Response to interpellation 2025/26:115 on the importance of the interpretation service
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M considers interpretation services to be a fundamental right and a prerequisite for equality. 1 M argues that the regions are responsible for everyday interpretation and that it is pleasing that S is now showing an awakening 2. 3 S considers interpretation services to be a matter of human rights and language policy. 3 S argues that the government's response is too theoretical and that the investigation has been on the table for three years without concrete proposals. 4 S criticizes the decision to lower the ceiling for interpretation support in working life. 5 S argues that funds via MUCF do not replace the right to an interpreter. 6 S emphasizes that guidance is crucial for persons with deaf-blindness. 7 S underlines that sign language is a human right. 8 M argues that the municipalities have a responsibility to comply with the LSS legislation. 9 M prioritizes that children and young people get access to an interpreter for leisure activities.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! I want to start by apologizing for my incredibly weak voice. I hope it will hold through the entire interpellation debate.
Jessica Rodén has asked me when the government intends to proceed with the proposals in the report SOU 2022:11 on a new interpretation law and a long-term development of the interpretation service. Jessica Rodén has also asked me how I and the government intend to ensure equal access to interpretation services across the country, as well as what measures I and the government intend to take so that children and young people can have access to interpretation even in their leisure activities so that parents are not forced to interpret for their own children.
I agree with Jessica Rodén that interpreting service is not a special service but a fundamental right and a prerequisite for equality, work, studies, and participation in society for persons with hearing impairment, deafness, or deaf-blindness. The Government has a clear ambition to strengthen the opportunities for persons with disabilities to fully participate in social life. Against this background, the Government has made the assessment that there is a need for a more systematic and long-term follow-up and development of the interpreting service. Therefore, we have tasked the Agency for Participation to establish a national function for the coordination of the interpreting service.
This function shall contribute to improving coordination, increasing knowledge about the importance of the interpretation service, and supporting relevant actors in their development work. It is an important step towards creating better conditions for an equal and accessible interpretation service throughout the country. The Government has also decided to provide the regions with 41 million kronor annually from 2025 onwards to strengthen the coordination of the interpretation service.
The report Action Plan for a Long-term Development of the Interpretation Service for Deaf, Hard of Hearing, and Deaf-blind Persons (SOU 2022:11) contains several valuable proposals to improve the interpretation service. The Government supports the ambitions of the investigation. Further preparation has, however, shown significant difficulties with certain proposals, for example, the proposal for a new law on interpretation services for deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind persons. The Government follows the development closely and continuously evaluates the need for further measures – not least through the new national coordination function for the interpretation service.
When it comes to children's and young people's access to interpretation in leisure activities, I want to emphasize that this is an important issue. For the government, it is an important priority to promote children's and young people's opportunities to participate in leisure activities that contribute to an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others.
The government has, among other things, allocated funds to the Agency for Youth and Civil Society Issues to increase participation in leisure activities among children and young people with disabilities. This includes the adaptation of premises, investment in equipment and assistive devices, or measures that contribute to increased equitable and equal participation. A well-functioning interpretation service is crucial so that children and young people with deafness, hearing impairment, or deaf-blindness can participate on equal terms even during their free time.
It is the regions that, according to Chapter 8, Section 7 of the Health and Medical Services Act (2017:30), have the responsibility to provide so-called everyday interpretation. This means that they shall organize, finance, and offer interpretation services for everyday situations, which includes leisure activities.
It is very important that the regions meet the obligation they have to offer interpretation services so that children and young people with deafness, hearing impairment, or deaf-blindness can participate in leisure activities in a good way. The Government intends to follow the issue.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Madam Speaker! I want to start by thanking the Minister for the opportunity to debate this important issue today, despite the Minister's problems with their throat. I hope it goes well – we will have to take it a bit easy.
Being able to communicate is not a luxury, but it is the very foundation of human dignity. It is by being able to describe how one feels, ask questions to one's doctor, participate at work, and talk to one's child's coach that one is a part of society. But for the person who is deaf or a sign language user, everyday life looks different. One is dependent on an interpreter. One is dependent on someone else showing up, understanding one, and interpreting one correctly. One must hand over one's language – and a piece of oneself – to someone else, and one never really knows if what one says is actually being said. That vulnerability is carried today by deaf people, people with hearing impairments, and persons with deaf-blindness in our country.
Madam Speaker! We have recently seen cases that are painful to take in, such as the deaf man in Södertälje who had to wait several days for a sign language interpreter before an operation. Several days passed without him being able to understand his diagnosis and without him being told what would happen to his body.
The chairperson of the Swedish Association of the Deaf, Hedvig Ledung, commented as follows: It shows a lack of understanding that sign language is not an aid, but a language.
It is precisely this that we Social Democrats highlight in our committee motion in the Social Affairs Committee: The interpretation service is not a common service. It is a matter of human rights, of language policy, and of disability policy. It is about the right to feel included in one's own language.
Madam Speaker! I heard in the Minister's answer that the government highlights the work with the Agency for Participation and the 41 million that are being provided to the regions – and this is good. The Minister's answer is, however, very theoretical. It sounds good when one hears it, but for the person who stands without an interpreter in healthcare, in school, or at work, it matters less that MFD is conducting a review or that the regions receive extra money.
It does not change the fact that the foundation is the same: The interpretation service is still unequal. The distribution of responsibility is still unclear, and people are still left without their language. It does not change the reality for the person who today sits in the emergency room and waits for an interpreter. Nor does it change the fact that the government has had the investigation Action Plan for a long-term development of the interpretation service for deaf, hard of hearing, and people with deaf-blindness on its desk for three years without putting forward a single proposal.
The right to language is the right to dignity. Swedish Sign Language is a language that is just as living, just as important and just as Swedish as Swedish itself.
Against this background, I want to ask the Minister: When does the Minister mean that we can expect concrete proposals on the table of the Riksdag? And what is it that is so difficult about legislating the right to one's own language?
Ewa Pihl Krabbe (S)
Madam Speaker! I also want to thank you for the answer to Jessica Rodén, and I am pleased with the positive tone that the Minister for Social Affairs expresses in this important matter. It is precisely as the interpellor and the Minister for Social Affairs say: It is a fundamental right and a prerequisite for equality and participation in society to receive a good interpretation service when one has a hearing impairment, is deaf, or is a person with deaf-blindness.
Sometimes one must remind oneself of history and how this target group fared not so long ago. Deaf people in Sweden were not given the opportunity to learn sign language in school until the beginning of the 1980s. Before that, the oral language prevailed in the schools for the deaf. On May 14, 1981, the Swedish Parliament decided to recognize sign language as the mother tongue of the deaf, thanks to research on deaf sign language, where it was established that Swedish sign language is a language like all others.
I visited the deaf school in Lund as a young student in the late 60s and could personally experience how the children were doing. It was definitely not a child-friendly environment, neither in the teaching nor in the play situations. One was forced into a language that one did not master. I remember crying when I walked away from there.
The five deaf schools have had a good and qualitative development in their activities since sign language became official. In the early 90s, the cochlear implant arrived, which allowed many in the target group to attend regular school. But fundamentally, one has a functional impairment that may require support in different situations. The deaf schools today look different compared to before, and the group of students has a partially different set of issues.
Madam Speaker! Since the 90s, I have followed the interpreting activities, and I have seen a number of investigations come and go – or rather, end up in some office drawer. In 2011, an interpreting service investigation was submitted where it was considered that the responsibility should be gathered under a principal. "To understand and be understood" came in 2018, and the plan we are now discussing, that is, the Action Plan for a long-term development of the interpreting service for deaf, hard of hearing, and persons with deaf-blindness, came in 2022.
Along the way, other problems affecting the target group have also arisen. There is a shortage of trained sign language interpreters in the entire country, and several training programs have been discontinued or reduced in scope. At the same time, the need is increasing, not least among older people with hearing impairments and among people with deaf-blindness, who are a particularly vulnerable group where the need for interpretation is very great. Those who do not receive interpretation are, in practice, denied access to work, education, and social life – and family life.
In an open letter to the Minister for Employment, Sveriges Dövas Riksförbund, Hörselskadades Riksförbund, and Förbundet Sveriges Dövblinda direct sharp criticism at the government's decision to worsen the interpretation support in working life. The new rules mean that the ceiling for interpretation support is lowered from 210,000 to 120,000 kronor per year. It is a significant worsening for the individual, and many who need to use the support furthermore do not dare to do so for fear of losing their job.
It is very good that the government, based on the latest investigation, has tasked the Agency for Participation with establishing a national function to coordinate the interpretation service, but a proposal also needed to be laid before the Riksdag.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you very much for the questions and contributions on this very important issue, Jessica Rodén and Ewa Pihl Krabbe!
I really want to emphasize how important it is that deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind people have their right to interpretation – because it is a right – fulfilled. I cannot, however, agree with Jessica Rodén that nothing is happening.
Now we are presenting a proposal where we, among other things, state that the regions need to have a single point of entry instead of such a large part of these people's everyday lives having to be spent seeking interpretation services at different locations. With these 41 million, the coordination of the interpretation service shall be strengthened to ensure that those who need an interpreter can have a single point of entry.
It is also pleasing, I think, that there is now a late awakening from the Social Democrats. Ultimately, one must look back and see what happened during the eight years when several investigations were conducted. Actually, nothing happened. That is why it is pleasing to see this awakening, even if it is belated.
The Government shares the view that it is important that we now move forward in the issue of interpretation services, and one must in no way underestimate or disparage the important contribution that the Agency for Participation is now making. We see that we can achieve a coordination and a follow-up of different parts of this. It is significant – absolutely crucial – for an open and inclusive society that people are not shut out, and in that case, the interpretation service must function.
As I have said before, the government has a clear ambition to strengthen the opportunities for persons with disabilities to fully participate in social life. Therefore, the government has, as I said, decided on this national function, among other things. We see that a unifying resource for long-term follow-up and quality development of the interpretation service is an important starting point for a well-functioning interpretation service that can also meet the interpretation needs.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Madam Speaker! We often talk about accessibility, but for deaf and hard of hearing people or people with deaf-blindness, it is about something much deeper. It is about being able to understand, it is about being understood, and it is about freedom.
To live as a deaf person is to constantly live in someone else's hands. You cannot have a spontaneous conversation. You cannot call the health center. You are completely dependent on the interpreter being booked, on the interpreter arriving, and on the interpreter understanding not only your words but also who you are. Interpretation is not just about language; it is about identity – about tone of voice, glances, context, humor, and seriousness. It is about your personality following through the interpretation. When the interpreter does not know you, when the conversation goes too fast, or when someone interrupts, you as a deaf person can suddenly be misunderstood or rendered invisible. It is a power imbalance that we hearing people never need to experience.
It is this that creates minority stress and a constant burden of explanation – having to start every meeting with: "I am here. I need an interpreter. This is my language."
I also want to highlight the children. It is about children who want to play, participate, and be part of a team. The national picture is clear: leisure interpretation is almost never prioritized. Parents are allowed to interpret for their own children in the scouts, in football, and in the stable. Children who want to be independent are not given the chance. Parents who want to be just parents are forced to be interpreters.
Madam Speaker! The Minister describes in his answer that the government has allocated funds via MUCF to support children's and youth's leisure activities. That is very good, but it does not solve the issue of interpretation services. It does not matter how many leisure projects receive support if the children still stand without their language when they are going to play football, ride horses, or participate in the scouts. This is where the difference between ambition and reality becomes clear. MUCF funds do not replace the right to an interpreter, and the measures the Minister highlights do not change the fact that leisure interpretation is rarely prioritized by the regions.
In the investigation that I mentioned in my previous post, it was proposed that the interpretation situation for children and young people should be analyzed nationally together with SPSM so that their right to language, participation and independence should be secured. Three years later, that work has still not been started. Why has the government not started the work that was proposed in the investigation?
Ewa Pihl Krabbe (S)
Madam Speaker! I would like to take the opportunity to raise another aspect of the interpretation service, and that is the accompaniment.
In particular for persons with deaf-blindness, the accompaniment is very important, for as a deaf-blind interpreter user expressed it: "If I cannot get to the activity itself because there is no possibility of getting accompaniment, then there is no point in me booking an interpreter at all." And that is just how it is.
It becomes a Catch-22 for many with severe disabilities. They have to fight to get paratransit services, which is very difficult, among other things in Skåne. Perhaps one needs an escort on a journey where one is granted an interpreter. If one is denied an escort, one has no use for the interpreter because one cannot manage to get to the destination alone. Paratransit, escort, and interpreter are therefore important ingredients for an independent life if one is disabled.
I am aware that accompaniment is not part of today's question, but I think the subject is relevant because nothing has happened since the Riksdag in June 2024 made an announcement where it was demanded that the government should review the possibility of regulating accompaniment in a specific law. Accompaniment and interpretation services are, in fact, linked for many people with severe disabilities.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! I can only agree with the description that Jessica Rodén gave of how people who do not receive interpretation experience their situation. I am pleased that I have continuous meetings with disability organizations. It is good for the ongoing management of this work. Listening to and reasoning with them has guided us forward.
When it comes to guidance, there are, just as Ewa Pihl Krabbe described, major concerns regarding another part. The municipalities have an extensive responsibility and are obliged to comply with the legislation. The LSS legislation that a conservative government introduced just over 30 years ago was intended to be an important freedom reform and ensure that persons with different types of disabilities receive equal and full participation in our society. A great responsibility falls on the municipalities, but there are also other parts, including the Socialstyrelsen report. This is currently being prepared in various ways in the Government Offices.
Now things are happening that did not happen during the previous eight years. I can feel nothing but reluctant admiration for a Member of Parliament who has nothing in their baggage from their own eight years in government, but who nevertheless stands up and criticizes the government now that steps forward are being taken regarding the interpretation service. Several investigations were placed in a desk drawer. The investigations were in that desk drawer when I entered the Ministry of Social Affairs. There really is not much to cheer for when it comes to what the previous, Social Democratic government did in terms of the interpretation service. This is a fact, not a way to shift blame.
Now we take a step forward, and the mission for MFD is very important. It is about producing, compiling, and providing information on regulations so that regions, municipalities, state agencies, employers, and other actors really know what is their task and responsibility. It is also about coordinating development efforts concerning interpretation services and this target group, as well as coordinating and managing issues concerning the interpretation service and the target group that do not have a natural home with any other actor.
Procuring interpretation services for elected representatives in certain organizations is sometimes a concern. This is an important part of the democracy functioning. It also concerns paying out state grants to the regions for interpretation services and being responsible for a unified national follow-up of the interpretation service, including the collection of statistics and the compilation of current research. This is important to emphasize, because research leads us forward.
This was an example of what this national function will mean. I am convinced that it will have a decisive significance.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Madam Speaker! Today we have discussed something deeply human, namely the right to language, the right to understand and to be understood, and the right to be part of the whole, regardless of whether one is deaf, hard of hearing, deaf-blind, or hearing.
Here in the chamber, there are sign language interpreters who sign the entire debate in real time. In the gallery, representatives from Sveriges Dövas Riksförbund can follow everything that is said in their own language and without delay. That is how democracy should function, Madam Speaker. It should be accessible, equal, and linguistically inclusive.
Let me be clear: Sign language is not a tool, it is a language. It is a human right and a natural part of Sweden's linguistic community.
Madam Speaker! Next year is an election year. Then it will become even more important that everyone can follow the public debate in their own language without obstacles or delay. It is a democratic right, not a service.
I would like to thank the Minister for the debate. I hear her commitment to the issue, and I and many others appreciate it.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank Jessica Rodén very much for the debate.
I hear my own commitment reflected in the member's very fine descriptions of the importance of obtaining this language and being able to use one's language. My starting point is that it should not matter whether it is an election year or not – one should always have the prerequisites and the rights one actually possesses to be able to participate in the public debate. That is the foundation for the entire LSS legislation. It is absolutely important that it is an election year, but one must have one's rights met every year and every day of the week.
In conclusion, I want to focus on how important it is that children and young people have access to interpretation when it comes to leisure activities. For the government, it is an incredibly important priority to promote the conditions for children and young people to participate in leisure activities so that they can have a meaningful and active leisure time in community with other children and young people. It is therefore the funds that I described earlier that have been allocated.
There should be an extra part to increase participation among children and young people with disabilities, because we know that the statistics indicate that they do not have the same rights or the same opportunities to have an active leisure time. A well-functioning interpretation service is absolutely crucial so that children and young people with deafness, hearing impairment, or deaf-blindness can participate on equal terms even during their leisure time.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.