Response to interpellation 2025/26:568 on correct priorities for reduced waiting times in healthcare
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that the government has prioritized shortening queues through targeted state grants for specific procedures such as cataracts, hip joints, and anterior cruciate ligament 1. KD claims that these investments contribute to shorter queues, that total queues have decreased by 40 percent compared to 2022, and that the regions have the freedom to manage the funds 1 2 3. KD also argues that available capacity in other regions is utilized to shorten queues 2. S argues that the government lacks responsibility for healthcare, makes large savings, and prioritizes tax cuts for the wealthy over healthcare 4 5. S wants a national plan for cancer care, indexed state grants, and that healthcare is provided based on need 4 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! Karin Sundin has asked me on what grounds I and the government have decided that it is specifically within the areas of cataracts, hip joints, and anterior cruciate ligament tears that there has been the greatest need for state grants for targeted interventions. Karin Sundin has also asked me whether I and the government, based on our prioritization, have assessed that there are other areas where it is less urgent to shorten waiting times, and whether the 1.2 per mille of the planned care that the initiative covers is in line with the needs principle of the Health and Medical Services Act (2017:30).
Shortening the queues to healthcare has been and is one of the government's most prioritized issues during the mandate period. When the government took power, we also took over a healthcare queue that was then longer than ever and which for a long time had only continued to increase.
The government has taken several measures to address the situation, including through strengthened management of the targeted state grants to healthcare. During the mandate period, the government has invested a total of approximately 25 billion kronor for this purpose. A large part of these funds has been distributed through a new state grant ordinance for specialized care.
Under 2026, approximately 5 billion kronor will be distributed through the ordinance. The conditions are broadly formulated, and the regions have great opportunities to, within the framework of the ordinance, independently manage how the funds shall be used and distributed within their region.
Of a total of 25 billion, one billion SEK in 2025 and 750 million SEK in 2026, corresponding to approximately 7 percent, has been used for a targeted investment to shorten queues for certain procedures. The investment is based on a proposal from a government investigator, and the procedures in question were selected, among other reasons, against the background that they have for a long time been characterized by long waiting times, not least for elderly patients. The procedures do not normally require the resources of acute hospitals, which means that existing capacity from private healthcare providers can be used.
Operations for hip replacements and cataracts account for only just over one per mille of the care provided according to Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner. At the same time, the patients waiting for any of these operations constitute a full 7 percent of all patients who have waited longer than 90 days for surgery. It is therefore a large group of waiting patients who are covered and who today receive care in a timely manner compared to before the initiative began.
If queues are to be shortened and welfare is to be able to deliver, the healthcare's total capacity must be utilized. The government's initiative strengthens the incentives to utilize the capacity that exists and constitutes a complement to the broad initiatives that the government is making on health and medical care during the mandate period.
During 2026, the initiative was furthermore expanded to include an additional three measures. The regions are free to decide for themselves which of the included interventions they wish to prioritize, depending on the situation in their region.
I agree with Karin Sundin that care should be provided based on need. The regions shall, in their capacity as primary providers, always consider the principle of need in their work and in medical prioritizations. To refrain from providing care to patients with a confirmed need for care, while there is capacity among private healthcare providers, is not to prioritize correctly.
There are still challenges with accessibility and long healthcare queues also within other parts of the healthcare system. The Government is working in various ways to shorten the queues, and the initiative being discussed here constitutes a smaller but significant part.
Overall, the government's initiative has contributed to significantly shorter healthcare queues than at the beginning of the mandate period. For the queues as a whole, we have seen a reduction of more than 40 percent between October 2022 and June 2026. If anything, this should be sufficient proof that the government's work extends beyond a few operations.
Karin Sundin (S)
Madam Speaker! Has the government really made the right priorities to reduce waiting times in healthcare, and has the government done it in such a way that those who have the greatest need for care go first? These are my questions now that we have the results of four years with the Tidö government. It has been years where the core activities of the welfare state, the school, elderly care and not least healthcare, have had to take a backseat.
We heard the Minister for Health speak about the billions that the government has given to healthcare. It sounds much better than it is. As the Minister for Finance usually points out, the tax money is not enough for everything. For four years, the government has prioritized lower taxes over money for healthcare. State grants have not been increased in line with inflation or cost increases, and not in line with the increasing proportion of elderly people. The value of the state's billions for healthcare has, in fact, decreased during these four years.
There are, however, some areas that the government considers particularly important to invest in, and those are shorter queues for operations for fractures, hip replacements, and cataracts. We also heard the minister say that 7 percent of the state grants have been earmarked for these procedures: 1 billion in 2025 and 750 million in 2026.
7 percent of the money therefore goes to procedures that constitute 1.2 per mille of the total healthcare production within planned care. It is a major investment, and it is good when patients' waiting times for care are as short as possible. It reduces the time for suffering and anxiety, and it likely improves patients' quality of life. As short a waiting time as possible should apply to all patients, not just for those who have a diagnosis that happens to be of particular interest to the government. It should also apply to those patients who have the greatest need for care.
The Minister for Health and Social Affairs says that she shares my view that care should be provided based on need. However, it is not a responsibility that she herself wants to take. Care based on need is the responsibility of the regions, not the government. It is therefore about those regions that have seen the value of state grants eroded for four years and who now see how the government, with its state grants, prioritizes measures based on where it is easiest to quickly achieve results in the form of shorter waiting times for surgery and not based on severity or need.
Madam Speaker! I have an appeal to everyone listening: The next time you hear Elisabet Lann or someone else from the government beat their chest for having shortened the healthcare queues, you should prick up your ears. You will probably be told the example of hip joints or perhaps cataracts. The government has earmarked 1 billion and 750 million kronor to be able to use just these examples. You will probably not hear Elisabet Lann say anything about her responsibility for the long waiting times for care in any other area.
I note, in any case, that I lack an answer to my question: Has the government used the state grants that are directed to the regions in a way that ensures that those who have the greatest need for care also receive priority for care?
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Health and Care for the answer.
These are incredibly important issues, because the vast majority of us will at some point be in need of healthcare. It is also the voters' most important issue. Therefore, it is very good that my colleague, Karin Sundin, has asked the question about the healthcare queues and what actually lies behind them, because it is not so incredibly easy for the voters to see through.
If you scratch a little behind the surface, the Minister for Health's answer becomes quite clear. The Minister for Health said that when the government took power, it also took over a healthcare queue that was then longer than ever and which for a long time had only continued to increase. The Minister for Health was therefore saying that the healthcare queues are significantly shorter than at the beginning of the mandate period.
That sounds good. Wow, one thinks. So fantastically much they have achieved. Despite having fewer resources, because the regions have had larger expenditures given the inflation and so on, they have managed to shorten the healthcare queues. My colleague, Karin Sundin, pointed out that 7 percent of the investments go to 1.2 per mille of what healthcare is engaged in. That is quite a lot of money to shorten the healthcare queues in specific parts.
I want to raise one thing regarding the healthcare queues that I do not think the Minister for Health or anyone in this government has raised. From which year is it being measured?
The Minister for Health and Social Affairs was not the Minister for Health and Social Affairs then. I believe that Elisabet Lann was a municipal politician in Gothenburg during this time, but we had a pandemic. Not everyone may remember it, but we had a pandemic between 2019 and 2022, and into 2023. We were all aware of the situation within the healthcare system. Everyone knew that it would be a challenge to address the care that had been postponed, given the great burden it meant for the healthcare system to manage all those who needed acute medical care as a result of the pandemic. We all knew that.
If a government had not managed to shorten the queues after that measurement year, it would have been a scandal. It is clear that one does it. It is therefore inherent in the nature of the matter that it actually makes a difference which measurement year one measures from.
The government has also constantly provided insufficient resources to healthcare. It is my and the Social Democrats' firm opinion. That is also why we in our budgets have directed more resources to healthcare throughout the entire mandate period.
But it is also about long-term perspective. What the SD government has engaged in during all this time are targeted state grants, which are very difficult for all municipalities and regions to manage. One always has to react. You don't know how much money you will receive next year or what it will look like. Therefore, one of our most important election promises, which I am very proud of, is that we shall have state grants that also take inflation into account so that one knows and can calculate on their long-term conditions for financing.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! Healthcare is one of the most important social institutions we have. During the Christian Democrats' years in the seat as Minister for Health, over 20 billion is missing. I shall explain.
One notices that healthcare is one of the most important social institutions, not least by the fact that voters almost always rank it as the most important political issue. Funded according to ability and distributed according to need, it creates equality, that is, it reduces the difference in life conditions between rich and poor.
Healthcare you can rely on creates security. But healthcare you can rely on also costs money, money that the now responsible government has failed to provide.
Grants to regions and municipalities are the state's largest individual expenditure, sometimes called general government grants. They are an important source of funding for healthcare. Therefore, we Social Democrats have decided that we shall consider them as a foundation for welfare and for healthcare.
But in order for the bottom not to drop out, it must be secured, increased, indexed – call it what you will. The point is that the general state grants must cover as many items and as much staff this year as they did last year. Unfortunately, it is a principle that this government has not upheld.
I and my colleagues on the Norrbotten bench have ordered an investigation from the Riksdag's investigation service to get a picture of what would be required for the general government grants to have the same value as they had during our last year in government, 2022. This means that one should be able to hire and buy as much for them as one could in 2022.
And hold on now: The general state grants to the regions are worth only 5.9 billion less this year than they were in 2022. To take an example, it means that the nursing assistants at our hospitals and health centers all over the country could be missing up to 10,000 colleagues compared to what they had in 2022. It is not like a pittance we are talking about. The one who is chasing healthcare queues should start by looking there.
If one aggregates this for the four years of the parliamentary term, that is, adds up what has been missing in securing funding for 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026, one lands on 20.2 billion kronor that this government has blown on healthcare during the parliamentary term.
As said: If one wants to shorten healthcare queues, one could start there.
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! It is very pleasing that so many want to discuss healthcare because it is the voters' most important issue. I also think it is the most important issue for a good society and a secure welfare.
I am also a bit impressed that one dares to be so self-righteous when representing a party, Madam Speaker, that has a rather deficient track record on the issue.
I watched as recently as yesterday the party leader debate before the 2022 election with the then Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. It was quite entertaining to see specifically the segment on healthcare, where they showed a steady curve of how the queues over eight years had only increased and increased. In this passage of seven minutes, Magdalena Andersson returned twice to: Yes, the queues increased already before the pandemic.
This is well known, but I understand that there is a desire to forget it.
Speaking of using 2022 and the pandemic years as reference years, it is a bit amusing to look at the high state grants that were intended to compensate the regions for the pressures from the pandemic and have this as a starting point. It gave the regions enormous surpluses across the whole of Sweden, money that could not be done away with but which also enables the regions to manage the finances during slightly more difficult times because the result equalization reserve can be used. This thus strengthened the regions' finances.
This government then continued to compensate for rising inflation and pension costs, which caused problems for the regions. But during the previous year, 2025, the regions actually ended with a surplus, over 8 billion plus.
This idea of indexing the state grants would only provide more surplus to Region Stockholm, which is making a surplus of 5 billion. It will not address the unequal healthcare and the unequal waiting times in the country. It can differ by hundreds of days, depending on which region one lives in, whether one receives care in time – speaking of need-based care.
Today, one does not receive care based on need. Today, one receives care based on which region one lives in. If two people live one kilometer apart, it can differ by many weeks or months how quickly one can receive care.
The marginal investment that this government has made on a few selected diagnoses is a small investment in areas that have accounted for 7 percent of the waiting times. That is where the queues have built up. Despite the fact that there is available capacity in other regions, the regions with long queues have not utilized that opportunity. They have preferred to see their residents wait, even though the possibility exists to purchase care in another region. This government has then made the assessment that it is sensible to utilize the capacity that exists, which nonetheless cannot be used for other ailments but just for this type of one-off intervention that does not take up care beds. This has contributed to reducing the queues.
The fact is, however, that the queues compared to 2022, not specifically for these three interventions but on the total, have decreased by 40 percent. We have cleared the pandemic queues. And do you know what – we have also started clearing the social queues! We are now down to the same level as the summer of 2015. Isn't that good?
Karin Sundin (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister for Health calls me self-righteous and my party colleagues self-righteous. I am not the only one who is skeptical about whether the government is truly making the right priorities with its investments to shorten certain healthcare queues.
The previous conservative government, the Alliance government, also made such investments, but the evaluations of the so-called "kömiljarder" (queue billions) that existed between 2009 and 2014 do not show particularly good results. For example, the National Audit Office states in its evaluation that the billions only had a short-term effect on waiting times. It is unclear whether the effect was due to a real increase in care or if it was administrative measures that were behind it, and it is also unclear whether performance-based payments as a steering tool had any effect in the long run at all. Nevertheless, it is what the Tidö government has invested the largest sum of money in its healthcare budget on – even though it was a narrower investment than the Alliance government's. That which is not heart failure, hip joints, and cataracts is the regions' responsibility. The government takes no responsibility for that.
We see the result. After four years with the Tidö government, healthcare lacks sustainable long-term funding. During these four years, we have seen large savings, layoffs, and mass terminations, while the staff shortage is great in many areas. There are large differences in access to care across the country. Patients from both the north and the south are having to travel further and further to receive the care they should have received in their home region. What is the government going to do about this?
We also see how more or less serious actors, or unserious actors, are making large sums of money in a healthcare market that is not functioning. And we have seen how gang criminals are investing in running health centers.
We Social Democrats have a healthcare promise to all of Sweden. We want to take a collective political responsibility in municipalities, in regions, in the Riksdag and in a future government so that healthcare functions in all of Sweden. A Social Democratic government will not shirk its responsibility or blame a single region or anyone else. We promise that we will put welfare first, before tax cuts for those who have the most to gain from tax cuts.
As a patient, one has the right to receive care in a timely manner, regardless of which disease or which ailment one has been affected by and regardless of where in the country one lives. We say that a national plan was needed to reduce waiting times in cancer care. They are not decreasing. Today, only half of cancer patients receive care in a timely manner, relative to the national goals. There was a need for a greater focus so that Sweden can live up to the portal paragraph of the Health and Medical Services Act, which states that the person who has the greatest need for care shall go first.
We will put a stop to today's system of hidden cuts in healthcare. We promise to ensure that state grants are adjusted in line with inflation and cost increases. We know that stable funding from one year to the next is a prerequisite for municipalities and regions to be able to do their jobs in a good way for all patients, regardless of where they live and regardless of which disease they have been affected by.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! It is always interesting how, depending on which seat one sits in, things are also referred to in a different way. When it is an S-led government, it is the socialists' way, but when one sits in government oneself, it is the regions' way.
Let me take an example where the same parties rule in the region as in Sweden's government – I think that one still has to take some kind of responsibility – namely my own county, Östergötland.
In Östergötland, 660 fewer people are working now than when this parliamentary term started. Is it visible? Yes, it is – especially within psychiatry. When we have knocked on doors during the parliamentary term, we have met desperate parents. They have waited not just for months but for years for a time in child and adolescent psychiatry – because the cuts have been so large.
This is a reality that people face. Therefore, I am still surprised by what the Minister for Health and Social Affairs accuses us Social Democrats of, namely, maintaining a self-righteous tone. Is the Minister for Health and Social Affairs satisfied with the situation in healthcare? We Social Democrats believe that we need to invest properly in healthcare. The money should go to care based on need, not leak out to criminal actors. I look forward to implementing this after the autumn election.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! We have every reason to be bold and have some self-confidence. Not only is healthcare the voters' most important issue; the voters also usually give us ownership. Most voters usually think that we have the best healthcare policy. I believe the Minister for Health knows that. Still, the Minister for Health stands here and says, in principle, that healthcare has the resources it needs. There is no reason to count the state grants, she says. The regions have so much money.
We Social Democrats do not agree. Does the Minister for Health and Social Affairs really believe that regional politicians, healthcare staff, and voters share her worldview that the regions have so much money?
Madam Speaker! This is a question of priorities. We Social Democrats have, with the same budget framework as the government, indexed the state grants every year throughout the entire mandate period. Furthermore, we have presented proposals for stronger public finances than the government. The difference is that the government has prioritized lowering taxes, aimed mostly at those who earn the most. Politics is about priorities, and we prioritize healthcare for everyone. You prioritize tax cuts for the rich.
With this said, unless something very unexpected happens, this is my final speech in the chamber. I would therefore like to take the opportunity to thank the Speaker's Presidium, the administration, and my colleagues for the past years. For what I assume is the last time, I thank you for the floor!
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to extend a special thanks to Linus Sköld, who chooses to discuss healthcare during his final debate. I think that was a good and wise choice. Thank you for that!
The claims that a large part of the investment this mandate period is more restricted are not correct. The large part of the investment is free for the regions to use. They must use it for healthcare. That requirement we set from the government's side. It may happen that it concerns some regional politicians.
It is only 7 percent of the 25 billion for shortening queues that is earmarked for, now, six different interventions where there are long queues and the needs are great. I would like one of the members to look these people in the eye and explain why they should not receive care in time. It makes a difference for people that capacity is utilized that otherwise would not have been used. It is a question of available capacity that is purchased from other providers or from other regions.
It was also expressed here that patients should not have to travel. I want to once again recommend that one goes back and looks at the party leader interview from 2022. When then Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson was asked what more could have been done to reverse the unfortunate trend, which continued for eight years and even before the pandemic, she expressed exactly that we need to get better at ensuring that patients can receive care in another region. But when this government enables that, we receive criticism from the same party for doing exactly that, so that more patients can receive care in time and avoid waiting.
When it specifically concerns Östergötland, it is 1,808 fewer patients who need to wait illegally long in queues there today compared to 2022. Is that not good?
Of course, one can have self-confidence when one has a stake in an issue. But it should still concern a party that considers healthcare to be the most important issue that not even everyone who chooses to vote for the party thinks the party has the best healthcare policy. There should be more potential there.
Karin Sundin (S)
Madam Speaker! In these final shaking minutes of the mandate period, I shall thank the Minister for Health for the debates we have had here in the chamber. But I shall also say that it has not been entirely easy to debate with a minister who actually does not want the responsibility she has.
The most important issue for the Christian Democrats and Elisabet Lann is that healthcare should be nationalized. That is how all problems will be solved. And she abdicates responsibility for the healthcare as it is organized today. Every time the government receives criticism or faces a difficult question, she blames the regions – one region or the other or all at once – on the previous Social Democratic government or on me.
My point is not that patients with a certain number of specified diagnoses should not receive care in time. I have never claimed that. What I have said is that all patients have the right to receive care in time.
I say that it is time to take healthcare seriously. It is time to stop counting heads. It is time to stop blaming the regions.
It is time that healthcare receives enough resources to fulfill its mission and thus the conditions to be able to prioritize according to need. It is time that state grants are calculated based on inflation and not based on what happens to be left over after taxes have been lowered for high-income earners. It is time for care according to need and not care according to wallet.
It is time for better cooperation between the municipal, regional, and state levels so that healthcare can function at all levels, throughout Sweden, and for all patients' needs.
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for the interpellation and for an important debate on the healthcare queues.
I really hope that we will avoid going back to growing queues again. We have seen the trend several times where the Christian Democrats enter the Ministry of Health and make targeted investments to tackle the inaccessible healthcare and the growing queues. But in the long term, it becomes a patching and a mending in a system that fundamentally does not have the prerequisites for equal healthcare.
I share the ambition that healthcare should be equal and that care should be provided based on need. Today's system makes that impossible. As has been said, one can live a kilometer apart and have completely different waiting times ahead of them, regardless of need. It depends entirely on which region it is about.
Care based on need and not based on wallet, it is said here. But care based on which region one lives in instead of care based on need seems to be completely okay. According to the Social Democrats, who claim to take over responsibility for healthcare again in a government position, we are to keep the current system and should not have to travel to get care where there is available capacity.
I think it would be very unfortunate to go back that way and refer patients with severe pain and great care needs to content themselves with relying on their own region's capacity when it is so unequal in Sweden.
Again: Indexed state grants do not help the regions that are struggling financially. The injustice lies in the fact that there are unequal conditions at the foundation. It gives more to Region Stockholm, which can put more than 5 billion aside, while the regions that have an impossible mandate will not solve it anyway.
I thank you for an important debate and for the other debates we have had in this chamber.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.