Response to interpellation 2025/26:409 on the right to LSS interventions
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the right to LSS interventions and the need for equal application between municipalities. M argues that LSS has improved living conditions and that the government is working to increase equality by letting Socialstyrelsen develop support material 1. M emphasizes that the government takes the lack of equality very seriously and is working on a major assistance reform to nationalize assistance decisions and avoid a welfare lottery 2 3 4. MP argues that the legislation has been juridified and that legal practice creates enormous differences in support interventions 5. MP considers the situation serious and requiring a rapid review of the LSS legislation 5 6. MP emphasizes that even national actors such as Försäkringskassan must be held accountable for strict assessments 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.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Nils Seye Larsen has, in summary, asked me if I agree that the differences between municipalities when it comes to assessments and decisions on support according to LSS risk creating a welfare lottery, and whether I intend to take any measures. Nils Seye Larsen has also asked me how I intend to proceed with the Swedish National Audit Office's recommendations regarding adjustments and clarifications of LSS, whether I judge that the state's follow-up and supervision is sufficient to ensure a more equal application of the Social Services Act (2005:400) and LSS, and whether I intend to take any measures based on my assessment.
The Act (1993:387) on Support and Service to Certain Persons with Disabilities, LSS, is a reform that has in a decisive way improved the living conditions for many people with extensive disabilities. The Act has enabled increased self-determination and created conditions for a more independent life for persons who belong to the Act's target group. The number of persons who have an LSS intervention is increasing, but it is of course important that the individual receives the right intervention and that the intervention maintains good quality.
Socialstyrelsen stated in the report Changes in accompaniment over time, which was released in 2023, that there is a need to increase knowledge about the purpose of the accompaniment intervention, but also a more general need for support regarding investigations, assessments of the circle of persons, and the right to interventions according to LSS.
The Government has, in the regulatory letter for 2026, tasked Socialstyrelsen with producing such support material, among other things based on the intentions of LSS and international conventions. In the assignment, particular focus shall be placed on the intervention companion service. Socialstyrelsen shall provide an interim report on the assignment in June and, at the latest in December 2026, submit a final report on the assignment. The purpose of the assignment is to increase the equality in the municipalities' handling of LSS.
The Government has received the Swedish National Audit Office's report LSS – a municipal assignment under state direction and control. The report is currently being prepared within the Government Offices, and the Government will respond with a communication to the Riksdag.
Nils Seye Larsen (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
I am probably one of many who were very deeply affected by the episodes in Uppdrag granskning about Gustaf and his relatives and the incredibly difficult situation they find themselves in, about how, alongside this, they are forced to wage another undignified struggle – for the right to support measures that should be self-evident – and what consequences that has. It seems to depend on where one lives.
Here, the great challenges with unequal and insufficient support for people all over Sweden with the diagnosis of schizophrenia are also highlighted. However, that is another question, which I will have to pose to the Minister for Health and Social Affairs. This is also about support measures according to LSS.
I appreciate the Minister's heart, commitment, and responsiveness regarding these issues and the situation for those of us living with a disability. What I may have lacked is the sense of crisis that would be needed regarding the LSS legislation and how threatened it actually is, as well as the decisiveness that would need to follow that sense of crisis.
The LSS legislation once put Sweden on the map and made Sweden a role model thanks to the measures for people with extensive mental or physical disabilities and their opportunities to live a dignified life with self-determination and participation in society. In recent decades, the legislation has unfortunately become increasingly juridified. Case law determines the right to measures to an ever greater extent, and the whole thing has come to vary enormously.
For example, we have been involved in cases of escorting, where more and more people with visual impairments are no longer considered to have the right to LSS interventions. We have spoken about a frightening case, which also affected me, involving a person who no longer has the possibility of receiving escorting to once a week go to their parents' grave and lay flowers there. I can also mention cases concerning personal assistance where the differences were absolutely enormous – I believe the difference between the municipalities' and the Försäkringskassan's assessment of basic needs was 6,000 percent.
This is obviously completely unsustainable, which the Swedish National Audit Office, which the Minister was referring to, emphasized in its review. I am pleased that the government will work on this. There is truly a need for the legislation to be clarified and for an investigation and review of the LSS legislation to be carried out, so that we can return to the law's original intention and so that it once again becomes the rights-based legislation it once was.
It is urgent. When can we expect to receive such a review of the law itself so that the rights of people with disabilities can be clarified? It must be equal; the LSS legislation should not become some absurd postcode lottery.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Warm thanks to Nils Seye Larsen for the important interpellation on an extremely important issue!
As the member surely knows, I have on several occasions been very concerned and expressed myself critically about municipalities that perhaps for decades have made a certain assessment having changed it even though the conditions or the needs have not changed. This is, of course, something that the government takes very seriously. We follow this very closely. We also prepare materials that we have received, including the National Audit Office's audits, which are incredibly important for the government's and the agencies' work to be able to develop.
As I described initially, the Government Offices are now working on the report and the conclusions therein. We look forward to delving into the report. However, it is difficult to say exactly when we will be finished. I wish I could do so, but it is nearly impossible. When the work is complete – when this has been prepared – we will return with a communication where we present our assessment of the observations and recommendations that the National Audit Office has made in this report.
Just as the member describes, measures according to the Act on Support and Service to Certain Persons with Disabilities shall promote equality in living conditions. They shall also be part of being able to participate fully in social life, which was highlighted in a very nice way. The concerns regarding this were also highlighted at the Funkisriksdagen here a couple of days ago, and this with accessibility is an important part.
The LSS interventions are increasing in total, but unfortunately, we do not see that within all of the ten interventions. This applies, among other things, to the accompaniment, and we are now working with the report that Socialstyrelsen has submitted. An important part is the assignment that Socialstyrelsen has received in the regulation letter and which Socialstyrelsen also proposes should be carried out.
It is no secret that even during the years in opposition, I was concerned that one can be in municipal detention and not dare to move out if the assessments were to become worse in another municipality. This was one of the reasons behind the committee initiative that I, among others, took the initiative for. This is another example of a part of LSS that we are working to supplement in various ways after a, I hope, attentive dialogue with the organizations for people with disabilities.
Nils Seye Larsen (MP)
Madam Speaker! I am aware that the Minister has been deeply affected and concerned by the various applications.
Historically, the state, municipalities, and regions have always had different levels that provided different interventions. For a long time, it worked well because each instance started from the individual. But something happened at the beginning of the 2000s. Then, the view on support interventions, especially personal assistance, changed. It became a destructive spiral where Försäkringskassan began making much stricter assessments with new guidance and new directives, and more people received rejections. Many then proceeded to the Administrative Court, and a juridification process was set in motion.
I remember this because I sat as a lay politician on a committee in Umeå and said that one should keep an eye on whether the municipality's costs for assistance would increase. During the period 2010–2014 alone, the municipalities' costs then increased by almost 50 million as a consequence of people being pushed down from state personal assistance to municipal assistance.
This in turn led to the municipalities starting to consider how they would make the assessments. It triggered a juridification spiral, and every agency is now looking at its own house. Those who are hit hardest and fall between the cracks are the people who have extensive needs for support measures from all the different measures. This can be good to keep in mind, but of course, we must work forward.
I want to be clear that we all bear a responsibility here. Miljöpartiet, when in government, perhaps did not take this fully seriously either. But with that said: The situation is serious, and we really need to move forward. How can we work to make the changes that need to be made in the LSS legislation so that people who are completely dependent on support measures, whether it is companionship, daily activities, a contact person, or personal assistance, shall receive their support measure without having to wage a bureaucratic battle? And, above all, how can we work to make it more equal across the entire country so that support measures do not become a welfare lottery?
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Once again, thanks to Nils Seye Larsen!
We share the concern that different municipalities are making different assessments. It must, of course, not be the case that such important rights legislation becomes a lottery depending on where one is located. This has also been the starting point for the committee initiatives that the Riksdag has submitted and which the government is now working on.
Different reports have shown that limited municipal guidelines exist. At the same time, this is a municipal responsibility that the municipalities have accepted to take and wanted to have as a municipal legislation. The municipalities have a responsibility to meet the individual's needs, and guidelines are needed to be a support in the processing of the right to interventions. However, one must always start from the individual's needs.
It should not be, as the member says, a bureaucratic struggle. Let me take a unified interpretation service as an example. We know that people in need of interpretation services have had to devote a great deal of time and effort to turn to different actors depending on where interpretation support is needed. The unification we are now doing, with the intention that one should be able to have a way in, is precisely about it being easy to get the right support at the right time.
Something else we have invested in and that is in very high demand is the competence center for people with intellectual disabilities and autism, which has now been established at the National Board of Health and Welfare. This area has been very neglected, and there has also been a lot of stigmatization and difficulties in obtaining the right support and help.
In area after area, we are working to strengthen the conditions for persons with disabilities, and the Riksrevisionen's audit is an important contribution to the work that is already ongoing in the Government Offices.
Nils Seye Larsen (MP)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
Yes, absolutely, but we also need to place demands on those who have the national responsibility, for example when it concerns Försäkringskassan and its view on personal assistance. It has become much stricter over time, and there has also been a shift in the interpretations. It is important to keep in mind that we cannot just place the responsibility for the shortcomings on the municipalities but also need to work nationally.
I checked the Socialstyrelsen report, and it is telling that it says: ”We find it remarkable that despite the introduction of guidelines, no major improvement has occurred. The consequence of this low level of residential support for persons with schizophrenia and schizophrenic-like conditions is that more in the relevant group risk not recovering, not being able to live in their own ordinary housing, and also deteriorating in their condition. This does not only mean suffering for the individual themselves but also has negative consequences for people in their surroundings.”
It is precisely this that the case of Gustaf illustrates. One of the consequences when one does not receive the right support measures is that the relatives have to carry a very heavy burden. Therefore, it is important that we move forward.
Perhaps it is not possible to give an answer here and now, but can we expect the government to come back shortly? We are waiting for both a new leadership law and a review of the LSS legislation. Is the government also prepared to provide funding? One of the Swedish National Audit Office's recommendations is to provide the municipalities with strong funding so that they can implement LSS according to the changes the government wants to see.
Socialtjänstministern Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! I would like to extend a warm thank you to Seye Larsen, who is a member for whom I have the greatest respect and whom I appreciate working with in the Committee on Social Affairs.
The questions the member of Parliament raises are indeed high on the government's agenda, and it is one of the reasons why we are now working towards a nationalization of the assistance. At its core lies a deep concern about how different it looks in Sweden's 290 municipalities, and we are now working to transfer the approximately 5,000 assistance decisions that are in the municipalities to a national function. It is because it should not be a lottery when it comes to the assessments, but it should be much more secure.
Just as the member says, it is the relatives who will take the big hit. The legislative change that enters into force on July 1 this year and which allows the relief service to be used even outside the home can be part of making things easier and more flexible, but we are currently preparing the major assistance reform which has the purpose of making the assessment more equitable.
I can assure the members that we are not trying to delay anything. The communication that will be issued as a result of the National Audit Office's review will be issued as soon as it is possible.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.