Better conditions for vocational education

Joar Forssell (L)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by expressing my support for the proposal in the report.

Mr. Speaker! The school shall be a temple of education in the heart of the village. It shall be a place where people come from everywhere but are given opportunities to travel anywhere. It shall be a place where one receives knowledge and education, where one learns the ideals upon which society is built, and where one is given the opportunity to move forward in life.

In that lie, of course, both these important symbolic things and the important values that build up a functioning society. But in that also lies that one must receive keys to working life at school and the tools one needs to be able to enter working life and get a job and a livelihood. One should be able to get the freedom that it means to carry with one education and knowledge as well as the keys to a working life, in order to get the freedom that the paycheck provides every month.

Mr. Speaker! That is why, when it comes to vocational programs, it is important that there is a close interaction between school and working life. What one learns in school should also be relevant in reality, and what companies need should also be what the school trains for. That is precisely what the bill and the report are about.

We want to ensure that there is a vocational test. It may sound obvious that there should be a vocational test, because there is a high school project today. But it is not obvious. Vocational tests are something that we strengthen with this.

If you think about it, this is not actually strange. It is not certain that the municipality is best at providing education in all job-related subjects and in everything that is relevant on the labor market. That probably speaks for itself. It is not certain that the municipality can or should do so. It may not have the right resources or the right competence, and furthermore, there may be somewhere else. In that case, it is unnecessary to build it up. It is simply important that it should be possible to outsource the vocational subjects. That is also something that is included in the report.

In the question regarding vocational tests, does it also apply to municipal adult education?

Mr. Speaker! Through the proposal in the report, we also ensure that students in individual programs in adapted upper secondary school shall have the right to complete their education. This is a very important part of this. The life journey that is to begin in school – where the school shall provide opportunities, help one to pack the bags, to book the tickets for life's journey but not decide where one shall go or which route one shall take – must apply to all students.

With that, I move for approval of the proposal in the report. I look forward to a good debate.

(Applause)

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

Robert Olesen (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservation 1 and reservation 2 in the report.

The report concerns better conditions for vocational training. Sweden needs more vocationally trained people. It is actually one of our most fundamental issues for the future. We need more nursing assistants, electricians, industrial workers, carpenters, plumbers, mechanics and many other skilled people who sustain our society and our economy.

Vocational training is needed that leads to jobs, training that maintains high quality, training that is anchored in the working life and training that allows young people to feel pride in their career choices. Therefore, Social Democrats welcome the government's ambition to strengthen vocational training and improve the connection between school and working life. It is good.

Mr. Speaker! It is not enough, however, to have high ambitions. One must also choose the right path forward. Here we see some problems with the government's proposal. The risk is that the government moves too fast, that it opens up for broad solutions without having sufficient control and thereby risks both the quality and the equity in vocational training.

For us Social Democrats, vocational education is not a second choice. It is a central and supporting part of the education system. Vocational education shall give students knowledge, professional pride, security, and future opportunities. It shall lead to work but also to education and development in working life and provide the opportunity to continue studying. Therefore, high requirements must be set.

Mr. Speaker! A central part of the government's bill concerns making it easier to outsource vocational training. We Social Democrats believe that the government is going a bit too far here.

Contracting can be justified in some cases, for example in smaller towns where it is difficult to arrange a certain vocational education. It can involve educations for which special equipment, special premises and educational environments, or special competence that is not available everywhere are required. But contracting must never become a way to shift responsibility, lower ambitions, or split up the education.

If vocational education is outsourced too broadly, without clear frameworks, there is a risk that students' education will become more dependent on where they live, which actor is hired, and how strong the follow-up is in their specific municipality or region. It is not reasonable.

A student in my home county of Kronoberg should have the same right to a high-quality vocational education as a student in Stockholm, Skåne, Västerbotten, or Västra Götaland. Employers must be able to rely on the fact that a completed vocational education actually means something. The students should also be able to feel confident that the education meets the standard.

That is why we believe that contracting in vocational education needs to be more clearly limited, regulated, and controlled. There must be clear quality requirements. There must be clear responsibility. There must be follow-up. The state must have the opportunity to demand accountability even when the education is carried out by contractors. A situation must never arise where the responsibility for the students' education disappears between different actors.

Mr. Speaker! We also mean that the term industry schools is better than vocational training on a contract basis. Industry schools is a more practical term. Above all, it signals something very important: that the education should be built up together with the industry, not just tendered and purchased from some external actor. This is a crucial difference.

A good vocational education must be shaped close to the reality of working life. It must have contact with the workplaces and companies where the students will one day work. It must be characterized by an understanding of how technology develops, what the working environment looks like, what requirements are set, and what knowledge is needed.

But it must also have a strong educational perspective. It is not enough to match today's needs in the short term. The school has a larger mission. Vocational education shall equip students for an entire working life, not just for the first job. It shall provide knowledge that lasts a long time and makes it possible to develop, further educate oneself, and stand strong even if the labor market changes.

Therefore, vocational schools shall be developed in close cooperation with the labor market partners in respective industries. Both unions and employers must be given real influence over which programs are to be started and how they are to be designed.

Workers and employers have a common interest in that vocational training maintains high quality and works in practice. That is how we build credibility. That is how we build quality. That is how we build training that both students and companies can rely on.

Mr. Speaker! Another important part of the bill concerns vocational tests. There is a great deal here that is positive. Vocational tests can be a good way to strengthen the link between education and working life. They can contribute to clearer requirements, higher quality, and better evidence that students have the knowledge and skills they need in their profession.

But even here, it applies to doing it right from the start. LO emphasizes in its referral response that it should be voluntary for the industries to introduce vocational tests and that the tests should be designed in close cooperation with the labor market parties, including through Skolverket's national program council.

Svenskt Näringsliv also emphasizes the importance of the working life having a major influence on how the tests are designed. This is very important. Vocational tests cannot be constructed from above, far from the reality in the industries.

It looks different in different professions. The requirements for an electrician are not the same as the requirements for a nursing assistant. The conditions within the industry look different than within restaurant, construction, or transport. Therefore, the vocational tests must be developed in close cooperation with the labor market parties within the different industries. They must be relevant and fair. They must, of course, be feasible, and they must strengthen the education. They must not become an administrative system that is layered on top without sufficient anchoring.

We Social Democrats therefore believe that the introduction of vocational tests must be voluntary and occur gradually. The parties in the labor market must be involved. The industries' experiences must be taken into account, and the system must be built up in a way that works in practice. It must be allowed to take time to do it right. Reforms in schools should not be pushed through to create quick headlines. They should be implemented to provide better education for the students and better competence for the working life.

Mr. Speaker! At its core, this is about what view we have on vocational education. For us Social Democrats, vocational education is a future investment. It is about young people's opportunities to get a job, stand on their own feet, and feel professional pride. Therefore, I move for approval of our reservations.

(Applause)

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

Kent Kumpula (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal.

These are very good and well-thought-out proposals from the Tidö parties, which will strengthen the cooperation between school and the working life. Through this, students who undergo vocational training will get better entry points to continued learning in the form of employment after their graduation.

When students take away a receipt in the form of a passed vocational test, I believe and hope that more companies will dare to hire newly graduated individuals. Unfortunately, it is a fact today that many students who have completed practical vocational training, even for identified shortage occupations, still have difficulty finding an apprenticeship, for example as construction workers.

Mr. Speaker! This means that many young people with a vocational education today end up falling between the cracks. A gap will emerge between the labor market's needs for competence supply and the influx of new workers. We must wall up this gap. If we do not succeed with that, it will only become larger and larger.

Mr. Speaker! There are two reservations to the opposition's report that I cannot quite understand. It feels a bit as if they have been written mostly just to be made, not because there is anything substantive to raise or any improvement to suggest.

I can read a bit summarily from reservation 1:

"Contracting can work in some cases … But if it is used too broadly and as an end in itself, there is a risk that the education will be fragmented and that the quality will become even more uneven than it is today … Therefore, we believe that stricter and clearer frameworks, as well as better follow-up and control, are needed. When contracting and new systems are introduced, there must be constitutional possibilities for the state to hold those who provide education on a contract basis accountable."

Mr. Speaker! This has already been addressed. I wonder if the opposition has even read the report. Of course, no one has any plans whatsoever to let the outsourced training be left to its own devices, completely without controls and follow-ups.

Mr. Speaker! It even stands in bold, already in the first sentence after the heading "Vocational training on a contract basis": "The contracting authority retains responsibility even when tasks are outsourced on a contract basis."

A little further down it says:

"The Government emphasizes that the expanded possibilities to conduct vocational training on a contract basis as proposed in the bill must not increase the risk of unserious actors within the education. Even if a principal hands over vocational training on a contract basis to an individual natural or legal person, the principal is still responsible under the Education Act for the training maintaining high quality and being conducted in a serious manner. – – – In the event of serious deficiencies in a procured vocational training, it is therefore reasonable, according to the Government, that the principal … terminates its contract agreement. – – – The Government further states that it intends to closely monitor the application of the reform and that it will take further measures if necessary."

It is, therefore, truly nothing that is left to chance, Mr. Speaker. Follow-up and control are self-evident, and it is, as said, already addressed.

It also states in reservation 1 that it is thought that "branschskolor" (industry schools) would be a better name than "yrkesutbildning" (vocational education). Partly I do not agree with that, and partly it is trivialities to argue about what the education should be called. It is not the name of an education that is decisive, but it is what the students take away in the form of knowledge and employability that is important and interesting.

Mr. Speaker! In reservation 2, the opposition is worrying entirely unnecessarily about the introduction of vocational tests. I read verbatim from the reservation:

"We mean that the vocational tests must be designed in close cooperation with the labor market partners in the respective industries and be introduced gradually. The conditions differ in different professions, and it must be allowed to take time to do it right."

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I wonder quite seriously if the opposition has even read the report. Probably not, so I will read aloud what it says regarding the introduction of vocational tests.

"The Government notes that continuous feedback and cooperation between schools and the working life is crucial for the quality of vocational education and that it leads to good professional skills and employability for the students. Measures are needed to strengthen the cooperation between school and working life, so that the teaching in vocational subjects becomes as relevant as possible for future professional life. A vocational test can, according to the Government, create clearer links between school and working life, ensure that the students have the professional skills required for a certain profession and facilitate the students' transition to work."

Furthermore, the following appears in the report:

"At the same time, the government notes that the work to develop vocational tests for all vocational programs in upper secondary school can be time-consuming, and therefore, in some cases or for a certain period, such a test may be missing."

Mr. Speaker! This matter of it having to take time to do things correctly, that the vocational tests shall be introduced in cooperation with the labor market, is also already addressed in the report. It is nothing that will be rushed through or introduced without close contacts with the labor market parties to ensure that the vocational tests become both good and relevant and that they are fine-tuned to land at the right level.

Mr. Speaker! I feel confident that this will turn out well, and I believe the opposition actually feels the same. They write follow-up motions and have reservations as mere formalities, so that it will be done, not because they have found anything that actually needs to be addressed.

(Applause)

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! We need really good vocational education to meet the need for the future workforce. Many are concerned that too many students study theoretical programs and too few study vocational education.

I have heard government parties say that they want to limit the possibility of reading theoretical programs for too many students, but I mean however that what is required to get students to read to vocational occupations is that the work environment is attractive and that they receive a good salary. That is what is required for young people to see them as future professions.

It is also important that the educations are really good, so that they lead to employment in professions that the industries demand. Here, it is important and good with a strong anchoring in the labor market. Vocational schools are an opportunity for that.

A pilot project has been ongoing between 2018 and 2023, which has shown that many of the students who studied at these vocational schools have obtained jobs after completing their education. All of that is positive, but there are some concerns regarding the government's bill. It will become easier to outsource parts of the vocational training, that is to say that someone else will take responsibility for parts of the vocational training.

One risk with this is that the principal does not have full responsibility for the education and that the quality will vary to a very high degree, as well as that the control over the vocational schools will be too low. We have now, however, received reassuring news that it will not be so. We really must hope that it does not become so.

Despite the government parties' promises, there is a risk that unserious actors will find their way in. We know that they exist among the principals already today. There are private actors who do not carry out their educational mandate in the way that is intended. Here, it is important that Skolinspektionen and others have the tools required to ensure that the students receive the very best education. I see no problem with politicians taking responsibility for and demanding that we have control over that our youth receive the best possible education.

We naturally need to ensure that there is training for today's shortage occupations, for example bodywork, sheet metal work and forestry machine operators. They were part of the pilot project.

If this is interpreted too broadly and in professions where there are already excellent educational providers today, there is a risk that the principals will relinquish responsibility. I also want to see in the future that there is a clear framework for how this is to be followed up and that there is a control over the providers that become so-called industry schools.

Madam Speaker! I therefore move for approval of reservation 1.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! Vocational competence at the upper secondary level is what is demanded by many employers. When the business community conducts its own surveys, it becomes increasingly clear that it is vocational competence at the upper secondary level that is demanded in the Swedish economy.

This development will be amplified by the technological development occurring right now with the increased entry of AI and similar modern technology into the labor market, which will increasingly require a transition of the labor market and of the economy. It will become even clearer that practical vocational skills will be valued even higher.

In light of this, the offensive that we have carried out during the mandate period, and still intend to carry out, is so important, that is to say, to strengthen vocational training and to strengthen the role of vocational competence in Swedish society.

The reform being debated today, and which we will shortly make a decision on, is about ensuring that the vocational programs are strengthened and that the vocational tests introduced ensure that an employer's security is strengthened so that the person who has graduated from a vocational high school or a vocational education for adults is equipped for the job in a practical sense. It shall become like a kind of certificate that those who leave the educations are actually ready to go straight into work. One should not have to worry that the education equips for certain things but perhaps not quite equips for what we need here on the labor market. This is one of many important components in our vocational offensive, in our work to ensure that vocational education is valued and expanded to equip the Swedish economy in the way that is needed for us to meet the future. The labor market shall be equipped with what is in demand.

It is no secret that the Moderaterna have presented proposals for some reforms that would take that type of reform even further. We would have liked to see that the upper secondary education is complemented with a third track – a two-year vocational education, a vocational school, which is possible for all young people to choose. In that way, the thresholds to upper secondary school can be lowered, a kind of all-inclusive reform. The reform would mean that some of those who today choose to opt out of upper secondary school, drop out of upper secondary school, or want to get out of upper secondary school faster get the opportunity to do so at a vocational school. This reform is an important step in the right direction. It increases the quality of vocational education and makes it easier for more people to make themselves competitive in the economy.

The vocational offensive we want to see does not only have these important components, but it also consists of several other relevant parts. It is about how we want to ensure that we consolidate the vocational educations that exist in the Swedish vocational education system into a new national vocational education. Then the labor market educations at Arbetsförmedlingen, yrkesvux at the municipalities and national vocational education, a pilot at Myndigheten för yrkeshögskolan, are consolidated in a new substantial reform. We consolidate and ensure that the resources we actually pump into the system get to work.

One of the recurring problems for vocational education in Sweden, Madam Speaker, is that we do not make sufficiently good use of the resources we actually invest.

Today, it is the case that every third fully funded place within the municipal vocational adult education is not used because we have too low requirements and expectations that those who lack education should educate themselves for work. Several of those who are assigned to vocational training by Arbetsförmedlingen do not show up at all, despite the assignment. Arbetsförmedlingen has failed in those controls. We must get these resources into work, and for that, we believe in a mobilization of forces.

Within the framework of such a reform, we also want to ensure that the compensation system becomes more fair, Madam Speaker. Today, we have an equality problem within Swedish vocational education because many women choose welfare-oriented vocational educations, often in the municipalities' vocational adult education, and have to take out loans to attend those educations, while many men who choose industry-oriented vocational educations do so within the framework of the Employment Service's labor market training and receive grants. This builds in an economic inequality among the unemployed, to the disadvantage of not least foreign-born women. We cannot accept that. Within the framework of a new national vocational education, we also want to ensure that the compensation is consolidated into a compensation system, a state unemployment benefit.

Madam Speaker! Within the framework of the reinforcement of vocational education with a vocational test that we are discussing today, we also see a need to reinforce the system with internship and apprenticeship positions. We want to make it easier for those employers who want to contribute to do so, regardless of which is the sending education system. We also want, Madam Speaker, to ensure that it becomes more profitable for those employers who want to contribute to these educations to do so.

We want a mentor deduction that will become a discount on the employer contribution so that it becomes easier for employers to participate and contribute, and so that they dare to place their most competent employees on this.

This would collectively ensure that the role of vocational education in the economy is strengthened, that more people can pursue a vocational education, and that in that way we get more people who meet the employers' demand.

Madam Speaker! Before I conclude, I naturally want to express my approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

I also want to turn directly to those of you who have chosen a vocational education. You are winners in the new economy. You who have chosen a vocational education will stand strong on the labor market. You will have jobs not only to seek and obtain but often also to choose between. While your friends who perhaps have chosen social programs or humanities or similar will need to adapt, take new educations and retrain within vocational colleges or other vocational educations to take the various practical, vocation-oriented jobs that will make the economy continue to grow, you will have secure opportunities, very low risk of unemployment, great chances for good incomes and great opportunities on the labor market.

Our mission is to ensure that those opportunities are strengthened, that it pays even more to take these jobs, and to ensure that the tax on work is lowered so that it pays to make these important choices and take on the social responsibility that many of you have done and taken. You may not in all circumstances have listened to that parent who said: Take a broad education with all the opportunities! Instead, you nurtured your interest in a trade and a profession that gave you the opportunity to emerge competitive on the labor market. Congratulations on that! It is you who are the winners in the new economy.

I move again for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

In this speech, Robert Stenkvist (SD) concurred.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Member for an excellent tribute to the vocational programs!

The chairman and I were together at the SM of Ung Företagsamhet yesterday. I know that we share a commitment both for the vocational programs and for UF, and I appreciate that. But I still have some questions, strangely enough, as we stand here.

Oliver Rosengren speaks about a professional offensive. We have not really seen that professional offensive during this government, I think. I know that the Moderaterna are driving it. I know that Oliver Rosengren is driving it. But I do not really see that the government has done it.

I know that we have agreed on, for example, two-year vocational training, that is, to really focus on those who should be able to get through quickly and those who otherwise have no way through. It has not happened.

I know that Oliver Rosengren has pushed for a supervisor deduction. We also have that in our budget. It has also not come to pass.

I also know that we in Sweden still have 20,000 students per year who leave school without being able to proceed to upper secondary school. It is more than ever before in Swedish history. Of them, approximately 10,000 have a passing average. In all other European countries, they typically get into vocational programs. In Sweden, they are outside of school. We have repeatedly proposed that we should open up the vocational programs for this group. But the government does not do that.

I am, therefore, completely on board with the fact that we should have a professional offensive. I just lack seeing it in reality. Therefore, I ask, Oliver Rosengren: Why has the government not delivered on the professional offensive that Sweden and Swedish business really need and which I know we share the interest for?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Member Paarup-Petersen, for the questions!

It is true that we share a commitment to vocational education. At the SM in Ung Företagsamhet yesterday, it was particularly enjoyable to participate in conversations and discussions with all the students who are enrolled in vocational programs and are simultaneously studying entrepreneurship.

The probability of becoming self-employed if one studies hairdressing or plumbing is, of course, many times greater than if one studies an economics program. Nevertheless, young entrepreneurship has become more of a standard in economics programs than in the vocational training where it might be extra suitable. It is positive that Ung Företagsamhet has seen this, that many municipalities are now starting to see this, and that what we did in Växjö many years ago is now becoming more and more common, that is, ensuring that all students, even in the vocational programs, can attend and study UF. I want to acknowledge the tribute to this.

Madam Speaker! I received a couple of questions here regarding the vocational education and vocational offensive. The Member and I have participated in several different contexts where the business community, on the contrary, describes that they see this offensive. It has been seen that the resources for vocational education have increased.

We have reinforced vocational adult education with a full Alvesta in training places. We have increased the compensation per training place within vocational adult education so that several of the providers that exist now have the possibility to also offer and provide high-quality training. We have ensured that more students now choose the vocational programs in upper secondary school by speaking well about this and making investments financially so that there will be higher quality and attractiveness. It is a number of different important parts that de facto mean that the resources for vocational education are increasing.

Now it is also high time for the reforms, and we are implementing an example of that here and now with the vocational tests. The grading reform that we are implementing will also ensure that more people get access to places in upper secondary school.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! It is quite right that things have been done, but in the name of honesty, it may be worth reminding the audience and the voters that one started by cutting the funding for the vocational training and then increased it again. Then it becomes a bit easier to get a plus on the account before the election. We see that one uses that strategy in a number of other areas as well.

But I know, again, that Oliver Rosengren is involved in these issues. It was truly fantastic yesterday with all the UF companies. It was also a bit of a surprising thing when the government cut the funding for UF for young entrepreneurship – money that we, of course, tried to get back.

But when we talk about vocational training, it is the case that we see that the government has shut down the trade schools, which were so in demand, for example, within electricity and construction etcetera.

We also see that people continue to be deported simply because a salary has been invented that is not relevant for a large number of professions.

When it comes to vocational tests, I am very pleased that they are included here. It is extremely good that vocational tests are now included. But we from the Center Party have time and again pointed out that there should be vocational tests to enter upper secondary school. It has received a bit of a cold reception, but the government now realizes that vocational tests are good. It is very important. It can show one's skills for a profession when one is about to leave upper secondary school.

Why do we continue to exclude those who can pass the vocational test? If we want skilled workers, it should be good if they also get in. But they are still excluded, and therefore we still have 20,000 students who are not allowed to enter the vocational programs.

Again: I still miss the short vocational training that was promised but has not materialized. I miss the mentor deduction that I know the Moderaterna also believe in. I miss vocational tests to get into the vocational programs. Can we hope that the Moderaterna are involved and vote through those reforms after the election?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! There must be all opportunities for Member Paarup-Petersen to vote on those types of reforms after the election when an elected Kristersson government presents such.

It is important to continue investing in vocational education, but I believe one must keep two thoughts in mind simultaneously when engaging in the resource discussion. For cyclical reasons, large expansions of vocational education are usually made when the economy slows down. That is why it was not strange that the previous government made large expansions of vocational education in connection with the corona pandemic and the subsequent effects on the economy, which brought about demands that more people should be able to receive education when they could no longer have the work they previously had. It is not so strange that one makes those types of cyclical expansions.

What we have been able to see in the initiatives that have been made during this mandate period is that expansions have been made even regarding the permanent levels for, for example, yrkesvux. Furthermore, it is the case that the instructions to Arbetsförmedlingen to expand the labor market training have become even clearer – despite the fact that Arbetsförmedlingen itself considers that there are challenges in this, we have persisted in that it is an important priority.

Here we have an important task to do. We must continue to ensure that resources increase. They will always increase a little extra during a recession, because that is when you need to make those types of reinforcements. We do, however, need to continue to permanently expand vocational training in Sweden, both within the framework of the youth gymnasium and within the framework of adult education. It will be central.

We have made major investments on the resource side, Madam Speaker, and now we look forward to taking large steps on the reform side. Several of the things the member is requesting are already part of the reform agenda, for example a grading reform that will ensure that the thresholds to upper secondary school are lowered so that more people get access to upper secondary education including vocational education.

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

Robert Olesen (S)

Madam Speaker! I have a very short question for Oliver Rosengren. I agree with much of what he has said, especially what concerns the issue of equality regarding the labor market training and the subsidy components in this. This absolutely needs to be resolved.

I also know that Member Rosengren is a strong advocate for outsourcing things; I have seen that over many years during his time in Växjö municipality. I want to ask Oliver Rosengren how he can guarantee that this, which concerns outsourcing, does not continue to contribute to the billion-rolling and profit-seeking that we see today within Swedish schools.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Robert Olesen for the question.

We are discussing a number of different issues within the school area that are of great importance for the students' everyday lives, for how education should be carried out in Sweden, for how the quality of vocational education and the theoretical programs can be raised, as well as for how schools should become safer and the grades fairer. Despite this, Madam Speaker, the Social Democrats, in every given instance, return to questions about the operation of the schools and the profits of the school corporations. It is, of course, unfortunate, but now the question has been posed and must therefore be answered.

That we have a school system that does not contain only one provider will contribute to increased competition. Competition will in turn ensure that we get increased quality. In those situations where we see that there are conditions for independent providers to contribute to quality, there are reasons to let them do so. In cases where there is no possibility for independent actors to contribute to increased quality, we should not have them.

Independent actors have no intrinsic value. It is about us raising the quality through competition, benchmarking, and multiple actors, which in some cases one can also choose between. That is the argument for allowing independent actors to be involved and contribute. If independent actors do not deliver quality, they shall, of course, be shut down and removed.

(Applause)

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

Robert Olesen (S)

Madam Speaker! I perceived that the member avoided my actual question. It was about the profit-seeking. Does Oliver Rosengren see that there is any way to stop the billion-dollar rolling, or will it continue even within the vocational training? Shall we continue to throw taxpayers' money into private pockets instead of giving it to students? How does Oliver Rosengren want to stop the billion-dollar rolling?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! The Government, together with the Sweden Democrats, is implementing a series of reforms to maintain the friskola reform, to ensure that the schools that are active behave as they should and to prevent there from being too much speculation and risk capitalism within the school system, for example by setting requirements for more long-term ownership, by having a proper ownership review, and by setting high quality requirements for anyone to be given the opportunity to contribute to children's education.

It is important that we use tax money in the right way. For the Moderaterna, the starting point is always to safeguard the interests of the taxpayers. We are relatively uninterested in safeguarding the interests of school groups or foreign companies. We are, however, very interested in children's school conditions and in achieving higher quality in education.

In a number of places around Sweden, we see very high quality in independent schools. If one reduces this issue to whether the one who has risked money to build up a school group makes a small profit, one risks throwing out a school system that today delivers very good results – in several subjects, it is about results at a world-class level. We do not want to contribute to that, but instead, we want to continue to ensure that the school system primarily sees children and young people and puts knowledge first.

In some cases, it will suit perfectly well that independent schools are involved and contribute to this. If they do not contribute to it but instead engage in speculation and are mostly there to make money, they should of course not be part of the school sector. In that case, the reason they are there is not the same as the reason why the Moderaterna are engaged in school policy. We do it for the children, for the youth, and for Sweden.

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal in the report. It is fantastically good that we have now taken a step towards a better and stronger vocational education and to ensure that more people go into vocational education as well as that they receive a better education when they are there. I am glad that we all agree on this.

We can observe that too few people are studying vocational programs. I believe there are somewhat different opinions on what that is due to; some of them have been discussed here today. One thing that we do know for certain, however, is that the vocational programs in very many places still stand far apart from the business community's actual needs. We need to look at those parts and ensure that the business community is involved in the working life and, to a greater extent, is involved in and influencing the design of the vocational programs.

Madam Speaker! In order to make the vocational programs more attractive, we need to ensure that one receives good supervision when, for example, out on an internship or – at a higher level – LIA, which is learning in work. In the end, this is what distinguishes the vocational programs. One gets a closer connection to the actual working life out there.

That is why the Center Party wants a deduction for those who supervise students. It is not included here. When we were going to submit follow-up motions, there were limitations on what we were allowed to include. I still think it is important to say that certain things are still missing when it comes to achieving a truly attractive vocational education in Sweden. I am thinking, among other things, of the supervisor deduction, which we invest 500 million kronor per year in in our budget. This is a way into a vocational program for more people.

In the current situation, Sweden has the most students who do not complete school of all countries in all of Europe, and the number is higher under the Tidö Government than ever before – every year it is 20,000 students who do not complete school. It is unacceptable. We could help them get in, but the government repeatedly refuses to open the vocational programs. If one waits until 2031, it will be very many more students who do not get a future. It is not profitable.

We also consider that the vocational test which the government is now realizing should be opened for at the upper secondary level is very good. However, they have still not realized that such a test should also exist when students are to enter. We have previously tried to highlight that the person who is skilled in their profession and perhaps has tinkered with engines throughout their childhood still cannot enter the vehicle program at the upper secondary level if they do not pass English. It is completely absurd. There are fantastically skilled young people who are not allowed to enter educations where they would excel because of the prevailing theoretical view on knowledge.

Practical skills are still not valued in this country, and it is a shame. It means that people who could have become fantastic professionals and could have contributed to the competence that companies are crying out for are excluded and led into unemployment instead of being led into the labor market. It is very much a shame.

Madam Speaker! I am glad that this committee report is a small step in the right direction. I can also state that in order to achieve a vocational offensive and the very qualified vocational programs and the competencies that the working life is truly crying out for, one must secure a path into upper secondary school and into a profession for even more people.

We have only just begun. I look forward to this government falling and a new government being able to take over and launch a real professional offensive.

(Applause)

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! We members of the committee represent somewhat different constituencies. It is at home in the constituency that we make our visits, and it is often that reality that is closest to us and from which we draw our examples.

As a Member of Parliament from Dalarna, I have met many employers who describe the same problem. It is everything from industries in Hedemora, Ludvika and Borlänge to healthcare operations in Gagnef and Falun or the business sector in Leksand and Idre. It is employer after employer who are seeking vocationally trained people.

At the same time, many young people graduate from upper secondary school without really gaining a foothold in the labor market because they lack the correct vocational training. There is therefore a gap here between education and work. That is also how it looks across Sweden.

It is a consequence of the fact that for a long time we have had a system where the content of education and the needs of working life have not always developed in step with one another. Society has changed rapidly – both technically, organizationally, and in terms of competence – but the education system has not always been adapted to ensure that students' knowledge truly corresponds to the requirements they face after graduation.

A vocational education should be a secure path into a profession. It should provide the knowledge that the working life demands, and it should carry all the way to a job. It is naturally a problem when that is not the case today.

The problem today is not just about content, but also about clarity. In many cases, there is a lack of a common, clear standard for what it means to have completed a vocational program.

The high school thesis, which today is often the concluding part of the education, looks very different depending on the school, the teacher, and local conditions. This means that a degree is simply not always a clear measure of actual professional skill.

For the employer, it becomes uncertain, and for the student, it becomes insecure. One has attended for three years and completed their high school project, but still, there is sometimes a lack of clear recognition from the working world that one is actually ready. For that very reason, the change in this bill with the introduction of vocational tests is immensely important.

It means that the education does not just conclude with a project or work. Now, the education concludes with a standardized test designed to measure professional skills in practice. The test covers the entire professional competence that the education aims for, and it is developed in close cooperation with the relevant industries.

The vocational tests will then become a tool to ensure that the education maintains a consistent and high level across the entire country. They contribute to equality. For the student, it means something very concrete. When you stand there with your vocational test, you know that you can handle it. You know that you are ready, and the employer feels the same way. It builds both pride and security.

Madam Speaker! At the same time, there is another problem that often falls into the shadows, namely accessibility. The supply of vocational training varies quite significantly across the country. In smaller regions, it can be difficult to offer training within narrower or more resource-intensive professions.

Therefore, the second important change is to open up for more cooperation between the schools. Today, the possibilities to outsource parts of the vocational education are heavily limited. This has meant that schools in practice have sometimes refrained from offering certain educations because they lack resources, equipment, and competence.

With the new proposals, the possibility is opened to hand over teaching in vocational subjects to other public providers, such as municipalities, or to private actors. This means increased flexibility in the system.

It means that more students can gain access to the courses. We can simply make it possible to stay at home and still receive the right education.

It is important in the whole country, not least in just Dalarna. With us, the distances are long. But the will to stay and build one's future in the hometown is often strong.

This is also about Sweden's future. Because without the right competence, Sweden stands still. Then healthcare and elderly care do not function. Then no houses are built, and then machines stand idle.

But it is also about the individual. It is about the young person who is to choose a path in life and who should get to feel that the path one chooses leads somewhere.

These changes give more people the opportunity to stand on their own feet, to feel pride in their work and to be part of something bigger. With that, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! Member Bengtsson likes Dalarna very much. As the member says, there are very many who seek educated people and not least vocationally trained people.

When we look at what is happening right now, we can state that one of the things the government has done is that they are deporting skilled people. In Dalarna, one earns less than what one earns in Stockholm. The median wage is based on the wage for the whole country.

In Dalarna, one earns less. One can be deported from Dalarna as a skilled worker for the same job that a skilled worker in Stockholm can remain in the country for. How does that help Dalarna's companies? That is the first question.

The second question is the following. One can see, for example, in the wage statistics that there are some mechanics, bricklayers, etcetera who do not earn that much. Is it good for Dalarna, which lacks people, and the municipalities that cannot find staff, that people are being deported because they earn too little? It is a bounty based, among other things, on Stockholm wages that Dalarna does not live up to.

When it comes to getting more people into the vocational programs, it can be stated that the government has refused to open up for vocational tests to enter upper secondary school. This means that the skilled young men or young women who want to get into the vocational programs cannot get in if they have not also passed English, Swedish, and math, even though they are very good at their craft.

They have refused to open the vocational programs so that it would be enough to get in with the average. Then 10,000 more could have entered the vocational programs every year. That they have not wanted. It will take many years until it is finished.

How does Dalarna benefit from this policy? The companies and municipalities in Dalarna really need competence. I know that it is true. How are they helped by these proposals?

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, member, for the questions, even if the connection to the report may be on the borderline!

The government is doing several things so that more people can enter employment and that more people can take the jobs where there is a demand from Dalarnas employers. An important part is that those who do not have a job today shall become employable.

It is not that there is a lack of people, but rather a lack of people with the right education. In that case, one needs to ensure that there are educational places so that those who do not have the right education can receive the right education.

Then it concerns the link to the wage requirement for labor immigration. Fundamentally, it is quite reasonable that when there are unemployed people in Sweden, they should primarily receive the right education to be able to take the simple jobs that exist.

That it should be necessary to labor-migrate people from other countries for employers to be able to hire people is fundamentally a system failure. It is because there are not enough correctly educated people on the Swedish labor market. The connection there is simply that, in the long run, it should be one of the incentives for more people to enter the labor market.

When it comes to lowering the requirements for entering upper secondary school, we have had that debate a number of times. Fundamentally, the counter-question is: Does the Center Party really mean that if we admit more people to upper secondary school who do not bring sufficient knowledge from primary school, the upper secondary school results will increase?

Does the Centre Party not see the risk that one creates yet another failure for students who are already vulnerable and have had a hard time in school, so that they incur another failure?

Isn't it better to implement early measures in primary school so that they get the knowledge they need so that they can then manage high school on the track they enter?

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! On the last question, I can only answer: Yes, it is incredibly much better to invest early in students to get the right knowledge. That is why the Center Party invests more in schools than the government does; that is how it is.

It would have been fantastically good if you had invested as much as we do. All other opposition parties also invest more than the government does in schools, precisely because one needs to be able to implement measures much earlier and have the money for it.

We want a sector grant so that it is not primarily large municipalities, large actors and large schools that receive the state grants. They are currently going primarily to the large cities. We want a sector grant instead, so that municipalities in, for example, Dalarna get the same conditions to help their students as the large cities. However, the Christian Democrats, together with the rest of the government, have said no to this. But I completely agree with the basic principle itself.

It can certainly be said that it is partly a systemic error that people are unemployed and do not have the competence that the labor market is seeking. But it does not help the entrepreneurs who currently lack competent labor to be told that they might get an employee with the right competence in four years. They are still without competent labor now. It is still a chef who is not there. It could be a bricklayer or a mechanic who is not there. If the companies can hire them, growth in Dalarna increases, and more people can get jobs at lower levels. It helps those who are unemployed.

That is how the economy works. That is what all the bourgeois parties thought in the past until this strange Tidö government came along and people forgot what the bourgeois heritage was, namely that growth can increase when more people come to work. It is sad.

I completely agree that we should ensure that people are educated. If more people enter the vocational program, the levels are lowered, and it is these levels that the government says shall apply when the new grading system is in place. It lies exactly at that level. Then you think that young people can manage it, but now you don't think they can manage it. It just doesn't add up!

We have said throughout the entire mandate period that for every year, there are at least 10,000 more who could have entered the vocational programs and contributed to Swedish growth. But you have said no. These are the same types of students that you believe can contribute in five years. But now you do not believe they can. There is no logic or reason in this.

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the contribution!

The difference is that we do this in an organized manner. We ensure that there is a structure for who proceeds to which education. It is not the case that we open the floodgates and let in just any student with any school failure behind them into a further education.

It is about what cumulative result one has from primary school, and it is that which determines which education one then fits into after primary school. It is a significantly better alternative for precisely these students when it comes to ensuring that no one incurs another school failure. It is much better than doing as the Centerpartiet proposes and, overnight, snapping one's fingers and letting everyone proceed into a higher education that is not adapted to their knowledge level.

The chairman mentioned that the opposition parties together invest more money than the government. It is naturally easy for each opposition party individually to invest more money. The problem is that each opposition party takes the money from different things. When the opposition parties are then to coordinate and negotiate, there are no guarantees whatsoever that they will agree to take the money from the same expenditure item. Thus, all this money is merely imaginary money.

When it comes to the labor immigration, it was a system that was abused. Many suffered when labor was immigrated for low-skilled jobs. Therefore, it needed to be regulated.

The government has sorted it out. We do it together and with exceptions for those shortage occupations where it is needed. In the long run, this is good both for those who live in Sweden and need to enter the labor market and for the labor market itself. It is good that one gets these exceptions for highly qualified labor and that labor in shortage occupations can continue to come to Sweden.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 14.)

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