Civil society, religious communities and popular education

Carl Nordblom (M)

Mr. Speaker! Society is greater than the state. Society is greater than our public bureaucracy, our authorities and our tax-funded political initiatives.

Voluntary cooperation is the basis of a free society – so wrote Milton Friedman in the book Capitalism and Freedom in 1962. I agree. Our civil society is based on free individuals' cooperation with one another in free associations. It is A and O in a democratic and free society.

All our associations, sports teams, religious communities, charities, gaming clubs, study associations, parent cooperatives, interest groups and so on contribute to freedom of choice and to a more vibrant society. A strong and vibrant civil society is therefore very important in a country like Sweden.

Civil society, religious communities and popular education

The political debate here in the Riksdag during the mandate period has been characterized by a great focus on increased control and a tightening of the regulatory framework regarding how the taxpayers' money that goes to our civil society shall be managed and reported. It has been good and necessary. For a long time, the granting of grants to Swedish civil society and folk education has been based on trust. It may have worked at one time, but unfortunately not in the society we live in today.

This has not least become clear in the Swedish National Audit Office's criticism of the grant awarding, where it is clearly signaled that tax money has been misused and exploited by, among others, criminal and extremist forces or risks being so. This, Mr. Speaker, no one thinks is good.

Every morning, millions of people in Sweden go to work. They work long days to then come home and take care of the family and try to manage the everyday puzzle. All these hard-working taxpayers should feel secure that their hard-earned money goes to the right things and the right purposes. That is why it is good and pleasing that the government during the mandate period introduced democratic conditions to prevent tax money from going to associations, individuals, and organizations whose activities conflict with society's fundamental values.

Mr. Speaker! An important part of Swedish civil society is our folkbildning, not least all the folk high schools around the country that contribute with education and an opportunity to improve one's study results. Many folk high schools are also an important place of education for jobs and skills development. During the mandate period, the Government is investing an extra 100 million per year on precisely the folk high schools to resume an initiative on these after several tough years of increased costs and concluded pandemic support.

Mr. Speaker! Study associations are also an important part of Swedish civil society. In order to restore trust and confidence and to protect the taxpayers' money that finances the study associations, the government has introduced stricter reporting requirements for the Folkbildningsrådet, strengthened Folkbildningsrådets role and given them the opportunity to withdraw state grants from recipients who do not meet the conditions for the state grants. The government has also introduced that the council shall be able to request financial statements from the recipient prepared by an authorized auditor.

That children and young people, in particular, should have meaningful leisure activities is of the utmost importance for public health, integration, safety, and social cohesion.

A well-functioning folk education contributes to more people from all parts of society getting the opportunity to influence their life situation and participate in societal development. It raises the general level of education and also increases interest in cultural life.

Mr. Speaker! During the mandate period, the Moderate-led government has taken responsibility for Sweden and Sweden's economy. It has fought a sky-high inflation and carried out historical investments in defense, the justice system, and Sweden's security.

During this mandate period, one has been forced to prioritize. Despite tough prioritizations and large necessary investments in other areas, one has continued to prioritize Swedish civil society and folkbildning (non-formal education). Folkbildning is still prioritized with 4 billion per year. 800 million per year is invested in the leisure card for children and young people. Almost 1 billion per year is invested in libraries and physical books.

During 2023–2025, 300 million has been invested through civil society against involuntary loneliness. 150 million per year has gone to initiatives for people in social vulnerability via civil society and 200 million to combat mental ill-health, also via civil society organizations.

Mr. Speaker! The list continues. I could continue for several more minutes.

I can only restate: Despite a global recession, despite war in Europe and despite the fight against organized crime, our Moderate-led government has the strength and the will to continue prioritizing civil society, association life, popular education, and our children and young people.

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Mr. Speaker! I will focus on civil society, and my party friend Magnus Manhammar will speak about popular education later.

A parliamentary debate on civil society should not be about budget items or grant rules. It should primarily be about our view of society, about people's right to organize themselves, and about civil society's place in our democracy. For us Social Democrats, civil society is not a relic from the past, nor is it a symbol to hold up, but it is the very lifeblood of our democracy. It is there that engagement grows, where community is formed, where change begins – in associations, in study circles, and in community centers.

Civil society is not a luxury we can choose to have, but it is a necessity for our democracy to function. Yet we are now forced to witness how this space is being restricted, not only through political priorities in the budget but also through an increasingly suspicious tone from those in power who see organized engagement as a threat rather than an asset.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has built its democracy from the bottom up. It has been through popular education, association life, cooperation, and the struggle for equality that democracy has been deepened and broadened. And we have done it together across class boundaries, between generations, and across the entire country.

But since the change of government in 2022, we have seen an opposite movement. Cuts are hitting public education hard, and obvious meeting places are closing again. Association life in the countryside is being pressured.

In Giva Sveriges report The State, the Capital, or the Citizen – who finances civil society? we can read that it is not just about cuts, but that it also concerns a changed political governance where the very support structure for civil society has shifted. It is about how voting organizations, such as the peace movement or consumer organizations, receive less support or no support at all. At the same time, public funds are increasingly directed towards activities that promote community but not influence.

The report therefore raises important questions: What is civil society's role in the future? Should it only be a sector that delivers services? What happens to the association life as a political force, as a voice for those without a voice?

Mr. Speaker! We also see how organizations that scrutinize power or defend human rights are being viewed with suspicion. The political rhetoric has become increasingly harsh, and instead of recognizing civil society as a democratic force, its legitimacy is being questioned.

In the interest organization Forum's report "Labeled as democracy extremists," it can be read how civil society organizations in Sweden today are subjected to an increasingly harsh rhetoric. Organizations and individual individuals within civil society are labeled as extremists, as threats to society, and even as terrorists. It is not because they break any laws, but it is because they raise their voices for equality, anti-racism, climate issues, and other democratic values.

Over 150 leaders from non-profit organizations testify in the report on how their operations have been affected and on tangible consequences such as reduced funding, lost collaborations, an increased sense of insecurity, and the need for self-censorship.

Mr. Speaker! Civil society also faces serious practical obstacles in everyday life. Did you know that 70 percent of our youth organizations today have difficulty opening or maintaining a bank account? Complicated rules, high fees, and long processing times force young people to shut down associations before they have even had a chance to get started. It is actually absurd, and it is time that we together review how these obstacles can be removed.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats want to facilitate voluntary engagement, not hinder it. In dialogue with civil society, we want to review how we can develop civil society's opportunities to involve people based on engagement and a desire to influence. We want to strengthen the conditions for civil society to contribute to social development and welfare both as voice-bearers and opinion-formers and with a diversity of activities. We see a great need to deepen and spread knowledge about civil society.

We believe that guidelines are needed for how authorities should handle this sector with respect for its unique character. In recent years, a shift has occurred where a number of authorities have asserted that the same rules that apply to private business activities should also apply to non-profit association activities. Sometimes the issue has been raised because a company has brought a legal case, and sometimes the authorities have acted on their own initiative, often with reference to EU directives.

The development is changing the conditions for non-profit association activities and forcing the associations to adapt to legislation that is written for profit-seeking actors in a market, i.e., for actors who act based on a completely different logic. This shift has occurred in defiance of a broad political consensus on safeguarding the unique character of civil society. We need to put a stop to this.

Mr. Speaker! All around our country, there is an impressive number of public meeting places operated by community organizations. Many have their origins in the Swedish popular movements. The community-run meeting places have a crucial role for our civil society's conditions to operate, not least in the countryside and in rural areas where the meeting places in many locations are the hub for the locality. They function as meeting places for community life, and in many places, they are the arena for art and culture to be available throughout the country. That was why we Social Democrats proposed an increase of 50 million kronor for meeting places – precisely to safeguard the possibility and existence of public meeting places all around our country.

Mr. Speaker! When democracy is challenged in Europe and in the world, we must strengthen its foundations here at home. Then we must defend our community centers, our study associations, our folk education, and our voluntary movements. Then we must understand that freedom of association, freedom of expression, and freedom of organization are not symbols but building blocks in every living democratic society. Therefore, we Social Democrats choose to safeguard the freedom of civil society, its diversity, and its power. We want to equip it for the future – not press it into silence.

We want an ideological debate about how we view society, about people's right to organize, about power and counter-power. We stand up for civil society – not because we have to, but because we know that without it we lose our democratic backbone and the future that we all have the right to shape together.

With these words, I move for approval of reservation 6.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We live in a strong and well-organized society where the "strong state" has given individuals a great freedom to develop their own lives based on their own thoughts and ideas. That is not how it looks in most countries. On the contrary! In much of the world, the state is neither well-developed nor a credible partner, which means the individual trusts the family and the kin more to develop a good life.

For many of us who live in Sweden, this is something foreign because we have become accustomed to a state that takes care of us from the cradle to the grave. The question, however, is whether the strong state really gives us the freedom we need. Mental ill-health and loneliness are spreading. Many feel that they lack a deeper meaning in life, and some are so worried that they are afraid to go out in the evening or talk to a neighbor. The state does not seem to solve all our problems.

Mr. Speaker! In our well-organized everyday life, I believe we need to reflect on what are the state's natural tasks and what we all, each of us together, are responsible for. The state can organize public safety as well as welfare, but it is in the family and the kin, in the natural communities in civil society in the form of sports and cultural associations as well as in churches and congregations that the warmth of proximity flourishes. It is there we get to know each other in a deeper way. It is in these communities we can see that life is more than just work and paying taxes.

When we debate civil society, religious communities and folk education today, I want as a Christian Democrat to be clear that we believe it is in these communities that good society has the greatest prerequisites to develop. It is among other reasons why we work to ensure that aid is at a higher level than today but is conveyed via different parts of civil society, which reduces the risk of corruption.

That is also why we believe that the folk high schools should have a larger budget allocation, as they have shown that they are good at getting people who are far from the labor market into jobs. It is also from this perspective that we have fought to establish a leisure card that makes it easier for children and young people in vulnerable areas to engage in sports and cultural associations.

Mr. Speaker! In addition to civil society, religious communities, and folk education providing the individual with an opportunity to develop as a person, it is in these communities that modern Swedish democracy has emerged. When Fredrik Olaus Nilsson in 1848 organized the first Baptist baptism in Halland, the foundation was laid for the first Swedish Baptist congregation, and it was in this church movement that, for the first time, there was equal suffrage for men and women.

The Baptists became a model for several free churches that emerged during the 1800s. From these churches, liberalism developed, which fought for freedom of religion and universal and equal suffrage. After the free churches and prayer houses emerged, the temperance movements also began to grow, and since there was often a personal union between these movements, they took with them the democratic traditions that developed in the free church. At the end of the 1800s, when the labor movement emerged, it was also part of the new democratic tradition.

In this way, free churches, free thought, the temperance movement, trade unions and workers' parties were united in a struggle for freedom of religion, freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of association, and even today it is within civil society that these freedoms are best developed and preserved.

Mr. Speaker! We can always argue about how many resources should be allocated from the state, regions, and municipalities to different parts of civil society, but we cannot deny the importance of civil society, religious communities, and popular education for Swedish democracy and the emergence of the Swedish welfare model, where everyone contributes according to their ability and where we try to provide for the individual based on their needs.

Mr. Speaker! Even though I, as a Christian Democrat, sing the praises of civil society, I am unfortunately forced to state that there are also problems. We have seen how individual groups exploit rules for their own gain. We also see how some get stuck in narrow groupings where they do not meet others. In some parts, this can be understandable later, especially if one is new to a country. But even if there are explanations for why a situation arises, it is important that we safeguard the regulatory framework regarding democratic goals and how society distributes its resources.

It is therefore positive that, for example, study associations have reviewed their rules and are actively working to counteract the incorrect use of money. It is also good that the public sector in the form of municipalities, regions, and the state have reviewed their regulatory frameworks. By creating good and well-functioning rules regarding public financial support, we protect those who use this support, which enables continued public support even in the future.

Mr. Speaker! We see that the social climate has hardened. Conflicts in the Middle East are spilling over into our streets and squares. Antisemitism and hateful attacks against Jews living in Sweden have resulted in the state having been forced to review the support to religious communities and, above all, to Jewish synagogues, preschools, and schools. We must never accept that antisemitism returns and plagues our society.

Mr. Speaker! We also see how other religious groups – Christians and Muslims – are subjected to abuse. Even though these abuses are not equivalent to what Jews are subjected to, they are also not acceptable.

Regarding threats and violence, it is the state that has the absolute responsibility as the state holds the monopoly on violence. It is a responsibility that the state must and shall take. But I believe that civil society, religious communities, and popular education can participate in mitigating the polarization that exists in society. Civil society as a whole has been involved in building up our democratic society, and I believe it has an important task to preserve our society even in this time, which unfortunately is characterized by polarization.

With this, Mr. Speaker, I move for the rejection of all motions and for the approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Jonas Andersson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today, the Culture Committee's report on civil society, religious communities, and folk education is being debated. I intend to state the Sweden Democrats' position regarding how these issues have been treated in the report.

Initially, I would like to move for approval of the Sweden Democrats' reservation 7 in the report.

Civil society is enormously important for Sweden as a country and for individual Swedes. It gives meaning for many. It provides community, education, culture, physical activity and much more. We know all that.

For the Sweden Democrats, it is important that policy creates good conditions for civil society to flourish and be free. It is important that the independence of civil society is protected. It follows from this that it is simultaneously important that civil society does not become so dependent on the state that it moves towards becoming an extended arm of the public Sweden.

Such a negative development, in my opinion, was seen during the previous red-green governments. Then, the policy resulted in immigration chaos and other problems, and then one tried to direct civil society to clean up and fix the problems that one had caused oneself through decisions in this chamber and in other assemblies around our country.

Mr. Speaker! Before the Sweden Democrats and the government parties took the helm in Sweden, the policy for civil society was grossly mismanaged by the red-green governments. To what extent it was due to incompetence, nonchalance, or both can be discussed. It is clear in any case that a lot of problems arose that characterize the policy area even now, and that they arose because of the political paralysis that prevailed at the time.

Until now, during this parliamentary term, civil society policy has revolved largely around the fact that the Sweden Democrats and the governing parties have had to clean up the swamp that the red-greens left behind. I have spoken about this in the chamber several times before.

Among other things, we have already implemented stricter guidelines for the Folkbildningsrådet, additional directives for the Folkbildningsutredningen, as well as a division of the folk education budget into one part for studieförbunden and one part for the folkhögskolorna. We have also tightened the democratic conditions for state grants to civil society.

In addition to the things we have done and do with the government when it comes to issues regarding civil society, the Sweden Democrats are pushing for further changes that will create order and clarity. A proposal addressed in this report is found in reservation 7, which I moved for approval at the beginning of the speech. We want to introduce a central database that shows all public grants to civil society and which organizations receive them.

This is what we want to do so that it will be easier for both state and local actors to get a good overview of which funding flows exist, as well as to help the authorities cooperate to stop fraud and inaccuracies. Actually, I think it is completely crazy that we do not already have such a database in place, I must say.

In its review of the state's grant funding to civil society from 2023, the Swedish National Audit Office proposed that such a type of database should be established. That proposal, however, only covered state grants. The Sweden Democrats therefore go further in that part, as we want to see that the municipal and regional levels are also covered.

Another proposal of a similar nature from the Sweden Democrats, which is also included in the report, is to introduce a national representative register containing information about the representatives of the civil society organizations that receive public grants. Introducing such a register would help our authorities to gain better overview and control – it would become more difficult for persons in civil society organizations to misuse grants. The register could also be used to see if representatives have been involved in, for example, economic crime. Exactly how such a register should look needs, of course, to be investigated.

Regarding both our proposals for a central database for public grants and the proposal for a representative register, the report refers to the fact that proposals such as these are being prepared by the government. It is important that the government gets these tools in place promptly. With their help, we will have even stronger opportunities to strike back against criminals and other dark forces who want to appropriate taxpayers' money through the association life.

Mr. Speaker! Last year, the Riksdag decided to introduce democracy conditions for state grants to civil society, in line with the bill that the Sverigedemokraterna and the government had negotiated. It was an important step forward to prevent taxpayers' money from ending up in the pockets of Islamists, criminal elements, and others who should be kept out.

The new rules began to apply at the turn of the year. So it is not that long ago, but it is important that we follow up on the consequences of the new democratic conditions that are now in place.

The Sweden Democrats therefore have a proposal in the report which aims to task an authority, for example Statskontoret, with repeatedly evaluating the consequences of the introduction of the new democracy conditions. The consequences need to be clearly clarified over time. It is about the trust in Swedish civil society and, naturally, in that regard, for the politics that have been involved in implementing these conditions. It is important that the democracy conditions hit the mark and that they become sharp enough when it comes to keeping undemocratic actors away from state grants to civil society. The Sweden Democrats are ready to act for further tightenings if it should prove necessary.

Mr. Speaker! The folk education sector is a part of civil society that has received particularly much attention in recent years, in this chamber and in the public debate in general. After the necessary reforms and the cleanup that the Sverigedemokraterna and the government have jointly carried out in the area during the mandate period, the tone from the Socialdemokraterna and the other red-green parties has reached absurd levels, not least when it comes to the reduced appropriation to study associations in the state budget. It has been pointed out that the crisis preparedness would be threatened in Sweden and parallels are drawn to the fact that Ukraine would stand up to Russia as well as it does thanks to folk education and study associations similar to those we have in Sweden.

Is it not that type of exaggeration that is being dragged out, that instead the countryside will now be almost destroyed when the student unions no longer receive nearly as many billions in state grants to carry out their activities? Even the Swedish music industry would, we have been told, be seriously threatened given that the student unions are prioritizing away rehearsal rooms in the current situation.

The Social Democrats' and the other red-green parties' absurd tone in the matter means that study associations and folkbildningen are disadvantaged – it becomes a kind of disservice, if you will. It is obvious that a good deal of what is being said is exaggerated and obscures a more serious debate on these issues, which I believe they deserve.

That sensible folk high school activity receives good conditions is good, but there are naturally great opportunities for the study associations to prioritize forward with the budget appropriations that remain. If the study associations opt out of today's lunch discounts in vulnerable areas, courses in dog parkour, special drum courses for non-binary people, and other questionable courses that they are currently engaged in, more money will be available for what is most important, for example, rehearsal rooms, which we have heard a lot about.

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats continue to work for order and tidiness in civil society policy. We have come a good way, but we are still not satisfied.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Mr. Speaker! Today's committee report concerns major areas that the Left Party holds in high regard: popular education, the conditions for religious communities, and more overarching civil society issues. We have no motions in this area this year, but a well-developed policy and significant reinforcements in our shadow budget. The organizations of Swedish civil society are very important building blocks in our democracy and need good conditions to operate.

Unfortunately, the consensus that has existed regarding the need for a strong civil society seems to have disappeared. Instead of feeling that they are seen as an asset to society, many who are engaged feel that political representatives in municipalities and regions and at the national level treat them with suspicion and sometimes even see them as a threat to democracy.

Representatives for the government base want to limit freedom of speech and the possibility of organizing, including for people who work in the state sector, when one does not distinguish between people's private lives and their professional activities. We saw this, for example, when Carl-Oskar Bohlin questioned an individual employee's engagement in climate issues.

Now, rules of conduct are also being discussed that could limit the freedom of expression for those who have a temporary residence permit. Unfortunately, I was very alarmed when I heard the minister Jakob Forssmed express on the radio that he saw no problem with our fundamental freedoms and rights potentially differing depending on whether we are Swedish citizens or not. This goes completely against our constitutional laws and international agreements. When one takes basic democratic principles so lightly, I feel that we are in a bad position.

Mr. Speaker! We also see that both a lack of calculation of financial support and laws and regulations are hindering civil society today. Vänsterpartiet wants that authorities and elected officials receive increased knowledge about the function and importance of civil society and that more decisions are illuminated based on what the effects will be for different types of organizations.

Voluntary work contributes with large and important efforts that we as a society cannot afford to lose. Yet, many organizations find it difficult to even open a bank account, rent a premises, or collaborate internally by, for example, paying for support services. For persons with disabilities, regulations for transport services, escort services, and Försäkringskassan's assessments constitute obstacles to becoming part of association life in various ways. This must be addressed urgently.

To these very practical problems comes the question of hate and threats against those who engage in political issues. It is particularly difficult today for representatives of children's and youth organizations, racialized persons, and hbtqi persons.

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to the field of non-formal education, it is important that the self-governance model we have today is preserved and that there continues to be an arm's length distance between non-formal education and politics. It has been a recurring theme this parliamentary period that representatives for the government parties have ridiculed and questioned the content and utility of courses within both higher education and folk high schools and study associations. We heard examples from this rostrum just a moment ago. The alternative to today's free non-formal education is perhaps minister-approved course catalogs.

For us in Vänsterpartiet, it is central that it continues to be free and voluntary that are the guiding principles and that politicians should not govern the content of the course offerings within folk education.

There is also reason to direct strong criticism towards the government's large cuts in the area. The folk high schools should have been allowed to keep the reinforcement that was added during the pandemic, as the need for educational places remains great. Now we see that very many young people would need a place when they have not managed to complete upper secondary school and unemployment is very high. Even though it is not primarily the folk high schools that are to solve these problems, they can play an important role with both general and special courses and vocational training.

We see that a substantial increase in the compensation per participant is also needed, as it has lagged behind for very many years. This can, for example, make the recruitment of teachers more difficult, if one looks from the perspective of the folk high schools. It also results in poorer opportunities for extra help for the many participants who have great support needs.

Mr. Speaker! I also want to touch upon the cuts that have occurred within the activities of the study associations. It is very unfortunate. Many music houses and rehearsal rooms have been forced to close. Many study circles are not taking place and collaborations with other organizations are being cancelled. This affects people all over the country who want to learn together with others. But the effects are most noticeable in smaller towns and in rural areas, where the meeting places, the cultural offerings, and the entire association life are dependent on just the study associations.

In a debate we had here about two weeks ago, we heard from the Moderates' cultural policy spokesperson Kristina Axén Olin that she was disappointed that their cuts to the student unions had had these effects. Perhaps the government parties had formed a mistaken impression that there was a lot of air in the system and that the money was lying unused. I do not know what expectations were held when such much was cut. But my hope is that they are now rethinking when they see how it affects operations all over the country. I hope that they rethink before the autumn budget and strengthen the student unions again.

Mr. Speaker! I shall also touch upon the conditions for the trossamfund. They were changed quite recently in light of the new democratic conditions. We stood behind that change, but we are a little worried that the regulatory framework will lead to, for example, the complicating of religious ideological debate and that the actions of individuals will have a major impact on entire organizations. We are following the issue very closely and hope that the concern is unfounded.

I also want to bring up the planned relocation of the Agency for Support to Religious Communities. It is also a challenge that we hope will not take too much power away from the important work that the agency carries out today.

I have great respect for the fact that religious faith is important to very many people in our country. I see the important work many religious communities do in our society when it comes to offering support to people in crisis, people who live in solitude, and people who are new to our country. These are people who need a sense of community, a meeting place, and guidance in life. Many religious meeting places are also important cultural arenas where one can express oneself and experience song and music.

As decision-makers, we must therefore find a balance – we must have regulatory frameworks that support this important work while simultaneously being mindful that religious mandates or undemocratic values and methods of work are not allowed to limit people's freedom and well-being.

Mr. Speaker! I would like to conclude by telling those listening to the debate that we are heading in a dangerous direction when it comes to fundamental democratic principles in our country. It is not happening in the same way as we see in the USA, and it does not make as big headlines. That is perhaps because Trump's transformation of the USA can be likened to an action movie where everything happens very fast. But the changes in our country are more comparable to slow-TV like the elk migration.

Since this government took office with the help of the Sweden Democrats, legislative proposals and economic proposals that weaken the rule of law and our individual civil and political rights have been put forward. This has occurred with arguments about countering fraud and extremism, combating crime, strengthening our resilience against foreign powers, and making us more attractive for NATO membership. But it has also occurred with racist undertones.

The Sweden Democrats have long worked on linking all social problems with people of foreign background, and unfortunately, it has taken root among many politicians in this chamber. It has gone so far that one is now prepared to throw away principles we have agreed upon for decades. These are principles about the equal value of all people and what builds a strong democracy.

Democracy cannot be defended through more restrictions, but only by strengthening the rights that generations before us have fought for. The heart of democracy beats in the protection of individual rights and in that we are allowed to express our opinions without fear of reprisals.

We must not let ourselves be deceived by populist arguments about security. Security without freedom is not security – it is oppression.

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

Anne-Li Sjölund (C)

Mr. Speaker! The free, independent civil society – that is, our associations, study circles, religious communities, and volunteers – is a cornerstone of our democracy. For me, who grew up with village associations, sports clubs, and study circles, what civil society means is obvious. It is there that we learn to cooperate, take responsibility, and listen to one another. It is there that we are people together.

I have myself worked at a study association. I have seen what happens when people meet. I have seen how a study circle becomes more than just learning. It becomes a place where people meet. They reflect each other, laugh, learn and heal. Someone might go from just dropping in to becoming a circle leader, an association activist or a firebrand.

It is there that it happens – not in lecture halls or in regulations, but in the meeting, in the conversation, in the small circle where a person gets to grow. That is how trust is built, and trust is the glue in our democracy.

But the world has changed. We talk more about preparedness, total defense, and threat pictures. Here, of course, civil society comes in. Sports, popular education, culture, and all voluntary forces are also preparedness. It is not enough just with more soldiers or better roads. We must also build societies that hold, where people feel well, where we know our neighbors, and where we stand up for one another.

The sports and outdoor life movement, the association life, and folk education are our soft preparedness. It is there that we build strength, cohesion, and faith in the future. When associations disappear, when study associations scale back, and when the community centers fall silent, we lose much more than we realize. We must strengthen our organizations and not let them be depleted.

We already see how culture, study associations, sports, and community centers are being affected by cuts. It was not the state that solved the food aid during the pandemic – it was the associations, the churches, and the neighborhoods. This worries me when I see how the conditions are now changing. Cuts in the support for study associations are a death blow to thousands of activities, from small towns in the interior to suburbs in the large cities. Already now, circles are being cancelled. Staff are being laid off, rehearsal rooms are closing, and doors are being locked.

They are pulling the rug out from under those who need civil society the most at a time when we need more community, not less. It is both short-sighted and sad.

A third of all rehearsal rooms in Sweden are at risk of disappearing. It concerns about 20,000 young people who may no longer have anywhere to play, practice, or find their voice. It is bands that are split up and voices that fall silent. As Per Gessle said: In the rehearsal room, I met Marie Fredriksson. Without the rehearsal room, there would have been no Gyllene tider and no Roxette.

For the Center Party, it is obvious to safeguard this power. We want to see long-term conditions for association life. We want to see stable and transparent support and a regulatory framework based on trust, not mistrust.

It is right to set requirements. Of course, no public funds should go to organizations that violate fundamental civil and human rights. But we must not create so much control that we hinder good engagement.

Mr. Speaker! It is often in civil society that people find their place. We know that over 600,000 people engage voluntarily every week just within sports. We know that children who participate in association life fare better, both physically and mentally.

We also know that associations, study circles, and passionate individuals make a difference every day. It is there that one dares to speak in front of a group for the first time. It is there that a young leader grows in their role. There, a newcomer receives language training and a network. Seniors get community, and children get hope for the future.

Centerpartiet wants to restore support for student unions, protect the independence of the Folkbildningsrådet, and make it easier to run associations throughout the country.

We want to invest in community centers and cultural venues, not least in rural areas.

A strong civil society is not a special interest. It is part of our democratic foundation. It is a social network and a preparedness structure.

Madam Speaker! I know how much is required and how much is carried by voluntary forces, by people who do not demand the spotlight but who just do. Let us not meet that commitment with bureaucracy, cuts and mistrust. Let us meet it with trust, support and cooperation.

We must stand guard over the free academy, over popular education, and over culture's possibilities to depict what is happening in our time. Without this, we stand weaker, both as individuals and as a society. It is there – in the non-profit sector, in the association life, and in popular education – that society is shaped, and it is there that the strength of the future is built.

With that, I move for approval of reservation number 2.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Tonight I would actually have been at a seminar and discussed the future of popular education. But I have the luck of standing here and talking about popular education instead. The previous debates were a bit more engaging than I had expected.

Let us talk a bit about popular education. The roots of popular education stretch all the way back to the end of the 19th century, a time when democracy was still in its infancy and when large parts of the population did not have access to education. Study associations and folk high schools became then gateways to knowledge but also to self-confidence, reflection, and social engagement. It was not just about learning to read, learning to write, or understanding one's contemporary era. It was also about understanding oneself and one's place in the world and about gaining empowerment.

This is what makes popular education so unique. It captures the educational need that people have. And it is combined with the special pedagogy that has emerged within study associations and folk high schools, which is based on the individual's own will to learn. It is a free education where learning takes place in dialogue, in community, and in mutual respect. It is an education that strengthens both the individual and democracy. Popular education is not top-down. It is not profit-driven. It is human-driven. That is exactly why it is so powerful.

Madam Speaker! Even today, adult education serves the same function, despite the fact that we have long had a well-developed school system. More paths are needed when the traditional school, for various reasons, does not work for an individual. Here are the folk high schools, which catch and provide a second chance. We have a fantastic access to higher education, but our desire to learn does not end when the degree is complete. It continues for the vast majority of us for the rest of our lives, whether it is about learning to handle new technology or about jointly developing preparedness in times of uncertainty.

One of the greatest strengths of popular education and civil society is the ability to quickly adapt and meet needs that arise during changes. We have seen this over the years.

When industries have been shut down and larger layoffs have occurred, folk high schools have quickly offered retraining courses.

Sweden has on several occasions received newcomers – most recently refugees from Ukraine. In those cases, student unions have started language cafés and teaching in social orientation and Swedish long before access to municipal activities such as SFI has been available.

When it is difficult to recruit staff for health and care locally, folk high schools begin to provide education to meet the acute need for staff.

When one can no longer park the car or pay a bill without an app on the phone, it is the folkbildning that is there with circles, where one can learn together to handle the new technology.

Now, when we are in times of unrest, one can, through the study associations' provision, prepare for crises and build networks with others to increase preparedness both at the individual level and at the societal level.

Madam Speaker! One strength is to be quick-footed when it comes to meeting new needs. Another strength within popular education is to give those whose voice in society is not so strong a stronger voice.

Within study associations, study circles are organized that target people with intellectual disabilities and aim to provide easy-to-understand information about the election in order to empower more people to exercise their right to vote. It works. Over 80 percent of those who participated in this type of study circle before the 2018 election went and voted. It is a great success, because this is a group that normally seen has the lowest voter turnout in Sweden.

Within study associations, there are also, for example, theater groups for people with intellectual disabilities. When I visited one of these a while ago, one of the participants told me that this really was the highlight of the week and what a tragedy it had been during the pandemic when one was not allowed to see each other once a week and perform theater together. She also told me that she had actually made friends through the theater group. It was very important for her because she had previously lived very isolated.

Almost every fourth person in Sweden today is troubled by involuntary loneliness. There must be many ways to break their isolation, find friends, and create new networks. Folkbildningen is such an important way. In the folk high school, many students tell moving stories about how a life-threatening – literally – lack of zest for life has been turned into faith in the future and a sense of belonging. And studieförbunden create meeting places for people through hundreds of thousands of study circles, cultural programs, and other arrangements – every day, everywhere in our elongated country.

Madam President! I began by talking about the roots of popular education. Let me conclude with a few words on the future of popular education. I view with great confidence the development that has occurred within the Folkbildningsrådet, where the focus is now being placed on moving from quantity to quality when distributing funds to popular education. I believe that it is very wise, just as the focus on transparency and on ensuring that the funds go to activities that uphold democratic conditions. I believe that it lays a good foundation for the development of the future of popular education.

With that, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Madam President! It is late in the debate. We have heard about civil society, the association life, the voluntary and idea-driven organizations, the sports clubs and the popular movements but also about the religious communities – what power in society they offer and achieve. To gather, do things together, meet and organize is a cornerstone of the Swedish, free society. It makes people grow and take responsibility. It develops both democracy and our local communities.

People from different strata of society and with different backgrounds, circumstances, interests, and cultures are given the opportunity to meet and interact through organizations and associations. This promotes social cohesion and diversity. It is a force to be reckoned with in combating the aberrations and perhaps failures in society that we see in the form of racism, crime, discrimination, exclusion, and loneliness. Through civil society organizations, we can ensure long-term work for inclusion and for maintaining culture and language within different ethnic groups.

It is a glue that holds society together, which creates meaning and trust and which, not least, promotes public health.

Over 6 million people, spread across the entire country, are engaged in one way or another. For Miljöpartiet, it is naturally a priority to support this force. In our budget motion, we have allocated more than 1 billion to a civil society initiative. These are broad, permanent investments to give the association life better conditions to conduct long-term activities.

Project support needs to be replaced with multi-year operating grants. With this initiative, we support the infrastructure with premises and the possibility to employ leaders, administrators, and other staff. Bureaucracy needs to be simplified and red tape reduced. It should not be completely impossible to obtain a bank account, for example.

Madam Speaker! This debate has also been about how civil society not only builds up but also breaks down society, how associations, organizations and study associations are used to cheat for grants, cultivate anti-democratic values and spread extreme views.

It is fundamentally important for the Green Party to counteract cheating, errors, crime, and all forms of anti-democratic tendencies. Not a single krona shall go to those who wish to undermine what we have built together.

In the government, we were involved in initiating the new democracy rules that were introduced at the turn of the year. That process needs to continue so that they can cover all state funding, including for folkbildningen. We need proper follow-up and clarity in the regulations but also an evaluation of the new democracy conditions so that we see that the implementation turns out in the way we want.

The debate on civil society, popular education, and association life has, not least in this chamber, had a tendency to tilt and tip over to almost exclusively being about crime, ill will, suspicion, and increased control rather than about all the positive things that result from us organizing ourselves together.

Unfortunately, that debate seems to have spilled over onto the Tidö government's budgets. We see a cultural life on its knees with reduced support and eroded grants to associations, outdoor life, and grant-giving organizations. A third of the support to study associations is also to be removed during the mandate period. So far, 350 million has been withdrawn, and next year, an additional 150 million is expected to disappear.

Madam President! These cuts have had consequences. Cultural life has slowed down, and unemployment among cultural workers is rising. In some places, the situation is as acute as it was at the beginning of the pandemic, before the pandemic support.

For the study associations, the situation is naturally even worse. We can follow the development on the Cutback Map, where reports, often from local media, about activities, premises, and courses being shut down in the wake of the government's policy have been plotted on a map of Sweden.

The worst is in small towns and in rural areas, where the study associations are often the only available premises for gatherings and meetings. Both Studieförbunden i samverkan and the Folkbildningsrådet confirm that picture in their reports. Miljöpartiet argues that the government must also evaluate the consequences and effects of the reduced support.

Recently, parts of Sweden's artistic elite and young, yet unestablished, musicians gathered in a filmed appeal regarding the rehearsal room crisis that the Tidöregeringen has caused. 60,000 Swedes play in bands and use the studieförbundens rehearsal rooms. Now, the studieförbunden themselves expect that a third of these – 20,000 people, mostly young – will be left without their rehearsal rooms.

Parallel to this, cuts are being made to the state support for the music school. The support for the folk high schools is being eroded through missing adjustments. It is not only the very foundation of the Swedish musical miracle that is threatened. With the government's collective policy, the entire glue that holds society together is starting to crumble.

Madam President! For the Green Party, folkbildningen with its 8 study associations and 155 folk high schools is an enormously important component in the cultural ecosystem but also for the educational chain. It is not least about the cultural competence supply but also about education, democracy and the strong society.

Miljöpartiet therefore wants, contrary to what the government is doing, to strengthen public education. In our budget motion, we allocate 650 million kronor more than the government to folk high schools and study associations.

We also want to implement the proposals in the folk education inquiry. Folk education shall be free and voluntary, and therefore the self-governance model needs to remain. The folk education council needs to remain. A balance between trust and control was also needed, and we think the investigator has landed well regarding this. The inquiry has been on consultation, and it is time to implement the proposals.

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet has two reservations in the report. I naturally stand behind both, but I move for approval only of reservation 12 regarding the implementation of the proposals in the folkbildningsutredningen.

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

Magnus Manhammar (S)

Madam Speaker! Honored members! There is a map of Sweden. It is not drawn with the contours of the mountains, the beautiful stretches of the rivers through the landscape or along the coastlines. Instead, it is drawn in red pen and shows association premises, music houses, community centers, youth centers, classrooms and libraries. It is drawn over study circles that are no longer held, over language cafés and rehearsal rooms that have fallen silent, over folk education that is being dismantled.

It is a map of a Sweden that is in the process of disappearing, a Sweden where knowledge and community once grew, evening after evening, in study circles and community centers. This Sweden is now being erased in many places, budget item by budget item, closure by closure.

We are talking about popular education. But we are actually talking about something much larger.

What is popular education then? Popular education is not just study hours and statistics. It is not just ABF, NBV, Sensus, Medborgarskolan, Bilda, Studiefrämjandet, Vuxenskolan and other names in an Excel file. Popular education is a human being who dares to ask their first question. It is a young person who finds their voice in a writing circle. It is a retiree who learns Swedish to be able to say "I love you" to their grandchild.

It is democracy's living room, where conversations are allowed to take time and there is room for everyone.

And do you know what? It works. Popular education works. That is why it is so dangerous that it is now being dismantled, because when popular education is torn down, silence spreads. Polarization grows, alienation gains new ground, conversations fall silent, people's opportunities shrink, and faith in the future is weakened.

These cuts are not just numbers. They are stories. I have seen the map of closures and cuts. It has been prepared by the study associations themselves. It does not just show empty premises; it shows voids in people's lives.

The government's massive austerity policy has consequences. An entire circle activity in Ronneby is closed down. An association in Överkalix can no longer hold its meetings. A music studio in Malmö can no longer afford to stay open. These are concrete consequences that hit small towns, suburbs, and the infrastructure of civil society.

I say it clearly: When the government pulls the rug out from under popular education, it pulls out the foundation for democracy, culture, language, and participation.

Madam Speaker! This is not a question of left or right. It is a question of who we are as a society. Do we want to build a Sweden where people are allowed to grow regardless of age, background or education? Do we want a country where curiosity lives, where conversation lives, where democracy lives?

Then we must say something now. We must say that enough is enough with the cuts and enough with the dismantling. Education for the people is not a niche interest. It is a societal interest that requires long-term perspective, trust, and funding.

Let me continue with an image. In a small town in a small room, perhaps in an old school or a library, a woman is sitting right now and learning to read. She has not had that opportunity before. It is her first book, her first step. No camera is there. No applause is heard. But that is where it begins. Democracy begins there. Human redemption begins there.

Let us not extinguish that light. Let us stand up for popular education.

Madam Speaker! Now I have used half of my time, and there is much more to say. But I have not written anything more, so I will continue without a script. I wrote a speech about what I wanted to say. This is something that touches me and all of us in this country, in the soul. It is not just something we debate here in the rostrum today, but something we see in reality. I have personally been out and met study associations and folk high schools and seen how reality has become completely different for them compared to just a few years ago.

I wrote on social media about what has happened with rehearsal spaces around Sweden. Many are being closed down due to cuts within the student unions. It is estimated that approximately one-third of the rehearsal spaces are about to disappear because of the cuts. Many people have contacted me since Tuesday when we debated this.

A teacher told that in a municipality in Skåne, people became so inspired by the government's cuts that they chose to cut their own folk education budget as well. Previously, they had had a total of 500 hours of youth activities per week. Many young people had had youth centers, activities, rehearsal rooms, and other things they could go to. Everything was swept away in one fell swoop. They received no state support and no municipal support. The study associations that remained simply did not have the possibility to have activities. Police, security guards, and security companies in that municipality say that they have noticed a huge difference before and after this. It is just one example.

In the last few days, many who have run youth centers, rehearsal rooms, and similar activities have contacted me. They testify that many young people used to be at the youth centers that have now disappeared due to the cuts. There wasn't as much mischief in the evenings. There wasn't as much drugs. In many cases, there were no drugs at all.

Many young people describe that they were on the right side thanks to the activities in the areas where they live. One of them wrote to me with very many emotions that two youths who used to be in a rehearsal room that was closed down due to the cuts have been shot. He never thought they would end up in trouble or have any problems at all. He thought they had a completely different future. But the consequence of the cuts can even be the loss of people's lives. I would not have brought it up otherwise, because I was not aware of it. But a youth leader in one municipality reached out because he wanted us to testify on exactly this.

I think it can sound poetic when one talks about study associations and popular education and how much it means for us as human beings to be able to learn throughout life. But what is happening is also pure reality. This is serious.

That cutting a third of the folk education grants to study associations obviously has consequences. It has consequences for the study associations, but above all for people all over the country. I read a post from the National Association of the Visually Impaired which described how their activities were one of those first hit by the cuts to folk education. That activity, in fact, costs more money than ordinary activity. It requires more resources to have study association activities for those who have a disability or some functional variation.

The cuts have hit very hard against people living in the countryside and people who already had difficulty accessing education and opportunities. It hurts the heart to see. I receive emails and calls daily from people all over the country who are worried.

I would really like to appeal to the bourgeois parties KD, L, SD and M to stop this. Stop the cuts! You see the consequences. You can also go to the Cut Map. You can google the consequences of the cuts and see what happens. See what you are doing to Sweden, and take it seriously! Think of our children! Think of our grandchildren and the future we face!

There is a lot of talk about order and tidiness in society, but then one must also invest in order and tidiness. One must invest, and one must believe in people. With those words, I want to call for continued discussion and for change from the government's side.

(Applause)

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

Jonas Andersson (SD)

Madam President! Thank you, Magnus Manhammar, for the speech!

I have a question for the Social Democrats regarding the potential underlying reasons that may be included in the picture. When one adopts this extremely high tone regarding the formation of public opinion and speaks about the entire democracy being in turmoil, it is a type of rhetoric that harms the debate more than it helps. One does a disservice to the study associations, in my opinion, when one exaggerates.

The Social Democrats' very close ties to ABF are a poorly hidden secret. ABF is the study association that receives by far the most state subsidies of all study associations in Sweden. We are talking about hundreds of millions of kronor annually. Representatives for the Social Democrats leave politics, from here in the Riksdag, and go straight into fine top jobs at various levels in parts of Folkbildningssverige. As recently as a month ago, it became known that the long-time former Member of Parliament and former Minister Tomas Eneroth is taking over as chairman of ABF.

The close bond that exists between the Social Democrats and ABF also became clear regarding what happened with ABF in Botkyrka. Members with connections to ABF and the gang-criminal youth centers participated in ousting the then-chairperson of the municipal board, Ebba Östlin, at a party meeting. Even the former minister, the Social Democrat Anna Ekström, went straight into the role of chairperson for the interest organization of the Rörelsefolkhögskolorna!

I still think one must ask whether the Social Democrats' extremely high tone in these issues has anything to do with the fact that their party friends benefit so much from this. They are, after all, favoring a part of their own movement.

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

Magnus Manhammar (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Member for the debate and for the question! It gives me a chance to describe what popular education is and why I am in favor of it.

I can start by saying that neither I nor any other Social Democrat in this chamber is in politics out of self-interest. We are here because we feel solidarity with our fellow human beings and future generations. Not least, my children are a reason why I am here at all. I believe in their future and fight as hard as I can for it.

The fact is that Swedish democracy would not have existed without the popular education that emerged in Sweden in the late 19th century – study associations were only local at that time. Popular education was absolutely crucial for getting started the civil society and the association life that today forms the entire foundation of our democracy.

According to democracy research around the world, free elections actually constitute only a small part of democracy in a country. When one measures democracy, one sees that civil society is crucial. Civil society's lifeblood, that is, the very energy that enables one to educate oneself and conduct activities, is popular education. Popular education makes it possible to develop and learn the democratic tradition.

I have had the privilege of working quite a bit with, among other things, side projects for democracy assistance around the world. In the work for democracy, I have been in Russia, Ukraine, Palestine, South Africa, the Philippines, and many other countries. It is precisely civil society and public education that build democracy.

In dictatorships, people engage themselves at risk to their own lives to build associations, civil society, and popular education because it builds democracy. Therefore, I am inspired by the idea of democracy. Therefore, I am proud to be a social democrat and to be a member of the Riksdag and stand up for popular education. It is about democracy.

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

Jonas Andersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Magnus Manhammar for the answer. However, I do not think I received much of an answer to the question about ABF. I understand that I may have stepped on a sore point, but the close ties that exist between ABF and the Social Democrats undeniably look strange. Your politicians go straight from the chamber into top positions at ABF. Then you stand here and speak in words that, in my opinion, are very exaggerated.

I understand that these can be tough times for adult education. One must adapt and prioritize in different ways. These are indeed significant cuts, but there is an opportunity to prioritize what one considers to be most important. In my speech from the rostrum earlier, I pointed out that instead of drum courses for non-binary people, dog parkour courses, lunch discos in vulnerable areas and the like, one can prioritize the rehearsal rooms and other activities that are more constructive. One has the opportunity to do that. One still receives very large amounts, and it is possible to make prioritizations.

Magnus Manhammar's commitment may be rooted in something other than personal gain. I do not argue against that. However, I maintain that it is obvious that the Social Democrats have very close, yes, intimate ties to some of the things they have pushed through in the chamber, for example, the regulatory framework for the party-political lotteries and hundreds of millions of kronor to a certain study association. That there should be no form of personal gain in this at all, I find very unlikely, Madam Speaker.

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

Magnus Manhammar (S)

Madam President! I thank you for this debate.

I take the chance once again to try to give a history lesson. Let me answer the question directly, Madam Speaker, why Social Democrats exist within ABF and then enter the Riksdag or vice versa go from the Riksdag or municipalities to ABF. It is not so strange.

It is about the trade union movement. Even that is usually a question mark for the Sweden Democrats, which I have heard in many debates. They think it is strange that the trade union movement has ties to the Social Democrats. It was the trade union movement that founded the Social Democrats. One only has to Google it or go to Wikipedia. This is no secret. That ABF was a part of the labor movement and has always been a part of the labor movement is also a self-evident fact. These are not news or oddities, but it is natural.

Civil society, religious communities and popular education

The other parties in the chamber, apart from the Sweden Democrats, also have ties to study associations. They too have engaged in folk education and are inspired by democracy. It is nothing strange, but something to be proud of.

I wish that the Sweden Democrats themselves formed a study association where they could work with democracy, human rights, and everything else they are passionate about. It would have been fantastic. It might even have changed the Sweden Democrats as a party.

It is therefore not strange that Social Democrats are within ABF and that ABF members are among the Social Democrats. It is about as strange as when the Sweden Democrats were founded. I have a pretty good grasp of that, because I have worked at the Expo Foundation. There were many from the very extreme right-wing movement, old Nazis and fascists, who founded the Sweden Democrats and who were part of the first party leadership. It is not strange that Sweden Democrats who leave the Riksdag go to Alternativ för Sverige and other extreme parties, because it is the same movement, the right-wing extremist movement. It is therefore not strange. It is also just a matter of checking Wikipedia or googling to understand the Sweden Democrats' movement. One can do the same thing when it comes to the Social Democrats.

These are not secrets, but simply the reality.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 29 April.)

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