By Plenary Sessions: Riina Solman

The legislative focus is directed toward compliance with the existing law, which requires the presence of one vocational school in every county. The speaker directly asks the minister on what legal basis a step is being taken that violates this requirement, thereby acting contrary to the administrative change.

The legislative focus is on improving access to special welfare services, specifically by raising the age limit for childhood from 16 to 18 when placing individuals on the service waiting list. The speaker is a strong proponent of this amendment and stresses that it was implemented consensually, taking into account the wishes of the Chamber of People with Disabilities.

It demands amendments to the legislation to stipulate a clear chain of accountability for preventing and punishing abuses occurring in care homes, thereby avoiding abstract social responsibility. It requests that the ministry establish a procedure or regulation governing the qualifications and hiring criteria for care home employees. It criticizes the failure to meet the objectives of the care home reform (a spot affordable with the average pension) and demands a comprehensive review of the relevant legislation.

The legislative focus is currently aimed at improving social welfare laws to establish a clear and binding chain of responsibility that eliminates any room for interpretation. Furthermore, regulatory clarity is being demanded in light of Supreme Court rulings concerning the handling of dangerous equipment, in order to prevent the erosion of the law's legitimacy.

The primary legislative focus is on opposing the social reform bill, which concerns the establishment of a common base rate, and there is support for terminating its proceedings. The secondary focus was on the draft amendment to the Social Benefits Act for Disabled Persons, where the Social Affairs Committee decided against raising the age limit for children requiring special care from 16 years to 18 years old.

The speaker is the initiator of the interpellations, concentrating on the deficiencies of existing reforms (the care reform) and oversight issues within social welfare. They criticize the failure to finalize legislation and demand that the state, when establishing standards, must also guarantee adequate corresponding funding. They cite the draft disability benefit bill as an example, noting that the proposed increase was laughably small.