Response to interpellation 2024/25:725 on a Lex Adam
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M argues that the social services should be managed through good governance, objectivity, and impartiality 1. 1 2 M emphasizes that the new Social Services Act strengthens the children's rights perspective, that IVO shall receive sharper tools for supervision 1 2 and that court decisions must be followed 2. 3 M argues that the new Social Services Act creates better conditions for quality and cooperation 3. 3 M emphasizes that the focus should be on effective supervision and that the competence of professionals is crucial 3. 4 M highlights that legal certainty and impartiality must be held high and that social welfare committees have a large responsibility for follow-up 4. 5 S argues that the Adam case is a legal scandal where the social services administration failed in objectivity and withheld information 5. 5 6 S argues that politicians are trapped in the system without tools to act when something feels wrong 5 6. 5 S proposes an investigation to give politicians the opportunity to request independent review 5. 6 S argues that resources are crucial for the effectiveness of the social services 6. 7 S argues that rules are not enough when fraudulent acts are committed in administrations and that a valve is needed for politicians in social committees to detect such cases 7. 7 S emphasizes that market failures and economic incentives of private providers can create problems 7.
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)
Mr. Speaker! Ola Möller has asked me if I am prepared to drive a Lex Adam which would allow politicians the right to request independent review of ongoing cases within the social welfare committee and greater opportunities for insight into the social welfare committee's cases.
The responsibility that the social services have to support and protect children and young people must be managed well. If there are deficiencies in the social services' activities, these must be taken seriously. For all work that the social services perform, the requirements for good governance apply. This means, among other things, that the social services shall respect everyone's equality before the law and observe objectivity and impartiality. The authority must not allow itself to be influenced by irrelevant circumstances.
The processing within the social services shall also be documented, rules on party inspection shall be followed, and the individual shall be treated with respect and given the opportunity to participate.
The activities within the social services shall also be of good quality, and everyone who performs tasks within the social services shall contribute to ensuring that the activities conducted and the interventions carried out are of good quality. Of importance for good quality is, among other things, that there is high competence and that persons working in the social services have a suitable background and personality.
With the social welfare committee's responsibility to be able to decide that children and young people shall be cared for outside their own home, there also follows a responsibility to keep itself informed about the care and to closely monitor the care. In order for this to be possible, the social welfare committee needs insight into the case. From the Social Services Act (2025:400) it appears that the social welfare committee shall primarily monitor the care through regular personal visits to the child's or the young person's home, individual conversations with the child or the young person, conversations with the person or persons who have received the child or the young person in their home, and conversations with the guardians. The social welfare committee shall pay particular attention to the child's or the young person's health, development, social behavior, schooling, as well as relations to parents, siblings, and other close relatives.
At least once every six months, the social welfare committee shall consider whether the care is still needed and how the care should be directed and designed. By requiring the committee to consider whether the care is needed, the committee is mandated to an active action consisting of regularly keeping itself informed and assessing whether the care is needed.
If the requirements for good governance are met and the social welfare committee follows the regulations to closely monitor the care and stay informed about the care, there should not be a need for the type of independent review that Ola Möller proposes.
Through the new Social Services Act, which entered into force on July 1, the conditions for the social services to maintain the requirements for good quality are increased. As an example, it can be mentioned that it appears from the law that the operations shall be conducted in accordance with science and proven experience. This means, among other things, that the social services shall apply the methods and interventions that, according to science, have positive effects in relation to the desired result, rather than those based solely on an assumption that they are good. In the budget bill for 2025, the government decided on a multi-year financial investment to the municipalities to stimulate a long-term transition of the social services' methods toward more preventive and knowledge-based work.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize the importance of the supervision and licensing that the Inspectorate for Health and Care (IVO) is responsible for. The supervision and licensing contribute to a health and care service that is safe, of good quality, and conducted in accordance with laws and other regulations. The Government has recently proposed that IVO should be provided with sharper tools in its work in order to increase the efficiency of the supervision and licensing and to protect individuals' rights and ensure quality within activities according to the Social Services Act and activities according to LSS.
Ola Möller (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
The Adam case is a legal scandal that has been ongoing for over a decade. It is a case that has yielded three episodes of Uppdrag granskning, where all the twists have been straightened out. Completely bizarre accusations against a child and his father have emerged, and time and again, society has failed the child and the father. Adam has been robbed of his entire childhood.
This is due to the fact that the social services administration in Helsingborg has failed to follow the law. There has been a lack of objectivity. They have not put forward alternative hypotheses. They have withheld information and even had separate, secret file archives. They have withheld information from the politicians and from the father.
Eight people in the social services department in Helsingborg are suspected. Two have been dismissed. Two have been subject to labor law measures, and the others would also have been reported if the statute of limitations for misconduct in office had not been five years instead of longer. More people would therefore actually have needed to be reported to the police.
Furthermore, a private provider, in the form of Humana, has been reported to Ivo by both politicians and by the administration. But the semi-annual evaluation that has been carried out by the private company has formed the basis for the decision on continued care of the boy. A private company has thus been allowed to work out the basis that determines whether they should keep the boy in their care.
In the social services administration, according to the report with the review of the case, a culture of silence has prevailed. People who have said anything deviating have been punished. They have been moved within the administration. This has been noticed by politicians – colleagues of mine. But then the head had to evaluate themselves, and nothing happened.
This is a scandal of enormous proportions. I must say that I am somewhat surprised by the answer the minister gives, because not with a single syllable does the minister regret what has happened. She does not mention the case as such and the utter absurdity of this.
Instead, we get an administrative narrative, which says how it should work. No one wishes more than I that it should be so. But in the argumentation driven in the response, Ivo would not be needed. We would not need lex Maria or lex Sarah, because in the response's description, everything works. But reality does not look like that.
Then it is strange that the Minister for Social Services does not, at least, look up and reflect on what this is about. It is about politicians who sit like prisoners in a system. The report with the audit that is on the table shows that the politicians have signaled and said: Here is something that is strange. Here we need to act! But the politicians have had no tools and have been completely in the clutches of these officials, of whom eight people are suspected of having acted fraudulently.
It is from this starting point that I would like the Minister, who I know cares very much about these issues, to consider appointing an inquiry to review the construction and give the politicians the opportunity to, when something feels wrong, ask for someone to look at it.
TALMANNEN
I want to remind that it appears from our rules of procedure here in the chamber that an authority's assessment or handling in an individual case may not be subject to argumentation or criticism. It may, however, be invoked, for example, to justify legislative changes.
This is a case that has been the subject of extensive media reporting, so it is naturally known to the general public. I nevertheless want to remind of precisely the balancing act that we have to navigate during the debate. It is important that one can invoke individual cases such as this to justify legislative changes, but at the same time, one must not go into such details that, for example, individuals can be identified in a way that appears improper.
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much to the member for the question!
I naturally appreciate immensely that there are members of the Swedish Riksdag who have a great commitment to us doing everything in our power to ensure that children get a secure upbringing and a secure childhood. We all know that childhoods do not come in repeats.
But I am also, in my capacity as a minister, restricted from commenting on individual cases. If the member thinks the answer seems cold in some way, I can assure them that in the exercise of my office, I work in all respects to strengthen the upbringing of children and young people. But I am prevented from commenting on individual cases, in the manner that the Speaker described.
However, all questions and all the different cases where children have suffered greatly affect me very strongly. It is also a strong motivating factor to work intensively to strengthen the rights of children and young people. It has been a red line in everything we do.
I am particularly happy and proud that the children's rights perspective has become so clear in the new Social Services Act, which entered into force on July 1 this year. There is a big difference between the old Social Services Act and the new one. In addition to all the parts concerning preventive measures and that the whole should be based on knowledge and proven experience, the children's rights perspective and the fact that it is based on the Convention on the Rights of the Child are very clear. No decisions shall be able to be made without the child's voice having been sought. The legislation that we have presented – and I can reveal that this also applies to upcoming legislation – will have as a clear common thread that the child's best interests shall take precedence over the parents' best interests. Adults' best interests will not be guiding, as in the old legislation.
It is about, for example, safer homes for children, what is sometimes called lex Tintin, and about the fact that we have now implemented an extended travel ban for children. It concerns all the other legislation that takes its starting point in that children now have their own rights. It is about a safely protected home. Children now have, for the first time, their own legislation based on this.
An important part of this is also that Ivo is provided with sharper tools in his work. We must ensure that the efficiency of the supervision, which this authority has such an important task in carrying out, becomes better. Ivo must be given even more tools. We have a referral to the Council on Legislation, and we are working on propositions that take their starting point in this. Ivo has for a long time pointed out that a number of these tools are lacking in order to be able to carry out more far-reaching interventions. There is, therefore, a common thread in this.
Then, what should be self-evident must be emphasized: Court decisions must be upheld. It is important that our social welfare committees and our municipalities also comply with the court decisions that are made. This is, of course, another important aspect when we talk about the safety of children and young people.
Ola Möller (S)
Mr. Speaker! I do not work with these issues in ordinary cases. I understand the balancing act, and I have, of course, thought a lot about how I should conduct this debate. I have deep respect for what both the Speaker and the Minister say, and I want to be clear that it is not my intention in any way to interfere in individual cases.
But this case has received great media attention, and the report showing the deficiencies that have existed is a public document. Therefore, I have nevertheless written the interpellation.
It should also be said that Swedish social services make fantastic efforts every day in this country. This is a legal scandal that in many ways is unique, even though there are, of course, a number of other cases. But it should be pointed out that this is not a general criticism of social services in this country.
The courts have, in this case, ruled based on the evidence that has been submitted. It has been fraudulent, and therefore the courts have not been able to detect this. The legislation could be more transparent from the perspective of the politics and the social affairs committees so that one would have a valve to use when something seems suspicious.
It is however the case that politics is completely trapped in this. Those who sit in the social committees are more or less confirming decisions, and politicians, including those from my party who have had a gut feeling and warned that something is not right, which the report shows, have been severely questioned and more or less blacklisted. People have gone to the group leader in the municipal executive board and said that these social committee politicians are difficult, they do not follow the rules of the game, and so on.
The culture in the social administration in Helsingborg has been strongly questioned for many years, which stems from the fact that year after year there have been large cuts because the budget has not balanced. This has created anxious and fearful officials who do not dare to take the fight with the politics and do not dare to signal inaccuracies, because they also have to meet their production targets.
This is an immense problem that also highlights why the social services, in order to function effectively and well, must have good resources, which has not been the case in Helsingborg. There is even a situation where, after not having performed proper background checks and the like, a gang criminal was hired, so it is not the only problem that this social administration has had. For the record, the city has been governed by the Moderaterna and other right-wing parties for nearly 20 years.
That politics does not become a prisoner in this is also important so that we know how vulnerable the social services have been in and due to the disinformation campaigns surrounding LVU. Many parents feel wrongly treated and turn to politics and ask why nothing is being done or said from the political side. The political level then becomes the one at fault, because in that situation, one sits prisoner against the administration and does not have this tool, even though one understands and feels that something may be wrong.
It should also be said that the authorities are completely correct in the vast majority of cases. It is not the case that Swedish social services kidnap children or anything of the sort. That is total disinformation. But here we have in black and white a case where a child has actually been taken and its childhood destroyed, and with this type of outlet, one could at least hopefully have discovered this earlier.
After preliminary work and investigation work by the Socialdemokraterna, the government has taken the work on the new Social Services Act forward – a perfect way to work in the Swedish Riksdag, where we look forward together, take each other's good ideas and move them forward. I am very happy that the new Social Services Act has been finalized, but it would not have helped in this case. My question therefore becomes again: Is the minister prepared to actually review the possibility of a safety valve for the politicians in the social committees?
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Mr. Speaker! I want to once again emphasize that I naturally view situations where children are harmed very seriously. Therefore, the guiding principle – and I am glad that the member also clearly expresses this – is that we, from the legislator's side, must ensure that we have all the prerequisites to give children and young people a safe childhood.
But it is also the case that with legislation follows a responsibility out in our various municipalities. I am sure the member does not want me to rattle off all the S-led municipalities that I have visited where there are obvious concerns linked to, among other things, resources when it comes to the social services and so on, but I believe we should stay at a level that lies above that. It is difficult to reason about individual municipalities, and as Minister I must take my starting point in that we stand on the children's side. I assume that the member also does so, and it must be easy for both our officials and the politicians who are out in our municipalities to take the children's side and ensure that children get secure childhoods.
Now we have new legislation in place that is highly demanded and long-awaited, and which provides different conditions for cooperation and opportunities to work in other ways. If regulations and other things are followed, independent audits are not needed. The focus must instead be directed towards having a functioning and effective supervision and that we create the best possible conditions for our social services.
The new Social Services Act creates better conditions for the social services to maintain the requirements for good quality. In the budget bill for 2025, the government decided on a multi-year financial investment to the municipalities to specifically stimulate a long-term transition of the social services' methods of work toward a more preventive and knowledge-based work.
With that said, we are working with a number of different approaches to develop the Social Services Act that entered into force on July 1 this year. The fact is that the directives did not provide the opportunity to investigate a number of different parameters, which Margareta Winberg, who was the investigator, very clearly pointed out to the then responsible Minister. This is what this government is proceeding from. We have significantly higher ambitions than what is in this investigation, and that is also why we have included a children's rights perspective with, among other things, searchable reports of concern and much more. There are also other aspects that were not included from the beginning in the material we had to work further with.
The role of the profession is very important, and the same applies to the role of politics. One must, in fact, be able to trust the profession. As the member expresses, there is usually very high quality in the investigations and the work that Swedish social services perform. These are, of course, important aspects that need to be included in the continued work.
Ola Möller (S)
Mr. Speaker! If everyone follows laws and rules, we do not need courts. That is roughly the argument the Minister puts forward here. But this is not about when everything works. This is not about the legislation being designed so that everyone follows it to the letter. This is about when people in our administrations and agencies actually commit fraudulent acts and there is no possibility of detecting it, even though there are those who have repeatedly reported and tried.
This reasoning makes Kafka's Trial appear as something rule-of-law compliant. It becomes completely strange, because then neither lex Maria nor lex Sarah would be needed. If everyone followed the rules, we would also not need JO. But this is a case that shows that rules are not enough.
I want to be clear: I do not doubt for a second the minister's intention to achieve good legislation. I absolutely believe that. But there are several dimensions to this. We also have the market failure, where a private company has had a child in its care and issued statements to the social welfare committee, which confirmed the statements from the private company. It is clear that there are incentives in this structure to keep the child where it is – it is money into the account every day that the child is placed with the private provider. And when one even from the political side feels that something is wrong in the administration, it is not strange that people become a bit conspiratorial. It becomes a total Catch-22: I feel that something is wrong, but when I say that something is wrong, they say that nothing is wrong, and then it is my feeling that is wrong and not the decision.
I actually do not understand the reluctance here. I am not asking for any changes in the view of the social services, and I am not asking that we should do anything differently. On the contrary, I am standing here praising the minister and thinking that this shows perfect cooperation and a common direction between different parliamentary terms. It is very good. But the minister does not even want to meet me and say that it is clear that there can be problems in certain administrations, whether they are S-led or M-led. I can accept that the minister wants to leave it at that, but I am a resident of Helsingborg, so for me it is important to talk about my city. I believe the minister has respect for that.
And seventhly, it is a rather small thing I am asking for. It is enough to sit at the Ministry of Social Affairs with a DS and see if this is something that is completely unique or if there is a problem: Shall we prepare a preparatory document so that politicians, both my colleagues around in the municipalities and party comrades to the minister and all other party colors, feel that they are not being taken captive and are not lying awake with anxiety at night because children are suffering?
I hope I can get an answer from the minister. Where does the reluctance lie? If all this that the minister is doing is implemented, why can we not also have a small valve that gives us the opportunity to sometimes save that child who, in this case, is being deprived of a decade of their childhood? Why can the minister not reach out to such a simple and actually very modest proposal?
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Member, for the opportunity to reflect on children and their safety and childhood!
The Speaker may not have been attentive at the end of my previous speech, where I said that we are now moving forward with the legislation that is linked to, among other things, the Social Services Act. Naturally, the role of the profession and politics is included there, and different aspects must be considered. If that is not some kind of opening, I do not know what is, but that is actually what I said a short while ago.
It is important to emphasize that for all the work that is now taking place, it is required that impartiality and legal certainty are taken into account. These are starting points that must be held high at all times. It is important that the individual's legal certainty is guaranteed. This, in turn, means that the social services' competence must be high and that persons who work in the social services must have an appropriate background and an actually suitable personality. Being able to meet children according to the requirements set in the new Social Services Act requires that one has the competence to listen to what children actually say – and perhaps also the personality that is suitable for that.
We who have worked with children know how high their loyalty can be towards parents but also towards other people, and that children can sometimes be easily manipulated. This puts focus on the fact that the people who work with children must have the right competence. This cannot be overemphasized. That is why we are working with a number of different measures to strengthen competence and develop methods within areas such as social services. I want to highlight barnahus as an example. If there are deficiencies, they must be taken seriously, and one must constantly work on identifying such.
It is naturally the case that when it has been decided that a child or a young person shall be moved to a home other than their own, it involves a particularly great responsibility.
I have myself sat on a social welfare committee. I know that it can sometimes feel as if one is a bit removed from the decisions, but one has an obligation to be active and ask questions. With the follow-up responsibility that constantly exists and which lies with the social welfare committee, it is also the case that as an individual member of the social welfare committee, one has a very great responsibility. That, of course, one must be able to handle.
From these different aspects, we now have legislation where children's rights are given a completely different position and opportunities are provided for the authorities that are to carry out supervision. The Audit Office is an important part of this. Ivo, which is the tool I work with primarily, receives better tools with the new legislation to be able to ensure what I perceive as the basis for the member's question and also the starting point for what I work with, namely that children growing up in Sweden shall have a safe and secure childhood and that their best interests are always considered.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.