Thank you for this interesting case.
In Norway it is an issue that people with impairments of different types struggle to get a job. I would think it is an issue in Denmark as well. It is a lot of effort to become fluent in tools, and having to learn two with identical purpose makes no sense. I would have though that helping people with tools that makes it easier to participate in both work and social life is a wanted thing. A free licence would have given the tool a chance to be used in a much wider sense, and given the tool a chance to be further developed by contributors so that it could be even more suited for different lifes.
I work as a tester here in Norway, to me it is difficult to get a hold of tools that are relevant for impaired users. So we make due with what we have (differs in every project). Unless impaired is a specific target group the extra effort for testing for different solutions is hard to justify, so it becomes a question of minimal effort/ compliant of laws. Making development of good solutions for impaired so much slower that it could have been.
I am curious to why the Agency of digitization thinks this is the most viable model for their product.