Accessibility requirements for certain media
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns amending the media laws to enable accessibility requirements for products and services, such as e-books and e-commerce services, to fulfill the EU's accessibility directive. S argues that access to media is crucial for democracy and that the proposal, which is based on an investigation, enables regulation in ordinary law through new delegation rules 1. M emphasizes that the proposal makes freedoms real for persons with disabilities and that accessibility is also digital 2. V highlights that accessibility reduces exclusion and that the proposal is important so that everyone can participate on equal terms 3.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Per-Arne Håkansson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Access to media, news dissemination, art and literature are crucial prerequisites for everyone, according to their needs and circumstances, to be able to participate in society and democracy. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2006, establishes these rights and requires states to take measures to ensure accessibility and that people can live independent lives. Sweden has also, for a number of years now, received sharp prompts from the UN body to take measures.
The EU has since 2019 adopted the accessibility directive, which is to be applied in all member states. It was to be implemented starting in 2025. Regarding Sweden, considerations concerning the adaptation to our media laws, regarding freedom of the press and freedom of expression, have caused the matter to drag on. Many probably think that it has taken far too long. I can have some understanding for that.
The law that the EU directive is based on sets accessibility requirements for a number of commercial products and services, including EU-books and software for reading EU-books.
The Committee on the Constitution has processed the proposal that the government has now presented, which is based on the government's Inquiry on the media laws and accessibility requirements for certain media, SOU 2024:96. There, a parliamentary reference group, which I myself was a part of along with representatives from a number of parties, reached a consensus on the proposals that are now being presented regarding the media laws.
The investigation proposed amendments to the freedom of expression act and the freedom of the press act to ensure that accessibility requirements can be imposed on media services covered by constitutional protection as such. The proposal means that the Riksdag adopts as pending the bill on the amendment of what is sometimes referred to as the media laws: the freedom of the press act and the freedom of expression act.
It is primarily based on the fact that new delegation provisions are introduced in the Freedom of the Press Act and the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression which, under certain conditions, make it possible to regulate certain requirements on accessibility in ordinary law.
When it comes to the Freedom of the Press Act, requirements are clarified regarding the introduction and in a certain way designing product information if the purpose is to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities, or requirements regarding the introduction and in a certain way designing information about the program and providing the program with certain technical functions and with the possibility of alternative presentation of content.
In the question regarding the Freedom of the Press Act, it is established that the person who broadcasts a program has an obligation to introduce and in a certain way design information about a service that they provide.
The scope for demanding the introduction and, in a certain way, the design of product information, for example on a package, is expanded. It shall also become possible to set accessibility requirements concerning information on, among other things, e-books and e-commerce services.
It is also established as an obligation for network operators to relay accessibility services, such as subtitling and interpretation, and this shall also be able to apply to programs other than those of public service companies. The proposals also concern requirements for technical functions in programs, for example that a TV viewer shall be able to control, for example, subtitling or interpretation, and that these must be broadcast with the programs.
Mr. Speaker! It can be emphasized in this context that no other restrictions on freedom of the press and freedom of expression in the area of the media laws may be made other than those that follow from these very constitutional acts: Chapter 1, Section 1, fifth paragraph of the Freedom of the Press Act and Chapter 1, Section 2, second paragraph of the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression.
During the preparatory work, I personally visited the Swedish Agency for Accessible Media, which is otherwise located in Malmö, to gain an insight into the work already underway in the area. The agency's historical exposé may be worth a reflection and provides an insight into the issues concerned and how they have been handled over time.
The lending of talking books began in the 1950s. In 1980, the authority Tal- och punktskriftsbiblioteket was established. In 1988, the authority Taltidningsnämnden was added. The first book in easy-to-read Swedish was published in 1968. It was an adaptation of Per Anders Fogelström's Sommaren med Monika. In 1984, the easy-to-read newspaper 8 sidor was started.
Newspapers, pamphlets, and easy-to-read books and magazines have contributed to participation and news dissemination. But with technical developments, media habits are changing and with them the conditions for accessibility for users and consumers.
Mr. Speaker! When it comes to a constitutional issue, there is a series of trade-offs that are weighed against each other. I want to mention some of the referral reports that have been submitted. Critical views on the regulation itself come from Utgivarna, Tidningsutgivarna, Journalistförbundet, and TV4. They argue that the purpose as such is good, but that great caution should be exercised when the legislator wants to make changes to the constitutions.
In the current proposal, there are elements that involve an interference with editorial integrity, for example, that regulations can be issued in law stating that those who broadcast programs in a certain way shall design the information about a service. The publishers argue that there are alternatives that are less controlling, such as industry agreements which mean that the industry as such undertakes to ensure the requirements for accessibility.
The starting point for this would be that the media have the best competence to design the services. It is also an arrangement that is in line with much of the Swedish social model. In many contexts, we need to safeguard a model where the parties involved take their responsibility and make agreements on a long-term basis that are based on just this.
A number of referral bodies, however, call for stronger wording and criticize that the introduction was delayed for too long. Synskadades Riksförbund argues, similar to several bodies, that no other country besides Sweden places companies' freedom of establishment ahead of individuals' right to information and freedom of expression in the constitution. A more general solution would, according to Synskadades Riksförbund, have avoided new investigations and delays in the implementation itself. Synskadades Riksförbund notes, however, that such a requirement, if it were to be met, would entail a new investigation. They therefore approve the proposal that has been submitted.
I also note a number of points in the referral response from Funktionsrätt Sverige, which address some gaps and shortcomings that Sweden still has to rectify. They also refer to the fact that the regulatory framework itself is complicatedly designed. It concerns the definition of e-books and the lack of impact assessments. Funktionsrätt Sverige presents critical points with an expressed hope, as stated in the referral response, that the government and the Riksdag will ensure the rights in the long term. It is, as I see it, a hope that needs to be realized. Therefore, responsiveness and follow-up will be important. Democracy is for everyone.
I vote in favor of the proposal in the Committee on the Constitution's report KU32 as it is presented.
Susanne Nordström (M)
Mr. Speaker! Today we are addressing an important proposal concerning something very fundamental: that more people should be able to access information, services, and media on equal terms. The Government proposes amendments to the Freedom of the Press Act and the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression. The purpose is to make it possible to place more requirements on accessibility even when it concerns products and services covered by constitutional protection. It is about Sweden being able to fully live up to the EU's accessibility requirements.
In practice, this means that persons with disabilities should be able to more easily use, for example, e-books, e-commerce services and media services. It can involve subtitling, read-aloud text, audio description, clearer product information or technical functions that make it more accessible.
The proposal also means that legislation on accessibility may only be introduced under clear conditions. Firstly, the purpose must be to strengthen accessibility for persons with disabilities. Secondly, the rules must be based on obligations resulting from Sweden's membership in the EU. It is an important balance. We safeguard our constitutional laws and our constitutionally protected freedoms while simultaneously ensuring that these freedoms also become real for more people. Freedom of expression and freedom of information have limited value if people are practically shut out.
The proposal provides, among other things, that product information, for example on packaging, can be made more accessible, that e-books can be given better functions and alternative formats, that e-commerce services can become easier to use, and that network owners may need to forward accessibility services such as subtitling and interpretation also for actors other than public service. These legislative changes are proposed to enter into force on 1 January 2027.
Mr. Speaker! An accessible society is not just ramps and elevators. It is also built digitally and in the information we encounter in the media and that we consume. This is a step towards a more open and inclusive Sweden. I stand behind the committee's proposal and move for the approval of the bill.
Jessica Wetterling (V)
Mr. Speaker! At the beginning of 2019, the EU Accessibility Act was adopted, which entered into force in the middle of last year and aims to set requirements for accessibility regarding various products and services. The directive states that the Member States are obliged to ensure that the products that economic operators place on the market and the services they provide are only those that meet the accessibility requirements. The Accessibility Act is a so-called full harmonization directive, which means that the Member States are prevented from introducing or maintaining provisions that deviate from what is prescribed.
In connection with the implementation of the accessibility directive, the government assessed that certain services covered by the directive could come to be covered by the scope of the media laws and that the directive's requirements in some cases would entail a limitation of the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of the press and freedom of expression. The government then stated that the provisions in the new accessibility act shall not be applied to the extent that it would conflict with the provisions on freedom of the press and freedom of expression in the media laws, but that there may be a need to investigate the issue of constitutional amendments.
When the Riksdag processed the bill at the beginning of this parliamentary term, both the Committee on Constitution and the Committee on Social Affairs stated that they agreed – or that we agreed; it is actually KU that is handling this matter – with the government's assessment and saw the need to investigate changes to the media laws based on the directive.
Now the matter has been investigated, and the government's proposal implies that new delegation provisions are introduced in the Freedom of the Press Act and the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression which make it possible to regulate certain accessibility requirements in ordinary law. A first prerequisite for these provisions to be applicable is, as previous speakers have pointed out, that the purpose of the requirements is to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities.
Among other things, this means that the space to demand product information on a package is expanded, and it will be possible to set accessibility requirements regarding information, format, and function on, among other things, e-books and e-commerce services. It will also, as Per-Arne Håkansson pointed out, be an obligation for network operators to forward accessibility services such as subtitling and interpretation in the same way as already applies for programs from the public service companies.
Mr. Speaker! This matter is a bit complicated to get to grips with, but it has a very important and fundamental purpose: to strengthen accessibility in society. It is crucial so that all people can participate on equal terms. It also becomes clear through this matter that accessibility is about so much more than just physical accessibility to buildings and transport. Access to information, education, work, and digital services is at least equally important. When society is accessible, exclusion also decreases, and more people get the opportunity to contribute their experiences and skills. It benefits both the individual and society as a whole, because diversity and inclusion create stronger communities and better conditions for development.
Disability rights is a very important issue for Vänsterpartiet, and we have championed it for a long time. This is also demonstrated, for example, by Funktionsrätt Sverige's rating of the parties in the Riksdag, where Vänsterpartiet tops. But even for me personally, this is a heart issue because I have worked for the majority of my professional life as a support assistant to persons with disabilities. Vänsterpartiet is therefore positive towards this proposal and stands behind it.
Mr. Speaker! This matter involves, as has been said, changes to two of our constitutional laws. Therefore, it will be addressed again after the election.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.