fun with good examples. Here it might not be a very good example, but it is still a new thing that has come up. Now it is often men in their 30-35 years of age who come to Finsam - a group that we have not even seen before at all and that we have not really had track of. They have been living at home with their parents. Now the parents are getting old and can no longer be the ones who provide support. That is what it is about. They otherwise largely do not exist in our registers and have not been on the labor market. Now they are seeking help and support for their sons who are in their 30-35 years of age.

We have a system that makes us hide and forget people in statistics or in homes, for that matter. So we cannot have that in Sweden. We must build a Sweden that holds together and where more people find more paths to work.

The interpellation debate was hereby concluded.

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