Response to interpellation 2025/26:334 on the conditions for coordination associations

Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me what measures I intend to take to resolve the obstacles that have arisen for the coordination associations to be able to continue to operate and develop.

The Government considers that the coordination associations are very important for supporting people to achieve work capacity and self-sufficiency through coordinated rehabilitation efforts. The Government has taken several measures so that the cooperation partners, through the coordination associations, shall support people to achieve work capacity and self-sufficiency.

The regulatory letters from Arbetsförmedlingen and Försäkringskassan state that the agencies shall work to ensure that the coordination unions prioritize financing interventions for those on long-term sick leave, young people with disabilities, and young people who receive activity compensation. It also states that Arbetsförmedlingen and Försäkringskassan shall contribute to ensuring that all parties in the collaboration take responsibility for the coordination unions' interventions. Finally, it states that Försäkringskassan and Arbetsförmedlingen shall, through the National Council for Financial Coordination, support the development of the coordination unions.

Against the background that it has not been judged to be compatible with the Act (2003:1210) on financial coordination of rehabilitation efforts, the so-called Finsamlagen, that coordination associations apply for funds from the European Social Fund plus, Försäkringskassan has, on behalf of the government, developed guiding routines for how the cooperating parties – through the coordination associations' preparation structures – shall identify and carry out coordinated rehabilitation efforts with project funds from the European Social Fund plus. Through this assignment, there is now a model that enables social fund funds to reach the coordination associations' target groups during the current programming period.

Försäkringskassan has, on behalf of the government, analyzed the need for changes in the Finsamlagen (S2024/00722). The proposals for changes in the Finsamlagen that Försäkringskassan has presented are now being prepared further within the Government Offices. The same applies to Försäkringskassan's motion regarding the processing of personal data concerning the follow-up of the Finsamin measures. It is very important that it is possible to follow up on the measures that the coordination unions finance, not least so that one can learn from the best examples but also from any mistakes. I can assure Eva Lindh that there is currently active work ongoing at the Government Offices on exactly these issues.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister very much for the answer. I particularly appreciate the last sentence, where she assured me that active work is ongoing at the Government Offices on precisely these issues.

The Minister may be thinking: My God, does she want another debate on this with the coordination associations? But the reason I have submitted the interpellation is that I want to try to find ways to make this work better.

Let me step back a bit to begin with, as some may be wondering what the coordination unions (samordningsförbunden) actually are. The coordination unions are not a small side track in Swedish welfare. They are one of the few systems that work for people who have ended up not only between the chairs but also between authorities and between different regulatory frameworks. It is often about people who are too ill to work but too healthy for the sickness insurance and who are ready to make the step-movements that the coordination unions help with. But it is also about people with complex needs. It can be a question of mental illness, long-term illness, low education and social problems. These people cannot be met by one authority at a time.

The coordination associations make a difference, but not through quick miracle solutions – that is rarely what works. However, it is not just a matter of incremental steps, but the coordination associations' help has led to people getting into work. Even the small steps can be completely decisive on the way toward work, better health, and in the long run, self-sufficiency.

I have worked as a social worker for a long time. I know that the coordination associations encounter something that we cannot always manage ourselves. We need much more coordination and cooperation.

The coordination associations also develop methods of work. They have not only succeeded with projects but have also developed ways to meet people and get them closer to work. These methods of work have then been able to be implemented in the regular operations.

But just as the Minister is pointing out, we have in recent years seen that several problems and hiccups have arisen. A grain of sand in the shoe, perhaps we can call it. The coordination associations have at times even had to stop performing part of their important activities. It is very unfortunate, because the need for interventions is not decreasing but rather increasing. Unemployment has not only persisted but also increased, especially among those who are furthest from the labor market. Then the state, the municipalities, and the regions should together strengthen and not weaken the structures that work. It is sad to see that is not the case.

One of the things the Minister touches upon is that the possibilities to combine with external funding are not the same as before. Furthermore, one can no longer follow up, and that is not good. Now it is time to write new guidelines, or what we now call it, for the agencies. What is the Minister doing, and how far can we go?

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

Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! I can assure the members that when I received this interpellation, one of many interpellations regarding the coordination unions, I definitely did not think "Oh no, not again" but rather thought: "Yes – finally a chance to talk about all the good things the government is doing in this area to get more people to move from benefits to work and from exclusion to self-sufficiency!"

This is a very important part, but it is a matter of having focus on several different things at the same time. We are now carrying out a major subsidy reform, which will lead more people to move from subsidies to work. This concerns people who hopefully have not been in exclusion for so long. At the same time, we keep the focus on these important issues, which concern all those who have lived in exclusion for a longer period, have not received the right help and support, and have definitely not always had their rights upheld. We really must not hide or forget anyone in the statistics. We must never give up on those who have ended up in exclusion but have the capacity to work. Slowly but surely, we need to find more paths back for many more.

Mr. Speaker! I want to pause briefly on the question regarding the ESF funds, which the member touched upon in his speech. I want to remind the House that it was not the government that decided that coordination associations shall no longer be able to run ESF projects. It was Försäkringskassan, as an independent authority, that made the finding that it is not compatible with current legislation. That is also exactly how the Swedish administrative model works.

Changing the law would have taken significantly longer and, furthermore, risked locking all coordination unions into a structure that might not have been applicable or relevant for the next ESF period.

Faced with this fact, we chose to react and act. In a very short time, we established a system that could guarantee and enable continued use of the ESF funds that are available for the operations. This is something that the member himself calls for and explains in his questions.

Now there is a system in place that, through Försäkringskassan, guarantees project ownership for important identified projects that other collaboration partners cannot or do not want to drive themselves for various reasons.

There was a very large consensus regarding the model that currently prevails between Försäkringskassan and several of the coordination federations. We announced this solution together in a joint article with the then-chairman of NNS. Their support in this matter has in no way changed.

It was a good solution we implemented there and then in order not to lose any money, but also not to lock ourselves into an incorrect system moving forward. Already when we delivered the solution, my message was very clear. The government has now taken its responsibility to specifically create a structure so that ESF funds can be used for the projects that cover the target groups of the coordination associations.

None of the projects that exist should be hindered by unnecessary bureaucracy. If problems of any kind arise for the parties to start or run the ESF projects themselves, Försäkringskassan steps in as project manager and can thus constitute the foundation or the guarantee. I have also received confirmation from the Director General of Försäkringskassan in our conversations that this is the case.

Now a very great responsibility rests on the parties to do their part. It is about identifying the projects, coordinating, and driving them either themselves or through Försäkringskassan so that one can carry out all the measures that benefit those for whom one is there.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thought I would come here and not politicize the issue so much but be constructive, but I still have to say a few things. We are politicians, after all.

The Minister begins by speaking about the subsidy reform. We do not agree with some parts of it. There must absolutely be an activity, but we say no thanks to more poor children. I just want to state that.

It has still been strange, given how much the government has championed the work line, that we have so many more unemployed today. My assessment is that one has not done enough to unlock the knots with what is already working, and there the Minister does not agree. Here is the end of my politicizing, and I return to the question.

What we see now is that the needs are increasing and not decreasing. We are nevertheless in agreement that more people really need help and support to enter the labor market. It is not that those people are not needed. They are needed on the labor market and in society.

It is a sorrow to see that so many of those who are unemployed and have been on sick leave have not received the right help or support to return to the labor market, and in that case, we lose competence.

For example, several projects have been carried out in Östergötland where a very high proportion, much higher than we could ever have expected, of those who have entered the projects have not only taken the steps we are talking about but are in work. It is an incredible win for the people and for society as a whole.

I also do not think we disagree that more people should be in work. We will do what we can to address that so that the competence is utilized. Very many of those who are currently unemployed or on sick leave have incredibly great competence that we need.

At the same time, we see that coordination associations across the country have been forced to phase out well-functioning operations. This is not due to a decrease in needs, but because the funding is no longer sustainable. We need to solve this.

The Minister says that it takes too long to change the legislation and that they are trying to solve it in another way. Even if it is solved temporarily now, it is not solved in the long term. It will be strange to do it in this way.

It has still existed for almost 40 years, and it has seemed to work previously. It has still been done. The Minister can count the years, because I might be wrong. We must solve it in the short term, but we also need to solve it in the long term.

Furthermore, the question of follow-up remains. We must be able to follow up so that we know what is actually working. This is both for the sake of these individuals and for what we spoke about earlier – good ways of working must be implemented in ordinary operations.

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

Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the opportunity, member, to go into a bit more depth on these important issues! I completely and fully agree.

It is about all those people who are now outside the labor market and who have ended up in a state of deep exclusion. Year in and year out, they have not received what they are entitled to, and they have not received help and support. Until now, they may have been on social assistance in many parts.

They have not received help and support. They have not received work training or learned Swedish well enough. They have not been able to attend any vocational training, had their education supplemented, or in that regard received the right help and support in health and medical care when they have had underlying diagnoses.

I now see a great potential in meeting all of them much earlier in the municipalities through the full-time activation in the social assistance if they apply for social assistance and live on social assistance. I think that is truly very positive. It is not everyone who is subject to the coordination associations' interventions, but it could be a small part.

There are few things that make me so frustrated and sometimes very provoked as when I listen to people who are in the coordination associations' various initiatives – they have experienced successful projects and have taken the first step into the labor market – and who are happy and proud of what they have achieved. If one then looks back at their history, one asks the question: Why did we let it go for so long? Why did they not get that help and support so much earlier? Why did they end up in exclusion without much support and help from society? We all know, and studies show it too: The more years you live in exclusion, the harder it is to come back and the worse your health becomes. It is a downward trend.

I hope that the coordination unions will not be needed in the future, at least not to the same extent as now. We will catch so many more so much earlier, quite regardless of whether it concerns the activity requirement, the subsidy ceiling, interventions in school for those staying at home, or whatever it may be. But this is based on the fact that we truly believe and think that these people were needed in our society. From the society's side, regardless of whether one belongs to authorities, municipalities, or healthcare, or if one is an employer or a fellow human being in a voluntary organization, it is important that we never, ever hide and forget people in the statistics.

I have a feeling that we have been far too afraid to set demands. One sets demands because one cares and because one truly sees the potential in another human being when it comes to a person's ability to both develop and have their rights upheld. We have been far too bad at this, and we have been far too bad at providing early interventions. But that is going to change now.

I mean that we need to work on several fronts simultaneously. Of course, the coordination associations have an incredibly important role to play here and now and probably also for a very long time to come. It is precisely as the member says: that there are many in our society who fall between the cracks and who end up between the systems and the rules and also between authorities. There we need to become significantly better at sharing information and at cooperating across boundaries. In that regard, the coordination associations are very good.

The Government Commissioner claims that we have tried to solve this with the funding via ESF. We have, therefore, solved it. But I also said clearly: The proposals for changes to laws that Försäkringskassan has submitted are being prepared right now in the Government Offices, together with the changes regarding the follow-up system which I also undeniably think are very important.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, that is why I began by saying that I was pleased that it was said that this is actually being processed further. It is not completely resolved. I see that there is a possibility, but it is not completely resolved.

I have worked as a social worker for almost 20 years. I have almost never met anyone who does not want to go to work. Some say that they do not want to. Some have lost so much of their self-esteem that they say that this is still a bit nice. People do not think that. They want to be self-sufficient. They want to be able to contribute. There is an incredible amount of people in Sweden right now – half a million – who actually are not allowed to do so.

We therefore need to do more. It is about both. It is absolutely about setting demands – that is what I think too. And it is about providing opportunities and conditions and about what the coordination unions do. When the coordination unions are resourceful – they are very innovative – and find new ways to provide support and help, we must capture that. Therefore, the follow-up becomes incredibly important.

For me, there is also a difference. It is about setting requirements and providing help. But to make children poor as a consequence of this, I do not think is reasonable – that is all I want to say.

What I wish, besides that this should be resolved, is that we consider how we can develop the coordination agreements. I also wish that all our systems should function. But I do not believe that either the Minister or I believe that it will be so in the foreseeable future. What I would wish is that these problems are solved and the scope of the legislation is increased, so that this can benefit more people.

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

Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)

Mr. Speaker! Many thanks for the interpellation and the opportunity to debate these important issues and, for my part, the opportunity to highlight what issues the government is driving within precisely this area!

I can only state that we actually seem to be in very much agreement. Coordination federations will be needed in the foreseeable future, and then they should have the best possible conditions. We recognize the innovative power, the great creativity, and the possibility to scale up and scale out certain funds. Not least I, who have been a municipal politician for many years, know that there is a very strong inherent power in the municipalities and their actors. They do not always go hand in hand with the authorities and state Sweden, and it is often there that it can become a bit of a problem. It is a matter of doing right and proper, following the law and giving the authorities good opportunities to be just that coordinating force, while at the same time we should not, for that matter, kill the innovative power and the possibility to, in a sometimes slightly whimsical way, as we in Småland particularly tend to express it, get more people to grow.

I will do my best. These are definitely important issues that we are processing – both regarding the follow-up system and regarding any potential new legislation. But here and now, it is important for me to be a bit resourceful. It is about not putting up obstacles just so that one can receive the important ESF funds – otherwise, projects would fall through completely. It is simply about finding a quick solution so that the ESF funds reach those they are actually intended for. It is not about building large offices or hiring many people within various coordination unions, but about really ensuring that we achieve interventions that make more people grow, come into their own, and ultimately become self-sufficient and find work and break the exclusion.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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