Response to interpellation 2025/26:484 on measures against irregularities in profit-driven elderly care
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that the starting point for elderly care should be security and humanity 1. The party wants healthy competition between serious providers and that unserious or criminal actors are shut out 1. M emphasizes the importance of the individual's freedom of choice 2 and argues that this must not be handed over to municipal politicians 3. M wants to prevent profit extraction from companies that commit crimes 3. The party is proud that the government has lowered the tax for nursing assistants 4, invests in language requirements and competence lifts 4 as well as abolishes minute-management in the municipalities where the party governs 4. V believes that the government and SD have worsened the "minute hunt" through market-liberal policy 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! Nadja Awad has asked me if I intend to take any measures to ensure that tax funds within elderly care are not used for fraud, crime, and profit maximization, and if so, which ones.
Nadja Awad has also asked me if I intend to strengthen the supervision, control, and sanctions against private operators who exhibit deficiencies in quality or legal compliance, and if so, how, as well as if I intend to take initiatives to ensure that the quality of elderly care is not negatively affected by profit requirements, and if so, how.
Nadja Awad has finally asked me what concrete measures I intend to take to meet the need for approximately 50,000 new employees in elderly care by 2030.
Madam Speaker! The starting point for all elderly care shall be security and humanity. Deficiencies in execution can never be accepted within either municipal or private operations. From the provisions of the Social Services Act (2025:400) it follows that interventions within social services shall be of good quality. The Health and Social Services Inspectorate, Ivo, is responsible for supervision of all operations, regardless of whether they are municipal or private operators conducting them.
Freedom of choice, high quality and security for the individual shall characterize the welfare financed with public funds. To achieve this, it is required that the care market is characterized by healthy competition between serious providers while unserious and criminal providers are shut out.
It is completely unacceptable that unserious actors exploit the welfare system for irregularities. The government has therefore commissioned an investigation to propose measures that strengthen Ivo's and the municipalities' possibilities to counter unserious and criminal operators, as well as to analyze and take a position on the need for measures that strengthen serious operators' possibilities and conditions (dir. 2025:90). The assignment shall be reported by February 9, 2027, at the latest.
Furthermore, the government has decided on the bill Sharper tools for the Health and Social Services Inspectorate (prop. 2025/26:15), which gives Ivo expanded opportunities to intervene against operations that do not meet the requirements of the legislation, including by introducing a sanction fee in two cases and that unauthorized operations shall be able to be prohibited immediately. The legislative changes entered into force on January 1 this year.
The government has also strengthened Ivo's conditions to carry out its work against welfare crime by increasing the agency's appropriation by 28 million kronor in 2025. In the budget bill for 2026 (prop. 2025/26:1), the government allocated 95.4 million kronor to Ivo for the work against unscrupulous and criminal actors as well as to continue meeting the need for supervision in accordance with Ivo's mandate. The government intends to allocate 144.2 million kronor for 2027 and 192.6 million kronor for 2028 to Ivo for this purpose. One can say that we are raising the level of ambition significantly.
Competence supply within elderly care is a priority issue for the government, and we continue to work with reforms in several areas for a stronger and safer elderly care throughout the country. Since 2023, the profession of assistant nurse has been a protected professional title, which contributes to ensuring competence within care and increasing the profession's attractiveness and status. The government has also, in the budget bill for 2026, strengthened and expanded the Elderly Care Initiative (Äldreomsorgslyftet). The competence initiative is proposed to be extended to 2027 and include 1.8 billion SEK per year for 2026 and 2027.
Questions regarding staffing and skills development, which the member has raised, are ultimately questions for the employer. It is about being an attractive employer, working with the work environment, finding solutions for a sustainable working life, and strengthening leadership properly.
The Government has recently appointed an inquiry that shall submit proposals to strengthen the competence of managers within elderly care and improve their conditions to lead the work (dir 2026:26). The purpose is to ensure safe and secure care and nursing for the elderly by strengthening the conditions for sustainable competence development and competence supply. The assignment shall be reported by April 2, 2027, at the latest.
Nadja Awad (V)
Madam Speaker! Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson and his government hunt the poor, the unemployed, the sick, and people with disabilities who receive assistance as if they were criminals. But healthcare and care companies, which cheat for real and even commit crimes, get away with it time and again. At the same time, the companies even get to earn gigantic sums of money from it. This year, the owners of the healthcare and care company Attendo shared 260 million kronor – a quarter of a billion kronor. It is the highest dividend since the listing on the stock exchange in 2015.
This year, the CEO of Attendo, Martin Tivéus, received 22 million kronor in salary and other benefits.
How on earth can the government and the Sweden Democrats allow companies to earn so much money by providing care and nursing that does not even meet the standard? At the same time, nursing assistants cannot afford to get sick and young care assistants cannot afford to move out from home. At the same time, the elderly are served microwaved food seven days a week.
Care and nursing companies deliver lower quality, according to research. They have fewer employees and fewer trained ones. They have fewer with full-time employment and permanent employment. They also have fewer satisfied users and elderly people. The staff have the lowest wages. A full-time employee in private elderly care earns almost 2,500 kronor less per month than a full-time employee in municipal elderly care.
It is completely incomprehensible that we have limited companies in Swedish welfare that can convert our tax money into gigantic salaries for CEOs and gigantic dividends for shareholders. The Government and Sverigedemokraterna watch while the looting continues and do not stop the profit-seeking in healthcare and elderly care. On the contrary, they have allowed these profit-seeking companies to continue establishing themselves in the municipalities despite the fact that they cheat, neglect care, and are reported to the police for suspected crimes.
Over 70 home care companies have lost their contracts with municipalities in the last five years. This is due, among other things, to fraud, poor management, and suspected crimes. And 15 municipalities say they have reported companies to the police, but so far only one report has led to someone being convicted of a crime.
Madam Speaker! In municipalities where Vänsterpartiet is involved in governing, agreements with these companies and corporations are terminated. But they continue to establish themselves in other municipalities, where right-wing parties are involved in governing.
When it comes to poor families with children, people with disabilities and the unemployed, they should be hunted for fraud and suspicion of crime in the social insurance system. But healthcare and care companies are obviously granted impunity by this government.
The Minister for Health and Social Affairs has, for example, not once been in the media and criticized private profit-driven elderly care. She only criticizes the municipal elderly care. How is it that the minister has double standards in this issue?
For example, the healthcare and care company Attendo has been reported to the police for systematic fraud in the form of overbilling of home care hours, and at least two employees have been reported to the police suspected of drug sales during working hours.
Rose-Marie, 82 years old, sat in her own urine for ten days, despite daily visits from Attendos home care. Her tears turned black, and it ended with her being forced to have her leg amputated. The Minister for Older Persons has not uttered a single word about this in the media.
Why are the Minister for Social Security and the government protecting these welfare companies?
One of Sweden's richest welfare billionaires, Per Josefsson, owner of the welfare giant Attendo, donated 200,000 SEK to the Moderaterna during 2025. This is shown by a review of the party's annual report, so I pose the question to the Minister for Health and Social Affairs: Is the donation from the welfare billionaire a gift to the Moderaterna and the government because they have not fought against the pursuit of profit in elderly care?
Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! I understand that the member does not have the ability, competence, or opportunity to follow the minister's work in the media. But for anyone investigating the matter, it should emerge with all desirable clarity that I have zero tolerance for poor elderly care, quite regardless of whether it is provided under municipal management, ideological management, or private management. It therefore does not matter to me what form of operation is used. It is about quality, and it is about safety and security for the elderly. I do not, therefore, have double standards. But I know that the member does, to a large extent.
What worries me even more, Madam Speaker, is that the member does not, not with a single word, not with a single sentence, describe this situation from the perspective of the elderly. Not a single time is the freedom of choice for the elderly, the possibility to influence their life situation, or the possibility to have influence over their own situation brought up. Not a single time is the importance of the elderly having the right to choose throughout their lives highlighted.
In my world, Madam Speaker, the will and right of the elderly to choose and influence their own situation does not go into retirement. That possibility is important, and it must be protected. One must have the right and opportunity to influence one's own security and safety and choose the care and nursing one wants based on quality, based on security and safety, and above all, based on the individual's freedom of choice.
The ageism that you in Vänsterpartiet exhibit is unparalleled. It is as if you in Vänsterpartiet seriously believe that at a given age, the right to make wise decisions that have an impact on one's own life is exhausted. You declare the elderly to be minors.
It is exactly as the member describes: where the Left Party is involved in governing, things are being shut down, they are being municipalized, and where the freedom of choice for the elderly no longer exists.
I do not at all share the view that the member describes here that private management or ideology-driven management would be worse. This varies across the entire country, and just as I am touching upon, it is about not having double standards, about not compromising on quality, on supervision, or on ensuring that we have a safe and secure elderly care for even a single second at all.
What the Left Party proposes instead is that we should take everything back and municipalize everything. All damages are equally bad, they are just equal. But the right for the elderly to choose and influence their own situation shall not exist at all. One should not be able to have LOV within home care. One should not be able to choose special housing oneself.
That is not where I stand. I think it is incredibly important to counter unserious actors. Companies that engage in irregularities and that do not provide elderly care of good quality, we really must clear out. They should not be allowed to exist. The permits should be withdrawn, and the sanction fees should rain down if one does not behave.
On the other hand, we shall safeguard freedom of choice and ensure that the companies involved contribute and complement, not least in times when more and more of us are getting older and the pressure on good elderly care with high quality increases. We shall protect those companies and ensure that they, just like the municipal ones, have good conditions to compete with quality, with good security and with good safety. But the municipal activity must be visible in the seams in exactly the same way as the independent actors.
Nadja Awad (V)
Madam Speaker! The Minister wants to talk about the elderly and how this government, with the help of the Sweden Democrats, cares about the elderly. In that case, I shall highlight three cases of elderly people who have been neglected by profit-seeking companies and corporations in healthcare and elderly care.
Individuals and relatives alerted that elderly people had received wounds with infections, running pus, and larvae at the Silverpark elderly home in Täby, which is owned by Vardaga. The minister has not come out and condemned this even once.
A woman with cognitive impairment suffered severe burns at Forenede Cares' residence Duvan in Linköping. She lay alone in scalding water and was forced to have her leg amputated. The CEO was forced to resign after the scandal. The Minister has not condemned this in the media a single time.
Rose-Marie, 82 years old, sat in her own urine for ten days, despite daily visits from Attendos home care. Her tears turned black, and it ended with her being forced to have her leg amputated. She received home care from Attendo.
Don't come and say that Vänsterpartiet does not protect the elderly! It is we who want to ban these unserious, criminal healthcare and nursing companies and firms that structurally neglect our elderly all over Sweden because they prioritize profit maximization so that they can extract billion-dollar profits. Their priority is gigantic salaries for CEOs and gigantic dividends for shareholders, not ensuring that they have enough staff who can provide care and nursing in a timely manner so that no elderly people get wounds with infections, running pus and larvae, get such severe burns that they are forced to amputate body parts, or are left sitting in their own urine for ten days.
Is this how we are to treat our elderly? I do not think that the government and the Sverigedemokraterna want that.
Why are you doing nothing about profit maximization? Why aren't you stopping it? Choke off the economic incentives for the unscrupulous criminal healthcare and elderly care companies!
You can have freedom of choice for the serious actors, for example foundations that are not profit-driven. They can continue to remain in elderly care and continue to deliver the so-called freedom of choice that this government, with the help of the Sweden Democrats, raves about so much. But it must not occur at the expense of the elderly and the staff's well-being.
I want to bring up another point, regarding the speeches accusing Vänsterpartiet of not protecting the elderly. In the latest measurements of which parties people have confidence in regarding elderly care, Vänsterpartiet is in the top three on the list. We have kicked the Sverigedemokraterna out of the top three, and we receive higher confidence in these issues than the minister's own party does.
It depends on that we, in cases that have been highlighted and repeatedly appeared in the media regarding elderly people who have been neglected or about staff who cannot afford it, have condemned this. We have also presented proposals, for example regarding a crisis commission for elderly care. We treat elderly care based on what it is and what staff, the elderly, and relatives are sounding the alarm about: There is a crisis in elderly care. The government and Sverigedemokraterna have not heeded that crisis, but have instead prioritized tax cuts for the very richest.
My question is: Why do you not choke off the economic incentives for these unserious criminal healthcare and elderly care companies?
Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! It is absolutely excellent that we have this debate. It will be very good consumer information for the voters and for the elderly in our society that the Left Party's plan is to abolish freedom of choice for the elderly. They want to declare all the country's elderly incompetent. It should not be possible to choose an independent home care service and decide who gets to come to one's home and handle the most intimate situations so that one receives the help and support that one needs and is entitled to. One should not be able to choose housing at all; instead, municipal politicians, preferably from the Left Party, should decide for you.
That is not where I am, definitely not. We in our party safeguard and cherish the freedom of choice for the elderly. We believe that elderly people who have been part of building this country should have the right to be able to influence their own life situation and make their own decisions. That right should apply throughout life. It definitely does not expire in retirement. And it should not be municipal politicians who decide this over your head. The right to choose applies throughout life.
Vänsterpartiet does not share that view but instead wants to take back all housing and all home care, so that the elderly are referred to only one actor.
The difference between us is that I oppose unserious actors. I do not want people to be able to have a profit withdrawal at all if they are an unserious company providing elderly care, if they are criminal and appropriate money they are not entitled to, or if they cheat or commit crimes.
That is why we have had an incredibly high tempo to strengthen Ivo and provide more tools so that criminal, unscrupulous actors cannot exploit our welfare at all. Besides feeding the criminal economy and organized crime, it also means that some of our most vulnerable may not receive the care and support that they need and are entitled to.
In addition to the measures that I have already mentioned, Madam Speaker, the government gave a mandate last year to several agencies to consolidate efforts against welfare crime. We have further tightened the requirements and controls of the operations. Taken together, this will mean that permits will be revoked, incorrect compensations will be stopped, and operations run by unscrupulous actors in the welfare sector will be closed.
The Left Party had every opportunity to do this, Madam Speaker, when they had influence over the previous government for eight years, but they did not do it. They did not take a single one of the measures that we have taken during this mandate period.
We are serious in our work to counter unserious actors and ensure that there are good competitive conditions for the serious actors who are involved and contribute to a really good elderly care in Sweden. At the same time, we safeguard the freedom of choice for the elderly and relatives to have influence and be able to decide for themselves about their own lives and their own life situations.
My questions back to the member are: Why does the member not think it is important with freedom of choice for the elderly? Why should the elderly not be able to choose? Poor elderly care is completely unacceptable, quite regardless of the form of operation. But does the member think it is not just as dangerous when wounds occur in the municipal elderly care? Is it okay in the municipal operation but not in the independent one when you press the alarm and no one comes?
Nadja Awad (V)
Madam Speaker! The Left Party's party leader Nooshi Dadgostar and I have posted four clocks – one for Ulf Kristersson, Jimmie Åkesson, Ebba Busch and Simona Mohamsson – to highlight how the government, with the help of the Sweden Democrats, has made the minute hunt in elderly care much, much worse.
When they lower the tax for the very richest and at the same time make cuts for the municipalities and allow tax money to disappear into CEOs' salaries and shareholders' dividends, it is the elderly care staff and our elderly who have to foot the bill. Nursing assistants and care assistants have to run faster between more elderly people. They do not even get a good salary and pension as a thank you. The elderly feel forced to apologize because the toilet visit took longer than the minute-management allows.
The government and the Sweden Democrats do not seem to take the crisis seriously. We therefore urge you to personally test the minute-hunting that exists within elderly care and which you have exacerbated with market-liberal policy. Can Ulf Kristersson manage to go to the toilet in four minutes? Can Jimmie Åkesson manage to brush his teeth in three minutes? Can Ebba Busch manage to shower in twelve minutes? Can Simona Mohamsson manage to eat her food in eight minutes?
Then consider how it would have worked if you had been older! Would it have felt like a dignified situation to eat, shower, or go to the toilet while the clock is ticking? Perhaps such a thought experiment could inspire a more humane care policy in the future.
As party leader for the government base and as responsible minister, one has the ultimate responsibility to ensure that we have a functioning welfare state in Sweden. When it comes to something as basic as receiving help in one's daily life in the autumn of life, this government, with the help of Sverigedemokraterna, has failed.
With that said, I would like to hand over a letter with time stamps and a personal letter to the Minister for Pensions, which I hope she will wish to accept.
TREDJE VICE TALMANNEN
I note that the member is aware of the rules of procedure. The stopwatch was a prop and was kept hidden until the final contribution. From this, I conclude that the member has read the rules of procedure stating that props intended to reinforce the political message shall not appear. What we just saw was, of course, a violation of the rules of procedure. I have noted this.
Äldre- och socialförsäkringsministern Anna Tenje (M)
Madam Speaker! I think it would have been more appropriate if the member and her party devoted themselves to abolishing the minute-management in the municipalities where they govern and can exert influence, just as many Moderate-led municipalities are doing now. It would be better if one tried to improve the working environment for those employed in elderly care and strengthen the leadership instead of trying to pick up political, populist points from the rostrum.
I understand that the focus lies elsewhere. When one does not care about the freedom of choice for the elderly and does not want to safeguard and nurture it, but is instead more interested in quick political points, that is where the focus lies instead.
Madam Speaker! I am very happy and proud that our government has lowered the tax for hard-working nursing assistants. A single mother of two children who works and toils in elderly care has received 3,100 kronor more in her wallet.
With the Left Party, one would get a significantly higher tax, and we know that in the municipalities where the Left Party rules, they raise the tax even further. I believe there are few things that increase the stress and pressure on a hard-working nursing assistant as much as the fact that the salary is not enough, that it does not pay off to get an education, and that the tax is raised time and again so that it does not pay off to work.
We are lowering the tax, and we are investing in language requirements in elderly care. We are investing in a skills boost for those who work within elderly care. It should pay off to get an education. We also ensure that we strengthen the safety and security for the elderly.
In the municipalities where the Moderaterna rule, we are now abolishing the minute-by-minute management municipality by municipality.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.