Amendments concerning the national curriculum and subjects of upper secondary school, etc.

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! We are now going to debate a number of changes in the field of education which are quite important, but they are perhaps not the largest reforms that have been implemented in the history of the Swedish education system. But they are a consequence of the fact that the Riksdag decided just over a year ago that we should change the grading system in the Swedish upper secondary school. This means that one no longer receives so-called course grades but term grades, or subject grades. That is already the case in primary and secondary school.

A consequence of this is that certain significant changes need to be implemented. Skolverket has therefore conducted a small review and submitted a number of proposals which the government has complied with. There is one thing that we can change as a result of this decision. There is a risk when transitioning from course grades to subject grades that students in Swedish upper secondary school will not delve as deeply into the subject of mathematics. This is because students, as a rule, may not receive as high grades in the more advanced courses in the mathematics subject at the upper secondary level. When one then transitions to subject grades, the consequence is that the incentives for students to study the most difficult courses in mathematics decrease. We want to remedy this in a reasonable way. This means that in the natural science program and in the technology program in upper secondary school, the mathematics subject is divided so that it also receives a specialization part. That is the one thing addressed in this proposition.

Mr. Speaker! The second change in this regard is that students studying the technology program in upper secondary school will also study natural science. The reason for this is that students in the technology program in upper secondary school today study chemistry and physics, but the program does not cover the entire natural science subject. So, there will also be a change here. All of this will come into force in two years, so no one needs to worry too much about the autumn term this year.

The third point, Mr. Speaker, is that there will be a change in the program structure of the upper secondary school, which means that the craft program will cease. That program currently pulls in slightly different directions. One can become a florist or a hairdresser, and there are a number of other specializations. Fundamentally, almost all students studying in the craft program want to become hairdressers. Over 90 percent of all those studying the craft program in upper secondary school want to become hairdressers, stylists, or barbers of some kind. Therefore, there will now be a separate program in upper secondary school, the hairdressing program. The other specializations, which have very few students today, will instead be provided through nationally recruited education.

Mr. Speaker! That is roughly how one can summarize this bill. There are a few more parts, such as that the time limit for confidentiality-breaking provisions is extended when it concerns being able to obtain grade information or statistics, for example. There is also a small change regarding different designations within special schools, when it transitions to being called adapted schooling.

With this, I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! I think it is clear how the government is following the line that has been laid out with these proposals. The government has repeatedly shown that it does not understand what the state needs to do for the skills supply to function. The government has cut hard in all educational opportunities for adults: adult education, universities of applied sciences, academies, folk education. The government has failed to provide CSN with the processing resources that the agency needs for the transition study support to function. The government has scrapped the attempt with vocational schools without presenting an alternative for how to solve the skills supply in narrow industries.

And now the government is abolishing the craft program. It may be a reform that is needed, but the government does not make an effort to ensure that young people's opportunities to choose craft education will remain.

I think that Fredrik Malm, just like I do, thinks it is important that companies have access to a trained workforce, even in narrow industries. So why, Fredrik Malm, do you not think it is worth ensuring young people's opportunity to choose craft training?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! Linus Sköld points out something that is very important, namely the need for us to have a supply of skills. Swedish companies are screaming today for trained labor. In that case, one must however, I think, look at the craft program in Swedish upper secondary school as a whole.

Each year group in Sweden consists of approximately 100,000 people. During the academic year 2021/22, a total of 6,018 students studied the craft program. Of them, 90 percent wanted to become hairdressers. Their education will henceforth be guaranteed as a national upper secondary program. In year group 1, it concerns 206 students in the whole of Sweden who are oriented towards fine woodworking, floristry, textiles, and other crafts. In the orientation other crafts, we are talking about 8 boys and 8 girls in the whole of Sweden.

I believe that even the Social Democrats will at some point come to the conclusion that it might not be quite reasonable for so few students to have a completely national upper secondary program. What we are doing now, as the government announces, is to provide the opportunity for these rather few students to study these programs through a national admission. Schools then apply to Skolverket, and in that way, we guarantee this.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to point out that we are not against the proposal to abolish the craft program as such. We would, however, like the government to consider how to handle the consequences this will have.

The government is obviously making an effort to resolve the situation for hairdressers and stylists and, in some sense, the situation for those who study textiles and the design direction, by incorporating it into another national program. But when it comes to the other directions, which admittedly have few students, the government does not make an effort to even engage at all. Instead, it dismisses the whole thing by saying: Yes, we shall see if there will be any who get trained in those crafts.

We Social Democrats would like the government to investigate how it can be ensured that young people still have the opportunity to choose these craft educations. This is crucial for the skills supply. Instead, Fredrik Malm and his party and the Sweden Democrat government choose to turn a blind eye to the concern expressed by the referral bodies, including the industries, in the referral of the Swedish National Agency for Education's proposal. They are laying it down smooth and easy, without taking the consequences into account.

I think that Fredrik Malm should answer the question of how he will ensure that there are cabinetmakers, chimney sweeps, and silversmiths who can perform those crafts in the future, if one does not make an effort to follow up that these educational opportunities remain available.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! It is obvious that Linus Sköld and I fundamentally have the same will and ambition to handle the situation we have on the Swedish labor market when it comes to the need for competence and to ensure that high school students will be able to train for various craft professions.

I perceive, Mr. Speaker, that what the Social Democrats are calling for is that the orientations within the craft program that are not now handled within the new hairdressing program or within the aesthetic subject, where we are talking about quite few students, should be handled within the framework of other national programs. I believe that this would be unfortunate, because then you do not get the program specialization in, for example, floristry or fine woodworking, which we are discussing here. If one places those programs as different components or elective courses within other programs, one will not, I judge, obtain the subject depth that one obtains in a better way by providing the opportunity to study these educations within the nationally recruiting system. I believe that it is a better model, quite simply, Mr. Speaker.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! As Fredrik Malm explained in his speech, this concerns several distinct proposals regarding the area of upper secondary school.

To begin with, it concerns the subject of mathematics and the consequences of the subject grade reform. We are to implement the subject grade reform because it creates greater wholeness in learning, better continuity, and reduced stress and pressure on the students. Nevertheless, in conflict with that principle, we are to divide the subject of mathematics into several subjects in the natural science and technology programs. The reason for this is that grades drop the more advanced the course becomes, as in the course-designed system. It certainly looks that way in other subjects as well, but the problem is particularly pronounced when it comes to mathematics.

Even though it violates the principle of subject grades, it is worth doing this. We cannot risk reducing the incentives to study advanced mathematics.

The school's mission to provide students with the guidance and stimulation they need to reach their full potential applies always, even in advanced mathematics courses. That the teaching is adapted and is of such quality that students are able to reach the higher grade levels even in advanced mathematics courses would be the actual solution to this problem.

We Social Democrats think it would be desirable that the design of upper secondary school is uniform and clear. Since the purpose of the subject grade reform, namely to create greater wholes in learning and reduced stress and pressure on students, is counteracted by this solution, we think it is important that the government follows the development of results in mathematics and, as soon as it is deemed possible, returns with a proposal to merge the mathematics subjects into one, without reducing the incentives to study advanced mathematics.

Changes to the craft program - or the abolition of the craft program - is another proposal in the same report. It is reasonable given that over 90 percent of the students in the craft program study the hairdressing track and given that the different tracks have too little in common for there to be synergy effects from making the educations for cabinet-making students, florist students, and hairdressing students into one program.

As was evident in the exchange just now, the government is not, however, making an effort to ensure that the supply of competence works in narrow industries, which is what this question is about. Instead, the government follows its pattern and closes the craft program without ensuring the possibility of other solutions for those who want to study craft-oriented subjects of various kinds.

The question remains: How can we be sure that we will also in the future have people who have craft qualifications in woodworking, as chimney sweeps or as silversmiths?

Another part of this bill is the name change from special school to adapted school. The Riksdag made a decision regarding the school regulations over a year ago, and the parliamentary decision enters into force now until the summer. This bill handles a number of consequential changes in adjacent laws, so that legislation consistently uses the term adapted school instead of the term special school and the term intellectual disability instead of the term developmental disorder. The name change is important to reduce this target group's vulnerability and stigmatization. Even though these consequential changes are only linguistic, it is obviously important that they are also made in adjacent legislation.

The proposition also concerns extending the breakthrough in statistical confidentiality that the Social Democratic government made when all data on all independent schools were classified as trade secrets. We made the construction with a temporary confidentiality breakthrough and appointed an inquiry on how to solve the situation in the long term. This inquiry has now received amended directives. It will take longer than the statistical confidentiality breakthrough to get the long-term legislation in place.

The basis for this is that information about our tax-funded schools should not be a trade secret, but should instead be public. The principle of public access should apply to independent schools as it does to municipal schools.

There is obviously an awareness in the government that transparency in the independent schools needs to increase, but the government does not want to go further than introducing a transparency principle. The only thing we know so far about the transparency principle is that it is not the principle of public access. Until the government has figured out what the transparency principle is, the breach of secrecy must be extended.

I want to point out that we, of course, stand behind both of our reservations, but in order to gain time, I move for approval of only reservation 1.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! Fredrik Malm has described the contents of the bill well. I just want to add a few important things.

We in Sweden have largely recovered in international measurements, for example PISA and PIRLS, when it comes to language. We still, however, have a need to improve in mathematics. The entire society is now moving towards more mathematics, technology, and other natural sciences, even within the humanities. It is therefore of great importance that the incentives to continue deepening one's knowledge in mathematics are strengthened and not weakened.

When we now implement the subject grade reform, a risk has been noted that the incentives to delve deeper into mathematics are weakened. This must, of course, be addressed. Ensuring that the incentives for deepening in the important subject of mathematics are maintained is one of the parts of this proposition from the government.

I recently visited Kungsmadskolan in Växjö. There, the craft program and many of our other important vocational preparatory programs are located. Teachers and students spoke about many different proposals and ideas on how one could improve and develop the vocational education and the craft program.

An important point that emerged in these conversations and which I believe should be taken to heart in the discussion on how we are to manage to balance the issue of skills supply even in narrow professions and skills supply throughout the entire country, while we of course must be careful with our shared resources and ensure that there are sufficient numbers of students in the places where the students are to be educated, is to continue developing and strengthening the apprenticeship program and the opportunities for apprenticeship training that, after all, exist and to continue developing the apprenticeship system.

When it comes to the subjects currently being discussed and the opportunities to receive education in them, it is about having greater opportunities to develop as an apprentice in craft professions. Craftsmanship lies very close to the idea of apprenticeship programs – one gets to learn from someone who already knows the craft. There, we see good opportunities to continue developing the conditions for training as an apprentice and in that way ensure that all around the country, where there is competence in these subjects, we can continue to develop this.

I vote in favor of the government's proposal.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! I noted that Oliver Rosengren did not mention the extension of the statistics confidentiality breach in any way, but since this is covered by the committee report, I intend to take the liberty of debating it anyway.

I stated in my speech that the Social Democrats want the principle of public access to also apply to independent schools. In the Tidö Agreement, the government and the Sweden Democrats have agreed to introduce a principle of transparency. The only thing that is obvious about this is that it is not the principle of public access.

I have tried to debate this issue with the Minister for Education here in the chamber without getting an answer as to what is the difference between the principle of transparency and the principle of public access. Perhaps Oliver Rosengren can shed some light on this issue? It concerns another party and another representative - possibly Oliver Rosengren has an idea of how the principle of transparency should differ from the principle of public access.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Linus Sköld for the question - a question about something he has already answered in his speech.

Two things are obvious regarding the principle of transparency. One is that it is a principle of transparency and not a principle of publicity. The other is that it is a matter that the government, for the very reason that it is to establish a principle of transparency, has not yet issued a statement on.

The Social Democrats ruled Sweden until recently, but thank goodness no longer, and therefore you also know that when one is processing an issue and preparing for something, it is unfortunate to try to guess the content of such a change in the chamber of the Riksdag.

Instead, Linus Sköld can think: that day, that care. There will come an occasion when we get the opportunity to discuss the difference between the principle of transparency and the principle of public access. That will obviously be when there is a concrete proposal to refer to. That we are standing in the chamber of the Riksdag today and guessing about the content of the principle of transparency does not feel particularly constructive, if I may be honest with the member.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Oliver Rosengren for a clarifying answer. What we have had clarified is that the Moderaterna are guessing about their own policy. To have the perception that a transparency principle shall be introduced without having the slightest idea of what a transparency principle is seems to me like a strange political stance. It is a political perception that the Moderaterna, together with the rest of the government and the Sverigedemokraterna, have expressed in the Tidö Agreement, and yet they have no idea what it will entail.

I think Oliver Rosengren owes those who are listening to the debate, those who care about how the school system works and those who care about how tax money is used an answer to this question: Which pieces of information are to continue to be secret in independent schools?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Linus Sköld for the follow-up question.

No, we are obviously not guessing, but in this case, it is about starting with the values. We think it is reasonable that there is information about where tax money goes and that there is information about the content of these schools and in what way they manage the tax resources they have received a share of. It is reasonable that taxpayers can review the use of public funds in activities that receive them.

What has been concluded in the Tidö Agreement is that a principle of transparency shall be developed. Just as in many issues that are difficult and can contain a number of different legal details, the only responsible way towards the very people that Linus Sköld speaks of – i.e., people with great commitment to the school system, students, teachers, principals, and parents – is to produce a serious and well-elaborated proposal. In this work, the large resources available at the Government Offices and in responsible agencies are important. That we, before the investigation, have not been able to describe all the details is not so strange.

It is not the principle of transparency that is being debated in today's report, but rather the extension of the secrecy rules that Linus Sköld himself mentioned.

A day will come when we can discuss how you view the principle of transparency. It is my hope that you will then feel that it fulfills the expectations one can have regarding publicity within independent schools. My conviction is that we will land there, because that is our direction.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Riazat (V)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the bill which, among other things, means that the new subject mathematics continuation is introduced in the natural sciences and technology programs and that the craft program ceases as a national program. We are also debating that the government wants to extend the temporary confidentiality-breaking provision in order to ensure access to school information. I intend to focus on the latter.

What is meant by ensuring access to school information? So far, it means that we are not to be allowed to access school information. It has, in fact, been consistent in the government's policy to try to make it as difficult as possible for parents, journalists, researchers, and the public to access the conditions that exist within the country's corporate schools, which unfortunately are in the majority among today's independent schools.

This week we have received the School Inspectorate's scathing criticism of some of Sweden's largest school corporations, and we have seen how different types of irregularities are repeatedly uncovered within the country's school corporations. What then is the response from the right-wing government and the Sverigedemokraterna to this? Yes, that there shall be less transparency. The government has no proposal for what should replace the temporary confidentiality-breaking provision when it expires, so we can expect more years of poor access to school information. Nor is anything mentioned about the whistleblower protection in the government's proposal.

Linus Sköld of the Social Democrats mentioned that there is a lack of a description of what the transparency principle will entail. It is strange that four parties enter into an agreement to introduce a transparency principle without themselves knowing what a transparency principle is. The only thing we can expect is that a transparency principle means that one removes the most important parts of the principle of public access and calls it something else. Otherwise, one would have agreed to the proposal to introduce the principle of public access that we have repeatedly submitted in the Education Committee.

Often when the bourgeoisie debates why they oppose the principle of public access, the argument is heard that it harms smaller independent schools. The national association of idea-based schools says that they are positive towards the principle of public access, and all the smaller independent schools we have spoken with want the principle of public access. Those who do not want the principle of public access are the bourgeois parties in the Swedish Riksdag, Timbro, Almega, and Svenskt Näringsliv. The smaller independent schools, therefore, do not oppose this legislation.

Only one representative for the government remains in the chamber, and it will be interesting to hear what the Christian Democrats say on the issue. Before the election, the Christian Democrats were in favor of introducing the principle of public access, and when the newspaper Skolvärlden asked their school policy spokesperson the question, the answer was: Of course, the principle of public access should be introduced. But when the Education Committee voted on the issue, the Christian Democrats were suddenly completely against the principle of public access. One might wonder why. Perhaps it's about a few Wednesday meetings, who knows?

Mr. Speaker! Those who run schools have taken upon themselves the responsibility for our children's education. It is difficult to imagine a more important mission. We must be able to feel secure that all school principals take this mission most seriously and live up to the common expectations regarding quality and values. Those who run schools must also reasonably be able to handle the transparency that the principle of public access and the protection of informants entails.

For Vänsterpartiet, it is a self-evident principle that activities financed by our common funds must follow requirements for openness and transparency. Citizens must be able to have insight into welfare activities regardless of whether they are run by companies or municipalities. It is, however, a fundamental problem that it is permitted to conduct welfare activities in the capacity of a company.

To ensure quality and reduce the risk of irregularities, it is also important that welfare employees can report irregularities without risk of reprisals, regardless of whether they work for public or private providers.

Vänsterpartiet will once again present proposals to introduce the principle of public access. Even if we do not succeed in getting it through this time either, we will continue to take the baton.

I move for approval of reservation 3 from Vänsterpartiet that the confidentiality-breaking provision shall not be extended by three years but by two years in order to expedite the government's investigation.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We address somewhat different matters in this report. It concerns adjustments that in different ways aim to create a better school path, better conditions for education, and better conditions for the educations to also lead to steps into the labor market so that one can more easily obtain employment after their education.

Mr. Speaker! The Christian Democrats' vision is a school where every child and student is given the opportunity to develop to their full potential, where no one is held back and where no one is left behind. If we are to have such a vision, we must constantly be prepared to review the system. Therefore, the Christian Democrats believe that these are good changes we are implementing today.

It concerns a few different things, which previous speakers have touched upon. It concerns various name changes. For example, the gymnasiesärskola will be called anpassad gymnasieskola from July 2 this year. It concerns that natural science shall be introduced in the technology program so that it becomes a subject included in all programs. Today, the technology program is the only program that does not have this or similar areas in its course offerings.

It is also about the subject mathematics being divided into partly the subject mathematics and partly the character subject mathematics continuation, this in order to not create any incentives to opt out of specialization when it comes to mathematics. Just that part has to do with the change when we move from course grades to subject grades. One effect of that, Mr. Speaker, is that the grade one receives on a higher part of the subject can affect the grade one receives on a lower one. It could have the effect that students opt out of specialized mathematics because more difficult courses often yield lower grades, which could affect the total subject grade.

Since we want to have high ambitions when it comes to mathematics and want our students to study mathematics specialization - or matte spec, as the students themselves call it - we need to make this change. But with that said, we also need to follow this moving forward and ensure that it has the desired effect.

This last point also concerns the change regarding the craft program. To abolish the craft program and instead introduce the hairdresser and stylist program to sharpen the different educations hits the mark more accurately. Instead of this broad program that covers everything from hairdresser and florist to fine carpenter and glassblower, we get educations that hit the mark more accurately.

This has in no way to do with the craft education programs being unimportant. On the contrary, they are important parts of the education mix. But when one sees that 90 percent of the students in the first year go towards the track of hairdresser, barber, or hair and makeup stylist, one needs to review this so that also the other important, niche craft education programs get the space they deserve.

To conclude by addressing this with the confidentiality provisions, the Christian Democrats think it is important that independent schools are given good conditions to operate. Independent schools contribute positively to the education system by creating a breadth and a freedom of choice for the students. But that said, it also needs to be regulated in such a way that one competes and operates on equal terms. In that case, we need a clear principle of transparency. One needs to be able to follow where the tax money to the independent schools goes. One needs to be able to measure quality and also compare the independent schools with municipal schools. That is why the government is extending the exemptions in the confidentiality rules so that we can continue to audit these schools until other legislation is in place.

I believe I have thus touched upon all topics. I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Riazat (V)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to quote from the Christian Democrats' party program: "The principle of public access, that is, the access to public documents, is central to an open and vital democracy. The possibility of secrecy shall be used restrictively."

I also want to take up a statement in a newspaper article and at the same time correct what I said earlier: It was not until the 2018 election that the Kristdemokraterna were for the principle of public access; it was actually all the way until 2021. But at the end of 2020, a Kristdemokrat was asked if she considered that the principle of public access should also cover independent schools that are tax-funded. The answer was yes – nothing more.

I simply wonder: What has happened? Why do the Christian Democrats no longer consider, contrary to what is stated in the party program, that the principle of public access is central to an open and vital democracy? Have you changed your minds?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question, Daniel Riazat!

The answer is simple: The Christian Democrats believe that transparency in independent schools is important. It is important so that the schools can operate on equal terms. It is important so that one can audit what the taxpayers' money is spent on. It is important so that one can audit the quality in the independent schools. It is also important so that a student who is to choose a school can compare different schools and see how a municipal school and an independent school function so that the student can make an active and well-considered choice.

With that said, I am not entirely sure that a full-scale principle of public access would hit the mark in the sense that a small independent school that does not have the legal competence employed could promptly be able to release any document and be able to determine what should be masked and what can be released, for example during the summer holidays.

There are certain parts where I am not entirely sure that it would benefit all smaller actors to be forced to adhere to a full-scale principle of public access. That is what the investigation we have been involved in is supposed to show. When that investigation is complete, we need to return to what advantages and disadvantages exist and how it would affect the smaller and the larger friskolor to have such a principle.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Riazat (V)

Mr. Speaker! How is it then, Mathias Bengtsson, that the organization representing smaller independent schools thinks this should be introduced immediately? They argue that no further investigations are needed. The question has been investigated quite many times in Sweden, and it has been concluded that this is the only way to have an open and vital democracy. How is it then that the Christian Democrats do not want to introduce it, and how is it that the Christian Democrats were in favor of this just about two and a half years ago?

Then I wonder again – the question has been asked here before: What is it that one should not be allowed access to as a citizen? What information should parents not be able to access when they are to decide which school their children should attend? What information should Thorengruppen, Academedia and Engelska Skolan be able to hide from the public? In what way do Mathias Bengtsson and the government intend to make it difficult for Skolinspektionen and others to access important information in order to be able to audit and have oversight of these schools?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The big difference between my party and Daniel Riazat's party is that we in the Christian Democrats care about all schools. We care about the independent schools. We care about ensuring that even the smaller independent schools are given good opportunities to operate, contribute to the education system, and be an alternative for those students for whom the municipal school does not deliver what can be expected, the safety and study environment they need, or the follow-up they need when they have, for example, been subjected to bullying or harassment. We see that all independent schools and also the municipal schools need good opportunities to operate, so that the students receive the freedom of choice.

We therefore take the concern seriously when smaller schools contact us and say that a full-scale principle of public access could create problems. It could become expensive and impossible, in the middle of the summer holidays, to provide the expertise to determine which documents can be shared promptly and which must be redacted. We Christian Democrats take the concern of smaller schools seriously and say: Okay, then we must investigate and look at whether there are other possibilities to create transparency and full opportunity to see how the school functions and compare the quality, without it hitting the smaller actors hard.

Just because we care about the friskolor and freedom of choice, we see that it must be investigated. But for Daniel Riazat's party, it has never been particularly important that students themselves should be able to choose which school they want; freedom of choice has never been particularly important. I can only regret that.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Mathias Bengtsson says that KD cares about all schools. That is good. Miljöpartiet does too. I also know that even Vänsterpartiet does that. I do not think that type of dishonest debating technique will benefit the school debate going forward, Mathias Bengtsson.

I believe that you care about all schools. But if one cares about all schools, one wants them to operate on equal terms. In that case, it is the principle of public access that applies. Everything else ensures that the terms are not equal.

Many independent schools contribute, just as Mathias Bengtsson said earlier, in a unique way to the Swedish education system and with qualities that perhaps would not otherwise exist. But some independent schools also contribute deviations that no one, absolutely no one, wants to see in the Swedish school system. It harms Sweden as a knowledge nation.

There seems to be a concern regarding principals' competence in handling Swedish public access and secrecy legislation. Is it a vote of no confidence against Sweden's principals and the principal training they have undergone? Would they not have the competence to assess the public nature and secrecy of documents and manage the disclosure?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Camilla Hansén, for the contribution!

I agree with the member's view that many independent schools contribute positively to our school system, but also that some independent schools do not demonstrate the quality and delivery that one would wish for from all schools in Sweden. I mean that it is precisely for that reason that the government is making the largest regulation and the largest tightening of the independent school sector that we have seen in Sweden.

We simply regulate and limit so that unserious actors will not be able to operate. Those who want to contribute positively to the friskole system shall be able to remain, but those who are out to make quick money or make a profit at the students' expense shall not have the opportunity to do so.

That is where the question of the principle of public access lies. Is it possible to create the transparency in the friskolor that both I and Camilla Hansén want to see without placing an unreasonable administrative burden on the schools? Is it possible to do so without every school being required to promptly provide the legal competence to make the assessment? Does Camilla Hansén mean that every single small friskola, in the middle of the summer holidays, during the vacation, should have the legal competence to quickly assess what should be masked or what may be released when a citizen requests a public document?

Is it reasonable that every small friskola should have that possibility, or is it possible to find other ways? That is what I ask myself. Therefore, it will be exciting to read what the government's investigation comes up with.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! For the sake of clarity in the debate, I believe it is important to say that we have different views regarding public access within the school system. Miljöpartiet's view is clear, and Kristdemokraterna's is unclear. Either one has public access and transparency according to Swedish legislation and actually several hundred years old traditions, or one nibbles at the edges. Kristdemokraterna are looking to nibble at the edges.

This matter regarding a small school and in the middle of summer is interesting. To begin with, I think one should listen with respect to the organization of the small idea-driven schools, which says: We want this, because we want a level playing field with the school corporations. We want all schools to have equal conditions.

There are very many small public activities. I will soon give an example in my speech. Which other small public activities should have exemptions from the principle of public access? I do not think it is okay to compromise on that which actually gives every person in Sweden the right to receive information about how our tax money is used.

The principle of public access we have is unique in a global perspective. Is it worth nibbling at the edges of it to benefit large free school corporations that want to extract money from the Swedish school system and who are tearing Sweden apart as a nation of knowledge?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I think perhaps Camilla Hansén exaggerates the differences between our parties on this issue. The Christian Democrats want transparency. We want that it should be possible to compare independent schools and municipal schools and that the transparency should be clear. That is why the investigation is appointed, as part of a large review and a major tightening of the independent school sector.

The proposal is not about the Christian Democrats wanting to favor the large free school actors. On the contrary, we take the concern that is shared by us seriously. Smaller schools say that they will have difficulty providing the service that a full-scale principle of public access would entail. We are not prepared to sacrifice the smaller actors, who contact us with that concern. Therefore, we want to investigate and see.

I also think the member is anticipating the events a bit, as if one already knows what the investigation will land on. I do not know that. We have received these signals of concern. We investigate and see what the investigation lands on and what the government proceeds with. That is how a government conducts serious politics.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are dealing with proposals from the government concerning the upper secondary school. Many of the decisions we are to make today are of a formal nature. But I still want to shed light on the important reform regarding changing the name of the special school to adapted school. The decision on the changes in the Education Act was made about a year ago, after important opinion-building from, among others, students who attended what was then called the special school.

Now, school and educational forms that have students with intellectual disabilities as a target group are called adapted school, in this case adapted upper secondary school. This is more than just words. It is also the result of students' work with opinion-building and their influence over the education, to which they have a statutory right. It is manifested in this decision. It is also the case that words matter. They say something about our view of humanity and about how we see the world around us.

Today we will also decide on changes in the subject of mathematics, in the subject of natural science, and regarding upper secondary craft education. I want to say something about just the craft education. I dare not guess which classes are sitting in the gallery now; they may already have chosen the perfect upper secondary educations for themselves. But it is also about those who are very young, are in primary school, and have dream jobs as firefighter, police officer, and journalist. It can be anything. One might be interested in, for example, history or have some hobby that one can find an outlet for in a profession.

There are professions that are creative and involve preserving cultural heritage. They are professions that are needed in our everyday lives. They are professions that are both history and future. Those professions are quite small, but the skills shortage is still great, just as when one hears about teachers, nurses and engineers. We need chimney sweeps, glassblowers, fine woodworkers, goldsmiths, watchmakers and whatever else it may be.

Something that I will follow a bit extra because I find it exciting is what happens with the textile design education. It is a large industry that needs to make an important transition when it comes to sustainability. I will follow what happens when it eventually comes under the aesthetic program.

Continuous changes need to be made in the education system for it to be relevant, but we must also lift our gaze and see how each education functions. For my part, it is often about more people dreaming of becoming teachers, but as you notice, there are many more professions that need young people who dream of those professions.

When it comes to raising our eyes, we could turn this into a budget debate, but we have done that so many times that we do not need to do it again. A friend of order might think that we have already discussed the principle of public access quite a bit, but I still want to highlight it. For me and very many others, it is obvious that the principle of public access should apply to all schools. But it is not a given for the government, and it is actually incomprehensible.

I do not understand that one is prepared to nibble at that tradition and cultural expression that the Swedish principle of public access is at the edge of. To follow it is obvious for, for example, the small idea-driven schools that are often kidnapped by the government parties in some form of misguided care because the principle of public access is apparently supposed to be extra burdensome for small operations. It is an extremely weak argument.

There are many small public activities covered by the principle of public access. I have worked at a small municipal authority that, according to law, must exist in all municipalities: the Guardian Council (Överförmyndarnämnden). The handling of public access and secrecy was a task that we carried with pride. It is not always easy when one is dealing with difficult personal cases. Most guardians in the country – there is one in every municipality – are extremely small authorities. Despite that, it would be unthinkable for most – I would say everyone – that there would not be transparency in the operations according to the principle of public access.

Amendments concerning the upper secondary school's national curriculum and subjects, etc.

When it comes to the principle of public access, the large schools want to preserve their trade secrets. In the municipal schools, it is everyone's right to know what the money is used for and how the operations are structured - absolutely everything. That is because it concerns our common property.

When the school system looks the way it does, transparency becomes extra important. I want to be clear that for Miljöpartiet, nothing other than a full-fledged principle of public access will be sufficient. Everything less than that is about nibbling at the edges of the principle of public access, and we will not agree to that. But I want to keep it open, just as Mathias Bengtsson said, for the results of the investigation.

It is clear that the investigation may conclude that one is absolutely not prepared to make concessions from the principle of public access to satisfy the school groups' needs. In that case, I will gladly support that investigation in all respects.

The system of market schools does something to our education system. When profit distribution is the purpose, when public statistics are called trade secrets, and when school fees and school choice create injustices, Sweden as a knowledge nation is torn apart.

We therefore need to lift our gaze above points on different courses and subjects and other things that must be continuously adapted. We are to make the detailed decisions, but we must lift our gaze in order to hold together Sweden as a nation of knowledge.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 17.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)